logo
US Republicans grill university leaders in latest House antisemitism hearing

US Republicans grill university leaders in latest House antisemitism hearing

Straits Times2 days ago
FILE PHOTO: General view of the U.S. Capitol during morning hours, in Washington, U.S., March 30, 2023. REUTERS/Tom Brenner/File Photo
The leaders of three U.S. universities testified before a House of Representatives panel on Tuesday about what they have done to combat antisemitism on campus, saying they were committed to stamping out hatred while protecting academic freedom.
At Tuesday's three-hour hearing, Georgetown University interim President Robert Groves, City University of New York Chancellor Felix Matos Rodriguez, and University of California, Berkeley Chancellor Richard Lyons came under sharp fire from Republicans.
Many of them echoed President Donald Trump's recent attacks on universities, which he has described as "infested with radicalism," and questioned whether the presidents were doing enough to protect Jewish students and faculty.
"The genesis of this antisemitism, this hatred that we're seeing across our country, is coming from our universities," said Representative Burgess Owens, a Utah Republican.
It was the latest in a series of hearings about antisemitism on campus in which university leaders testified before the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, which is tasked with higher education oversight.
Democrats on the panel used the session to question the Trump administration's gutting of the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights, which probes incidents of antisemitism and other forms of discrimination. That has led to a backlog in investigations at a time when Republicans say universities are not doing enough to combat antisemitism.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for the administration to resume dismantling the entire department, part of Trump's bid to shrink the federal role in education and give more control to the states.
Top stories
Swipe. Select. Stay informed.
Singapore Las Vegas Sands' new development part of S'pore's broader, more ambitious transformation: PM Wong
Singapore 'Kpods broke our marriage, shattered our children': Woman on husband's vape addiction
Business US tariffs may last well after Trump; crucial for countries to deepen trade ties: SM Lee
World Trump says Indonesia to face 19% tariff under trade deal
Multimedia Telling the Singapore story for 180 years
Life Walking for exercise? Here are tips on how to do it properly
Singapore CDL's long-time director Philip Yeo to depart after boardroom feud
Singapore 'Nobody deserves to be alone': Why Mummy and Acha have fostered over 20 children in the past 22 years
Representative Mark Takano, a California Democrat, called the hearing a "kangaroo court."
"This scorched earth warfare against higher education will endanger academic freedom, innovative research and international cooperation for generations to come," Takano said, referring to the administration's efforts to cut off funding to some schools, including Harvard and Columbia, and impose other sanctions.
University leaders have come under fire from both pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian communities for their handling of protests that broke out after the 2023 attack on Israel by Hamas militants and conflict that emerged from it. On some campuses, clashes erupted between pro-Palestinian and pro-Israel demonstrators, spawning antisemitic and Islamophobic rhetoric and assaults in some cases.
During the hearing, the university leaders were repeatedly asked about their responses to antisemitic actions by faculty or affiliated scholars.
Representative Mary Miller, an Illinois Republican, asked Berkeley's Lyons about a February event in which speakers "repeatedly denied that Israeli women were gang-raped by Hamas terrorists on October 7, 2023, and argued that Israel was weaponizing feminism."
Lyons said the online event in question was organized by a faculty member but the comments that Miller cited did not come from the Berkeley faculty member. He said the school anticipated that some of the ideas discussed at the event would prove controversial.
"I did not prevent it from happening because I felt that keeping the marketplace for ideas open was really important in this instance," he said.
Previous hearings held by the panel have led to significant consequences for university presidents.
In December 2023, Representative Elise Stefanik, a New York Republican, raised her own political profile by grilling the presidents of Harvard, University of Pennsylvania and Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
She asked them whether "calling for the genocide of Jews" would violate their schools' codes of conduct related to bullying and harassment. Each president declined to give a simple "yes" or "no" answer, noting that a wide range of hateful speech is protected under the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment and under university policies.
Their testimony, which many viewed as insensitive and detached, triggered an outcry. More than 70 U.S. lawmakers later signed a letter demanding that the governing boards of the three universities remove the presidents. Soon afterwards, Harvard's Claudine Gay and Penn's Liz Magill resigned.
Columbia President Minouche Shafik resigned in August, following her April testimony before the committee. REUTERS
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Pakistani TV channels withdraw reports on Trump visit
Pakistani TV channels withdraw reports on Trump visit

