News | Administration
Live updates: Shafik testifies before Congress on Columbia’s handling of antisemitism on campus
University President Minouche Shafik was joined by board of trustees co-chairs Claire Shipman, CC ’86, SIPA ’94, and David Greenwald, Law ’83, as well as David Schizer, co-chair of the Task Force on Antisemitism.
By Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff PhotographerThe House Committee on Education and the Workforce launched an investigation into antisemitism at Columbia in February.By Noah Bernstein, Sarah Huddleston, Shea Vance, and Esha Karam • April 17, 2024 at 2:18 PM
By Noah Bernstein, Sarah Huddleston, Shea Vance, and Esha Karam • April 17, 2024 at 2:18 PM
Updated on April 17 at 4:09 p.m.
WASHINGTON—University President Minouche Shafik testified before the House Committee on Education and the Workforce alongside board of trustees co-chairs Claire Shipman, CC ’86, SIPA ’94, and David Greenwald, Law ’83, and Task Force on Antisemitism co-chair David Schizer.
The Wednesday hearing, titled “Columbia in Crisis: Columbia University’s Response to Antisemitism,” called into question the University’s handling of on-campus antisemitism amid an ongoing congressional investigation into Columbia’s “failure to protect Jewish students.”
Shafik was the latest university president to testify in front of the committee following a calamitous Dec. 5, 2023 hearing during which then-Harvard President Claudine Gay and then-University of Pennsylvania President Liz Magill failed to clarify their respective universities’ policies regarding calls for genocide against Jewish people. Gay and Magill have since resigned.
Shafik declined to testify at the Dec. 5, 2023 hearing, citing a scheduling conflict. On Wednesday, Shafik, joined by fellow University leadership, was for the first time subject to the committee’s scrutiny face-to-face.
The hearing concluded at around 1:40 p.m. with closing remarks from committee chairwoman Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.).
Spectator is covering the hearing live and updating this article with new developments.
1:39 p.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
Greenwald, Shipman, Schizer, and Shafik sat before the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Foxx delivered the concluding remarks, first aiming “to set the record straight” on Shafik’s “misleading” previous remarks on student suspensions.
When Foxx first questioned Shafik, Shafik said that the University had suspended 15 students in relation to “antisemitic incidents.” Foxx claimed that only three students were given interim suspensions for “antisemitic conduct” between Oct. 7, 2023, and March 23 and that all three were either lifted or dropped down to probation.
Greenwald previously told the committee that the University suspended 10 students for their alleged involvement in the “Resistance 101” event. Foxx said that Columbia lifted five suspensions, after determining those students were not involved.
“The only two Columbia students who remain suspended … are the two Jewish students suspended for spraying the odorous substance Rep. Omar referred to,” Foxx said.
According to Foxx, Columbia produced documents as part of the committee’s ongoing investigation into the University’s handling of antisemitism that show that the substance sprayed at the rally was a “non-toxic gag spray.”
She continued to reiterate examples of antisemitism at Columbia previously brought forth in the hearing.
Finally, Foxx brought the three and a half hour hearing to a close by remarking that while Columbia has taken steps to enforce its policies, “there is still a significant amount of work to be done.”
“We will be looking for answers to the questions that have been raised today—in a very timely fashion—and we are prepared to bring you back if we don’t see more tangible progress,” Foxx said.
The hearing adjourned at 1:42 p.m.
1:31 p.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
Scott pressed on, asking Shipman to consider how transphobic comments have been made in committee hearings on antisemitism and if racism or homophobia are not pressing enough concerns.
Scott turned towards Schizer to ask him how Columbia could “prevent” protests against the war in Gaza from turning into “antisemitic” events, if the University were to adhere to a bipartisan resolution that mandates federally funded institutions protect individuals’ right to free expression.
“I would not support speech anywhere at any time, I think we need classes to take place, we don’t want them disrupted, but we need protest and we need speech, just to be in the right place,” Schizer said.
Scott then asked Shipman if the committee should be holding similar hearings surrounding discrimination faced by Black students, Muslim students, or transgender students.
Shipman responded by saying that the “Columbia in Crisis” hearing responds to “a specific problem right now on our campus, … and that is rampant antisemitism.” She said that Columbia would “benefit from broader hearings about hate in general.”
Scott pressed on, asking Shipman to consider how transphobic comments have been made in committee hearings on antisemitism and if racism or homophobia are not pressing enough concerns.
“I have spent a significant amount of time with some of our Muslim students from the region and their stories are also heartbreaking, and I don’t like that any student on our campus does not feel safe,” Shipman said. “I think what we see most routinely right now is political speech crossing the line into antisemitism and we’ve got to figure that out.”