Straits Times

time10 minutes ago

  • Straits Times

Pakistani TV channels withdraw reports on Trump visit

Find out what's new on ST website and app. FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Donald Trump speaks, as he meets with Bahrain's Crown Prince and Prime Minister Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa (not pictured), in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., July 16, 2025. REUTERS/Nathan Howard/File Photo ISLAMABAD - Two leading Pakistani television news channels withdrew reports on Thursday that U.S. President Donald Trump planned to visit the South Asian nation, with one of them issuing an apology. Geo and ARY news channels had said earlier on Thursday that Trump was expected to visit Pakistan in September. But both later withdrew their reports. "Geo News apologises to its viewers for airing the news without a verification," it said. A senior management official at ARY told Reuters it backtracked after the foreign office said it had no knowledge of a visit. George W. Bush was the last U.S. president to visit Pakistan in 2006. "We have nothing to announce," a U.S. embassy spokesperson in Islamabad told Reuters, referring further questions on Trump's schedule to the White House. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore Driverless bus in Sentosa gets green light to run without safety officer in first for S'pore World US strikes destroyed only one of three Iranian nuclear sites, says new report Business 5 things to know about Kuok Hui Kwong, tycoon Robert Kuok's daughter and Shangri-La Asia head honcho Asia Air India probe of Boeing 787 fuel control switches finds no issues Singapore Man charged over manufacturing DIY Kpods at Yishun home; first such case in Singapore Singapore Sex first, then you can sell my flat: Women property agents fend off indecent proposals and harassment Singapore Two women jailed for submitting fake university certificates to MOM for employment passes Singapore Fatal abuse of Myanmar maid in Bishan: Traffic Police officer sentenced to 10 years' jail U.S.-Pakistan relations saw a major boost when Trump hosted Pakistan's army chief Field Marshal Asim Munir at the White House last month in an unprecedented meeting. REUTERS

Romanian top court overturns president's challenge to hate speech bill
Romanian top court overturns president's challenge to hate speech bill

Straits Times

time10 minutes ago

  • Straits Times

Romanian top court overturns president's challenge to hate speech bill

FILE PHOTO: Romania's President Nicusor Dan attends a press conference, on the day of the NATO Bucharest Nine (B9) meeting, in Vilnius, Lithuania, June 2, 2025. REUTERS/Ints Kalnins/File Photo BUCHAREST - Romania's top court on Thursday struck down a challenge brought by centrist President Nicusor Dan against a bill seeking harsher punishment for antisemitism and hate speech after a divisive election in which the far right gained ground. Parliament updated legislation outlawing the celebration of fascist leaders or imagery in June, introducing prison sentences for the promotion of antisemitism and xenophobia via social media platforms. The bill also increases jail terms for creating or belonging to racist organisations. However, the president argued the bill did not properly define fascists, which would lead to judges interpreting the law arbitrarily. The court unanimously ruled against his objections. An annual report released by the Elie Wiesel National Institute for the Study of the Holocaust in Romania on Wednesday said the country's election season was marked by a sharp increase of hate speech and aggression against Jewish, Roma, Hungarian and LGBT minorities - while also noting authorities were more actively enforcing legislation. Romania cancelled a presidential election in December after allegations of Russian interference – denied by Moscow - in favour of far-right contender Calin Georgescu, who was later banned from running in the May re-run and has since been sent to trial for promoting Romania's wartime fascist leaders. He has denied all wrongdoing. Romania had one of Europe's most violent antisemitic movements of the 1930s, the Iron Guard, known for political assassinations and pogroms. The country was also an ally of Nazi Germany until August 1944, when it changed sides. REUTERS Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore Driverless bus in Sentosa gets green light to run without safety officer in first for S'pore World US strikes destroyed only one of three Iranian nuclear sites, says new report Business 5 things to know about Kuok Hui Kwong, tycoon Robert Kuok's daughter and Shangri-La Asia head honcho Asia Air India probe of Boeing 787 fuel control switches finds no issues Singapore Man charged over manufacturing DIY Kpods at Yishun home; first such case in Singapore Singapore Sex first, then you can sell my flat: Women property agents fend off indecent proposals and harassment Singapore Two women jailed for submitting fake university certificates to MOM for employment passes Singapore Fatal abuse of Myanmar maid in Bishan: Traffic Police officer sentenced to 10 years' jail