Scott turned back to Shafik to query what disciplinary action would result from a student using antisemitic speech. Shafik shied away from explicit disciplinary measures, instead focusing on the role of education.
“We’ve got to start by educating our students to not say certain things and change the culture so that nobody is discriminated or harassed at all,” Shafik said. “That should be our objective.”
1:28 p.m.
Stefanik briskly took over as Moran yielded the rest of his time to her, pursuing a line of questioning regarding a “letter supporting President Shafik.”
“Board members have come forward anonymously to this committee, raising the issue of a letter that was circulated that members of the boards did not sign in support,” Stefanik said.
Shipman, Greenwald, and Schizer all denied knowledge of any such letter.
Stefanik’s last question of the hearing was regarding chants calling for the genocide of Jews, calling back to the pivotal question of the Dec. 5, 2023 hearing.
“Has there been disciplinary action taken against students who have chanted ‘from the river to the sea,’ which you have testified is antisemitic, and which Congress has voted that it is antisemitic?” Stefanik asked.
“We have some disciplinary cases ongoing around that language,” Shafik said in response. “We have specified that those kinds of chants should be restricted in terms of where they happen and we are looking at it.”
1:24 p.m.
Rep. Nathaniel Moran (R-Texas) echoed Bean’s concerns about whether the University’s statements translated into action. He then addressed what he saw as a “foundational issue about truth” underlying the hearing.
“I happen to believe that there are absolute truths in this world, truths that are objective and not subjective, truths that should stand even when it is unpopular or when it is hard,” Moran said. He went on to ask the panelists if they agreed with this statement. All four members of the panel agreed, and Moran referred to it as a “softball question.”
Moran praised Greenwald for his “very direct answers” compared to the other witnesses.
“Only time will tell whether your words here today are hollow or the actions are truly to follow,” Moran concluded.
1:19 p.m.
Rep. Brandon Williams (R-N.Y.) questioned the panel on the state of pluralism at the University, asking Schizer about whether or not certain groups, such as conservatives or Jewish people, are excluded at Columbia.
“Look, I’m a conservative at Columbia Law School, I was dean for 10 years, the place has been good to me,” Schizer said. “But I do want to say that I am not the norm, and I’d love more conservatives.”
Williams then directed a question toward Shipman and Greenwald, asking how much funding Columbia has received from foreign governments or individuals from foreign countries, including China and Qatar.
Greenwald replied that China sends many students to Columbia, and the state funds their tuition.
Williams turned to Shafik, inquiring whether faculty or staff are required to sign “DEI statements” to be employed or continue their employment at Columbia.
Shafik stated that this was not the case, and some departments have optional statements about the unique perspective they can bring to the position and may go about implementing diverse perspectives differently.
“Personally, I think that you are in deep denial about the culture at Columbia in terms of the actual openness to views that differ from the culture of the school, where your money comes from, the disruption of classes, and the DEI statements,” Williams said.
Williams ended his time by drawing parallels between Columbia and Nazi-era German higher education institutions.
1:14 p.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
“In your opinion, has [Massad's] antisemitic conduct risen to be a professionally unfit or serious breach of academic conduct or serious professional misconduct?” Chavez-DeRemer asked.
Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer (R-Ore.) then questioned Shafik, calling Columbia “one of the worst offenders” on the safety of Jewish students. Chavez-DeRemer also returned to the topic of Massad, asking why he has not been fired yet.
“In your opinion, has his antisemitic conduct risen to be a professionally unfit or serious breach of academic conduct or serious professional misconduct?” Chavez-DeRemer asked.
Shafik said that there are certain cases where tenured professors could be fired, noting that Massad’s conduct is still under investigation.
Chavez-DeRemer also asked Shafik if she would commit to expanding curricular offerings on Jewish and Israeli history, saying that Columbia offered only three such undergraduate courses.
“Our Institute for Israeli and Jewish studies offers 21 courses. We have a collaborative arrangement with the Jewish Theological Seminary, and many of the students who are doing the joint degree with the Jewish Theological Seminary are here,” Shafik said.
1:08 p.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
Bean said that "the action on campus doesn’t match your rhetoric today.”
Rep. Aaron Bean (R-Fla.) opened his time, declaring that Columbia accomplished something that Harvard and the University of Pennsylvania have not by clearly condemning antisemitism. However, Bean said that “the action on campus doesn’t match your rhetoric today.”
Bean expressed concern about security on campus and asked whether any students had been expelled.
“We have massively increased our security capacity,” Shafik said.
Bean then yielded the remainder of his time to Stefanik, who pressed Schizer, Shipman, and Greenwald on whether there have been “anti-Jewish” protests on campus. The three responded affirmatively, in contradiction to Shafik’s earlier statement. Stefanik then renewed questioning of Shafik, asking if she would change her former testimony in acknowledgment of “anti-Jewish protests.” Shafik responded that “anti-Jewish things were said, yes.”
Stefanik then revisited Shafik’s remarks on Massad, asking if Shafik could clarify whether Massad was still the chair of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences academic review committee. Shafik confirmed that he was under investigation but declined to say whether Massad was still the chair. Stefanik asked whether Shafik would make the commitment to remove Massad as chair.
After a brief pause, Shafik said, “I think that would be—yes. Let me come back with yes.”
1:02 p.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
Shafik said that “antisemitism is not a problem for Jewish people to solve, it’s actually a problem for all of us.”
Rep. Lucy McBath (D-Ga.) spoke at length about the relationship between racism and antisemitism and the Black and Jewish communities, asking Schizer if the University is taking steps to improve interracial relations and pressing Shafik on what those actions look like.
“Issues like racism and antisemitism are not partisan issues, they are American issues,” Schizer said. “And in that spirit, I know President Shafik has been emphasizing how important it is for us all to come together, and we may not agree.”
Shafik echoed Schizer’s sentiment, saying that “antisemitism is not a problem for Jewish people to solve, it’s actually a problem for all of us.”
12:56 p.m.
Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.) said that Shafik “hemmed and hawed” when responding to an earlier question on if chants such as “from a river to the sea” are antisemitic, asking Shafik to further explain her answer.
Shafik responded that some Jewish members of the community do not hear those chants as antisemitic, including Jewish faculty members. Kiley asked if there are “antisemitic professors on your faculty.”
“I certainly hope not,” Shafik responded.
Kiley continued, asking if Shafik believed that Abdou was antisemitic. Shafik said that Abdou “has written and said things which are in support of Hamas.”
Kiley inquired when Abdou was asked to leave the faculty, to which Shafik replied that she could get Kiley an answer in writing. Kiley pushed forward, asking Shafik if she had counsel preparing for the hearing and how many hours she spent preparing.
“Why can’t you just give us the facts?” Kiley asked.
Kiley continued, asking a series of questions on if Shafik would make a statement to faculty members that they would be asked to work elsewhere if they “engage in antisemitic words or conduct,” if she believes the “BDS movement is antisemitic,” who she is “worried about offending,” and what Shafik would say to the crowd of students currently in attendance.
12:51 p.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
Omar asked if Shafik had seen anti-Jewish protests. Shafik did not respond for several seconds, before answering “no.”
Rep. Omar asked Shafik if she had seen anti-Muslim, anti-Arab, or anti-Palestinian protests on campus. Shafik answered “no” to each one.
Finally, Omar asked if Shafik had seen anti-Jewish protests. Shafik did not respond for several seconds before answering “no.”
Omar spoke on the University’s hiring of an external firm in its investigation into the March 24 “Resistance 101” panel. Omar described how private investigators sent “threatening emails” to leaders of pro-Palestinian student groups and turned up at students’ residences, and how multiple students were suspended.
“This was a very serious case. We had students … who invited people who were inciting violence. And that is unacceptable,” Shafik said.
Omar asked why these specific students were suspended and if the University is absolutely sure that the suspended students participated in the event.
“They refused to cooperate with the investigation, and so until they do so, they are suspended,” Shafik said.
Omar then referenced an alleged spray attack that occurred at a Jan. 19 pro-Palestinian rally, questioning why students weren’t provided support after the attack.
“As far as we know, we think it was an odorous substance, and we did reach out to all of those students who said they were affected. Many of them didn’t want support,” Shafik said.
Omar continued to interrogate Shafik’s response to the doxxing and harassment of Muslim, Palestinian, and pro-Palestinian students, as well as the online presence of Shai Davidai, a Business School assistant professor who is currently the subject of a petition demanding his firing and an investigation by the Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action.
Shafik said that there have been “more than 50 complaints about Shai Davidai, and he is currently under investigation for harassment.”
12:45 p.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
Shafik said that Massad and Franke are currently undergoing an investigation for “discriminatory remarks.”
Rep. Michelle Steel (R-Calif.) also honed in on Massad’s comments, as well as remarks made by Hamid Dabashi, professor of Iranian studies and comparative literature, and Rashid Khalidi, professor of Arab studies. Steel asked if this “conduct is appropriate and acceptable” and what actions the University took to address the concerns.