Evolution of the UK electorate from landowners to suffragettes to 16-year-old voters
Evolution of the UK electorate from landowners to suffragettes to 16-year-old voters

Straits Times

time40 minutes ago

  • Straits Times

Evolution of the UK electorate from landowners to suffragettes to 16-year-old voters

Find out what's new on ST website and app. FILE PHOTO: People walk past a polling station sign outside a church as voting gets underway in the Runcorn and Helsby parliamentary by-election in Runcorn, Britain, May 1, 2025. REUTERS/Phil Noble/File Photo LONDON - Britain on Thursday set out plans to lower the voting age to 16 in a landmark reform to the process that underpins one of the world's oldest parliaments. Who can currently vote? At present, anyone aged 18 or over can vote in UK general elections if they are a British citizen, a qualifying citizen from the Commonwealth group of former British colonies, or a citizen of Ireland, and are registered to vote. Members of the upper house of parliament and convicted prisoners serving a sentence are excluded from the franchise. When did parliament get elected representatives? In 1295, the English parliament, then made up of nobles and bishops, was extended to include elected representatives, setting the model for future parliaments. How was the electorate restricted? Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore Driverless bus in Sentosa gets green light to run without safety officer in first for S'pore World US strikes destroyed only one of three Iranian nuclear sites, says new report Business 5 things to know about Kuok Hui Kwong, tycoon Robert Kuok's daughter and Shangri-La Asia head honcho Asia Air India probe of Boeing 787 fuel control switches finds no issues Singapore Man charged over manufacturing DIY Kpods at Yishun home; first such case in Singapore Singapore Sex first, then you can sell my flat: Women property agents fend off indecent proposals and harassment Singapore Two women jailed for submitting fake university certificates to MOM for employment passes Singapore Fatal abuse of Myanmar maid in Bishan: Traffic Police officer sentenced to 10 years' jail In the 15th century, the vote in England was restricted to men who owned freehold land worth at least 40 shillings, narrowing the electorate to wealthy landowners. The English and Scottish parliaments passed a law in 1707 uniting the two countries into one sovereign state called Great Britain. At this time, the right to vote was still severely restricted. About a century later, Ireland merged into Great Britain to form the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. When was the first UK election? The first ever UK general elections ran from July 5 until August 14 in 1802. In 1832, the vote was extended to more men by a broadening of the property qualification, while parliamentary seats were redistributed to better represent rapidly growing towns and cities. But the legislation defined a voter as a male person, formally excluding women from voting in elections. Before that, there were occasional instances of women voting. When did women get the vote? Women were granted the right to vote in stages, starting in 1918 when women over the age of 30 who owned a property or were married to a property owner were given the right. All men over the age of 21 were also given the vote at this stage. Ten years later, the vote was finally extended to all women over the age of 21, before the age was lowered to 18 for both men and women in 1969. What earlier efforts were made to move the age under 18? A bill to reduce the voting age to 16 failed to pass due insufficient parliamentary support in 2008. Proposed legislation giving 16- and 17-year-olds the right to vote in Scottish parliamentary and local elections was passed by the Scottish Parliament in 2015, broadening the electorate in Scotland's devolved administration. Four years later, the Welsh Parliament followed with a similar bill, marking the largest franchise extension in Wales since 1969. Which countries have lowered the age below 18? If the plan to lower the age to 16 is passed, Britain would be on par with Austria, Nicaragua, Argentina and Malta, according to U.S.-based research group World Population Review. The age is still 18 to vote in a national election in most major economies, from the United States and Germany in the west to China and India in the east. What were other notable reforms to the UK system? The state began cracking down on illegal practices, such as bribing, in the voting system as early as 1872, through the Secret Ballot Act, enabling people to vote in private without being intimidated into voting for a particular party. Before the turn of the century, attempts to bribe voters were criminalised, with more severe fines and in some cases imprisonment set as punishment. In 2022, Boris Johnson's government introduced a requirement for voters to show photo ID while voting to crack down on possible voter fraud. REUTERS

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store