Shafik said that Massad and Franke are currently undergoing an investigation for “discriminatory remarks.” Since the start of her tenure, she said that the University has put mechanisms into place to discipline faculty if they “cross the line.”
Shafik said that the University will be hiring additional faculty who will bring in new perspectives and will “do all the background checks you would expect” during the process.
12:40 p.m.
Foxx called the meeting into order, giving the floor to Rep. Bowman, who began by asking about how the University is making spaces for “critical dialogue.”
Bowman asked if Columbia's programming attracts attendance from both sides of the issue. Shafik said that while immediately after Oct. 7, 2023, it was difficult to create space for dialogue, she has prioritized making time to hold listening sessions with students “from both sides of the issue.”
Bowman asked Shipman and Greenwald about how the University is combating Islamophobia, to which both leaders affirmed that all forms of hate should not be welcome on campus and that it is the role of University leadership to listen.
“We can’t let political debate cross into hate,” Shipman said.
Bowman also raised questions on the alleged chemical attack on students at a Jan. 19 pro-Palestinian rally. Shafik said that the student perpetrators were suspended.
12:29 p.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
“This is not an honest conversation that we are having today in this committee," Omar said.
Several students remained outside the hearing, unable to enter. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) criticized the exclusion of the students from the hearing.
“This is not an honest conversation that we are having today in this committee, and the fact that these young people came from Columbia to be at this hearing, to have their voices heard, and are not being allowed, is, I think, a disservice to our democracy,” Omar told reporters in the hall.
12:12 p.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
McClain asked if phrases like “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” or “long live the Intifada,” are antisemitic.
Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.) asked Shafik “how troubling” she found the conversation surrounding antisemitism and discrimination on campus, to which she replied, “I am very troubled.”
“What does it say about our college campuses today that we’re having a hearing about antisemitic sympathies on campus, expressions on campus on a large scale, and pro-terrorist expressions on campus on a significant scale?” Good asked the panel of witnesses.
“Congressman, I think it says we have a lot of work to do. It’s shocking,” Shipman replied.
Good pressed Shafik on the “Resistance 101” event and asked for a written response after the hearing regarding whether or not the other student groups who had signed onto the Columbia University Apartheid Divest coalition would face suspension in the aftermath of the event.
Rep. Mark DeSaulnier (D-Calif.) kicked off his time, asking about how technology, and social media in particular, has exacerbated the polarized political situation on campus.
Schizer seized the chance to answer the question, citing “horrible” anonymous posts on apps such as Sidechat.
Sidechat, a popular app among Columbia students, has faced heightened legal scrutiny over its anonymous posting model, which has seen several instances of violent threats against students made by their peers.
“Every student I meet, I tell them, ‘Please get off Sidechat, it’s poisonous,’” Shafik said.
Rep. Lisa McClain (R-Mich.) spoke next, asking Shafik for her personal definition of antisemitism, and then, her opinion on how the task force on antisemitism might describe the term—something the task force’s leadership has declined to do and for which it has come under fire.
McClain continued her line of questioning by asking Shafik what the consequences are for antisemitic behavior.
“Depending on the nature of the incident, there are consequences ranging from people being potentially suspended, being forced to get educated and trained about antisemitism,” Shafik said.
McClain then zeroed in on specific language, asking if phrases like “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” or “long live the Intifada,” are antisemitic.
McClain was unsatisfied with Shafik’s first response: “When I hear those terms, I find them very upsetting.”
In her second response after McClain repeated the question, Shafik said, “I hear them as such, some people don’t.”
McClain pressed on, asking for a yes or no response.
Shafik eventually answered affirmatively that the phrases were antisemitic and deserved consequences, after McClain had turned to Schizer for an answer.
At 12:29 p.m., Foxx called the meeting into a recess.
12:07 p.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
Hayes asked for clarification on the fact that Massad is currently under investigation and that Massad no longer holds a leadership position.
Rep. Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.) started her time by condemning the “injection of biblical theology” into the hearing, saying that “my faith is used as a shield to protect others and not a sword to hate or harm others.”
Hayes asked for clarification on the fact that Massad is currently under investigation and that Massad no longer holds a leadership position.
Shafik said that she would like to confirm both facts in writing.
Hayes proceeded to cite annual increases in antisemitic incidents and inquired about how Columbia’s administration has considered the task force’s recommendations.
Nicholas Lemann, a co-chair of the University’s task force, told Spectator in an interview on Monday that he is “optimistic” about the administrative response and that Cas Holloway, the newly-minted chief operating officer, has established an internal spreadsheet tracking the administration’s progress in implementing the task force’s recommendations.
Hayes then asked about creating policies that distinguish between free speech and hate speech, and the impact of increased funding for the Department of Education.
“We know that there’s a number of cases before the Department of Education around these issues. We would welcome guidance from the Department of Education as we try and define the boundaries, particularly around speech,” Shafik said.
12:02 p.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
"Thousands of Columbia students come from countries that hate America,” Owens said.
Rep. Burgess Owens (R-U.T.) used his time to draw parallels between the treatment of Black students and Jewish students.
“If this would not be tolerated for Blacks, why has it for months, for years, … why is it that Jewish Americans can then be treated by these bigots and bullies in this manner?” Owens asked.
Owens then cut Shafik’s answer short to elaborate on the parallels, touching on diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.
“The core teaching values are [diversity, equity, and inclusion] and [critical race theory], which are racist and antisemitic teachings of Marxism,” Owens said. “The racist beliefs are that Blacks are a hopeless, weak, and oppressed race that needs the protection and pity of the white race. Antisemitic beliefs are that Jewish race are the oppressor race.”
Owens continued to discuss Massad and the culture of antisemitism on campus, before cutting off Shafik’s answer again.
“Thousands of Columbia students come from countries that hate America,” Owens said. “[They] skip classes to demonstrate, bully Americans, burn American flags, stop traffic in our country as they shout ‘Death to America,’ and some kind of way they still get a degree?”
11:58 a.m.
Rep. Teresa Leger Ferndandez (D-N.M.) began her time by citing that, last year, Congress proposed a 25 percent budget cut to an office that investigates antisemitism on university campuses last year. She asked if Schizer would support legislation that “gives us more data and a mechanism to fight antisemitism.”
Leger Fernandez ended by emphasizing that antisemitism is not the only form of hate, citing recent rises in Islamophobia and hate crimes against LGBTQ students.
11:52 a.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
Banks asked Shafik to “explain why the word folx is spelled f-o-l-x.” Shafik replied “They don’t know how to spell?”
Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) asked Shafik to define the term “ashkenormativity” and explain the spelling of “folx.” Both words appeared in an unofficial “orientation glossary of terms” pamphlet distributed to students at the School of Social Work, which Shafik said was prepared by students.
Banks asked Shafik to “explain why the word folx is spelled f-o-l-x.”
“They don’t know how to spell?” she replied.
“‘Ashkenormativity’ is defined as a system of oppression that favors white Jewish folx, based on the assumption that all Jewish folx are Ashkenazi, or from Western Europe,” Banks quoted the pamphlet.
Banks and Shafik then battled over whether the orientation guide was an official University document—Banks contested that it was distributed to all students, while Shafik maintained that it was created by students and did not represent the University’s position.
“This is handed out on your watch,” Banks said, before turning to the board of trustees.
“As President Shafik has said, we’re not going to be able to limit what individual students say to each other,” Shipman said.
Banks then asked whether Shafik believed that “white Jewish folks are privileged, that they are oppressors.”
Shafik said “no.”
11:48 a.m.
Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) asked Shafik about the lack of students on the slate of witnesses before the committee, describing a conversation with a Jewish student at Columbia as particularly illuminating.
Stevens cited the D grade that Columbia received last week on the Anti-Defamation League’s campus antisemitism report card.
11:43 a.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
“Do you want Columbia University to be cursed by God?” Allen asked.
Rep. Rick W. Allen (R-Ga.) asked Shafik if she is familiar with Genesis 12:3.
“Probably not as well as you are, Congressman,” Shafik said.
“Do you want Columbia University to be cursed by God?” Allen asked, prompting laughs from Allen, Shafik, and the committee’s audience, before he adopted a more serious tone, recommending that Columbia offer courses on the Bible.
First-year and sophomore students in Columbia College and the School of General Studies are required to take yearlong seminars on classical texts. Both of the courses’ syllabi list parts of the Bible, including Genesis, as required reading.
Shipman responded by saying “you’re right that we have a moral crisis on campus” and that she “finds the behavior of some of our students, some of our faculty, unacceptable.” Shipman said that “people learn from consequences” and that “deep antisemitism training” is needed at Columbia to address these issues.
11:40 a.m.
Rep. Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan (D-Northern Mariana Islands) offered the witnesses a brief reprieve from the questions of others on the committee, asking Shafik what, if anything, she was planning to say when Stefanik and Walberg cut her off from answering.
“I am personally very committed to viewpoint diversity at Columbia and I am personally very committed to making sure that our faculty do not cross the line in terms of discrimination and harassment,” Shafik said.
“Many of these appointments were made in the past in a different era, and that era is done,” Shafik added.
Sablan asked Schizer, Shipman, and Greenwald if they had anything to add. Only Shipman gave an additional remark, thanking the committee for organizing the hearing.
11:35 a.m.
Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-Wis.) yielded his time to Stefanik, who said that Massad is still listed as the chair of the academic review committee on the website. Shafik said that she would need to “check that,” to which Stefanik asked if she had Shafik’s “commitment that he would be removed today.”
Stefanik turned to Shipman and Greenwald, asking them the same question. Shipman responded by explaining the limitations of Columbia’s policies in potentially removing him from his post.
“I am the one asking the questions here, as a United States member of Congress,” Stefanik said.
Greenwald responded that his comments are “abhorrent” and that Columbia could remove him from his position.
Stefanik yielded the time back to Grothman, who again questioned rhetoric spoken by Columbia faculty. Shafik again condemned the remarks, but her statement was not enough to appease Grothman, similar to other members of the committee.
Grothman asked how many Republican versus Democrat faculty members there are at Columbia, telling her to “ballpark” her answer. He also touched on a teach-in titled “Significance of the October 7th Palestinian Counteroffensive” held by Columbia Social Workers 4 Palestine in early December and asked on what repercussions students faced.
11:30 a.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
Manning proposed a three-point plan to reduce antisemitism, focusing on implementing a "rigorous antisemitism training” for both admitted students and faculty.
Rep. Kathy Manning (D-N.C.) continued the committee’s focus on Massad’s employment status at Columbia and asked if the chant “globalize the intifada” is tolerated at Columbia.
“I personally find it unacceptable,” Shafik said. “Our current rules have not specified that as not acceptable, but we have sent a very clear message to our community that that kind of language is unacceptable.”
Speaking of Massad, Manning demanded to know if Massad was still teaching. Shafik responded that he’s on the faculty, but does not know if he is still teaching.
Manning asked if Columbia holds any faculty in the MESAAS department who are pro-Israel. Shafik responded that the head of the department is Israeli.
Manning proposed a three-point plan to reduce antisemitism, focusing on implementing a “rigorous antisemitism training” for both admitted students and faculty. She also said that Columbia should ensure “that your Middle East studies department does not foment antisemitism by teaching that Israel is illegitimate as a state and that Jews should be murdered to get rid of Israel.”
“Is that a problem?” Manning asked.
11:22 a.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
Stefanik was unrelenting, asking for specifics on the University’s hiring processes and how they may change.
Stefanik animatedly jumped onto Walberg’s line of questioning, asking who spoke with Massad and what was said in the conversation as part of her interrogation into Columbia’s hiring practices.
Shafik answered that Massad was told that “his language was unacceptable.”
“In his case, he has not repeated anything like that ever since,” Shafik said, to which Stefanik asked, “Does he need to repeat stating that the massacre of Israeli citizens was awesome?”
While Massad was hired—and given tenure—prior to Oct. 7, 2023, Stefanik brought up Mohammad Abdou, who was hired as a visiting professor after the attacks and has previously expressed support for Hamas.
“I share with you your repugnance at those remarks. I completely understand that. On my watch, faculty who make remarks that cross the line in terms of antisemitism, there will be consequences for them,” Shafik said. “I have five cases at the moment who have either been taken out of the classroom or dismissed.”
Shafik said that Abdou is among the faculty who have been terminated.
“He is grading his students’ papers and will never teach at Columbia again. And that will be on his permanent record,” she said.
Despite this answer, Stefanik was unrelenting, asking for specifics on the University’s hiring processes and how they may change.
Shafik described an “attestation” that all new faculty must sign, indicating that they have never been accused of discrimination or harassment, but acknowledged that the University needs to “toughen up” its screening process.
Stefanik continued to ask what disciplinary action has been taken against Katherine M. Franke, James L. Dohr professor of law, citing an instance where Franke said that “all Israeli students who served in the IDF are dangerous and shouldn’t be on campus.” Shafik said that Franke “had been spoken to by a very senior person in the administration” and that she has “suggested” that Franke make a public apology.
“You see the concern here though, with the lack of enforcement?” Stefanik said. “You see the concern that speaking to these professors is not enough and it is sending a message across the University that this is tolerated, these antisemitic statements from a position of authority in professors in the classroom is tolerated?”
11:18 a.m.
Rep. Alma Adams (D-N.C.) then turned to Schizer to ask about how the task force has approached the “unique challenges” of dealing with student safety in the setting of a large urban environment.
“Our first step was to look at rules for protests and I am very grateful that our responses have been taken so seriously, and as I said the University is implementing all of our recommendations,” Schizer said. “But we’re only just getting started.”
11:13 a.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
Walberg asked Shafik, “So support of terrorism is acceptable if you’re a Columbia professor?”
Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.) followed, diving into professor of Middle Eastern, South Asian, and African Studies Joseph Massad’s controversial article in the Electronic Intifada, which described Hamas’ attack as “awesome, ” “astonishing,” “astounding,” and “incredible.” In the wake of the piece, a petition calling for his firing garnered over 47,000 signatures.
Walberg asked Shafik if she condemned Massad’s article and what consequences he has faced for it. Shafik condemned his statement, saying that she is “appalled” and that he has been “spoken to.”
Walberg scoffed at Shafik’s response, asking, “So support of terrorism is acceptable if you’re a Columbia professor?”
When Shafik attempted to respond, Walberg pushed forward, bringing up other instances when Massad’s speech in his classroom that he described as antisemitic and alienating for Jewish students.
Walberg continued to ask what actions the University has taken against Massad, bluntly asking if he is “out of the classroom.”
Shafik said that Massad is no longer the chair of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences academic review committee.
At the end of the tense back and forth, in which Walberg displayed his “bring them home” necklace, he asked Shipman and Greenwald whether or not they would hypothetically approve of Massad’s tenure at the present moment if they were on the faculty committee who decided tenure.
Shipman responded that she would not, and Greenwald agreed immediately after.
“Then why is he still in the classroom?” Walberg asked.
11:08 a.m.
Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.) followed Wilson and condemned both antisemitism and Islamophobia, acknowledging the rise in feelings of fear or a lack of safety among all students. Directing a question toward Schizer, Takano asked if the University would support “calming actions,” such as public statements from the University condemning all forms of violence against all people.
Schizer responded that “it is unacceptable for any students at any university to feel fear or to feel uncomfortable for who they are,” and while universities have made progress, there is still a way to go. In answering the question, Schizer emphasized that consistency in application, meaning that the same policies applied to Jewish students should be equally applied to Muslim students, is an important element of this solution.
“I think free speech is essential, but I also think consistency is essential,” Schizer said.
10:57 a.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
Bonamici asked each of the four witnesses whether calls “for the genocide of Jews violate Columbia’s code of conduct,” all four witnesses swiftly answered: “Yes it does.”
Foxx deferred to Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.), who asked each of the four witnesses whether calls “for the genocide of Jews violate Columbia’s code of conduct,” the very question that became the nail in the coffin for Gay and Magill at the calamitous Dec. 5, 2023, hearing.
All four witnesses swiftly answered: “Yes it does.”
Bonamici continued, asking Shafik what chants such as “by any means necessary” or “intifada” mean to her.
Shafik responded that she finds the chants “incredibly distressing” and wishes that students would not use those phrases on campus as she’s heard from Jewish students that those words ignite fears for their safety. She continued to describe the mandate to define when speech crosses from protected to unprotected.
Bonamici turned to Schizer, citing his career in the legal academy and post on the task force on antisemitism, as she asked for an opinion on how he understands the free speech on campus.
“We need to make sure that our students are protected from harassment and discrimination, even as we protect speech,” Schizer said.
Bonamici yielded the rest of her time to Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.), who cited his connection to Charleston, South Carolina, a “holy city,” as motivating his sympathy with Jewish people after Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel.
After a lengthy windup about the importance of intellectual diversity, Wilson directed a question about what the University has been doing to prevent “antisemitic conduct” toward Shafik.
Shafik responded, saying that education is the most important mechanism through which to prevent antisemitism both on and off campus.
10:52 a.m.
Foxx opened the questions to witnesses, grilling Shafik on the University’s enforcement of policies and disciplinary procedures. Her first question was regarding an April 4 “All out for Al-Shifa” protest, organized by Columbia University Apartheid Divest, after which the University stated that it pursued disciplinary action against students who protested.
Shafik stood by the University’s new policy and laid out disciplinary measures Columbia has taken, including sending out warning letters.
Foxx followed up, asking if Columbia had sent out warning letters for all other events.
Leaving little time between Shafik’s answer and her next question, Foxx challenged Shafik, asking how the University can restore a healthy learning environment if it took the school months to send warning letters after demonstrations.
“Chairwoman, I want to reassure you, I have absolutely no hesitation in enforcing our policies,” Shafik said, adding that previous policies and disciplinary procedures were not “up to the scale” required to address the new magnitude of protests.
Foxx continued, asking about the efficacy of simply suspending students who violate University policies and whether these students have been seen joining protests after their suspension.
“The students don’t seem to be afraid,” Foxx said.
Shafik said that the University has suspended 15 students and placed six on disciplinary probation. She said that based on what she’s hearing from students, “they are getting the message.”
Foxx then turned her attention to Greenwald, asking if he can “honestly” say whether the board has fulfilled their fiduciary duty in their response to unauthorized protest activity, as students continue to protest despite the University initiating disciplinary proceedings.
10:47 a.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
Greenwald cited multiple controversial protest slogans that became a hot-button topic at the December hearing.
Greenwald delivered his remarks next, discussing the role that the trustees play in the University’s response to antisemitism and his own experience as a Jewish American.
He continued listing University measures, including the creation of the Doxing Resource Group, enhancements to reporting processes, and the Interim Demonstration Policy.
Like Shafik, Greenwald discussed the Task Force on Antisemitism, which released its first report in March. The report raised concerns that the University was not adequately enforcing its protest policies against students. He noted that the trustees had formed their own Task Force on Antisemitism and that he and Shipman worked with Shafik in forming the “Our Community, Our Values” program.
Greenwald noted that the University had engaged the FBI to respond to a “vile and shocking” panel called “Resistance 101” that took place in March. He said the University suspended 10 students for their involvement in the event.
Earlier in his remarks, Greenwald cited multiple controversial protest slogans that became a hot-button topic at the December hearing.
“There were protests on campus in which protesters shouted ‘from the river to the sea’ and held banners saying things like ‘whatever it takes,’” he said. “Many Jews hear and see that as a call to eliminate Israel and Jews everywhere. As a result, many Jewish students and other members of our Columbia community did not feel safe.”
Eighteen Columbia deans penned a Dec. 20, 2023, message describing the phrases “by any means necessary,” “from the river to the sea,” and calls for an “intifada” as being “experienced by many Jewish, Israeli, and other members of our community as antisemitic and deeply hurtful.”
10:42 a.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
Shipman, who became co-chair last September, acknowledged that she is “not satisfied with where Columbia is at the moment.”
Following Schizer, Shipman delivered her opening remarks, reiterating many of the same measures that the University has taken to combat antisemitism that Shafik spoke of.
“The last six months on our campus have served as an extreme pressure test,” Shipman said. “Our systems clearly have not been equipped to manage the unfolding situation. But with each challenge, we have moved to adapt.”
Shipman, who became co-chair last September, acknowledged that she is “not satisfied with where Columbia is at the moment.”
“We are far from done. I am outraged by the vile sentiments I continue to hear, by those who ignore our rules, and we are holding them accountable,” Shipman said. “This problem, though, goes deeper than discipline. It’s about returning to our core values as an institution.”
Shipman emphasized the University’s immediate measures to ensure physical safety on campus, referencing the New York Police Department’s increased campus presence.
10:37 a.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
“Columbia is not just my professional home; Columbia is my cause,” Schizer said.
Schizer was the second member of University leadership to give opening remarks.
In his prepared statement, Schizer briefed the committee on his personal commitment that Columbia provides “a welcoming environment for Jews and everyone else” and the initial work of the Task Force on Antisemitism: a group he has led since its establishment on Nov. 1, 2023,
alongside Ester Fuchs, professor of international and public affairs and political science, and Nicolas Lemann, professor of journalism and dean emeritus of the Journalism School.
Early in his remarks, Schizer described how the persecution of his grandfather in western Ukraine, including a “near-death experience” with “antisemitic thugs,” led to his family’s “transformative” engagement with the University.
After immigrating to New York City and learning to speak English, Schizer’s grandfather enrolled at Teachers College. Meanwhile, on the other side of his family, Schizer’s mother attended Barnard College and the Law School, and his uncle went to Columbia College and the Medical School, both of them on scholarship.
“Columbia is not just my professional home; Columbia is my cause,” Schizer said. “I’m inspired by what the university has done for my family and for so many families from diverse backgrounds across the globe. It is critical to preserve that proud tradition.”
Schizer proceeded to recount “heartbreaking stories” from Jewish and Israeli students on campus since Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel.
In one instance, a student wearing a shirt with an Israeli flag was pinned against a brick wall and told to “keep fucking running” upon breaking free. It reminded Schizer of his grandfather’s experiences in Ukraine, he said.
Schizer turned his attention toward his work on the task force. The group has held more than 20 listening sessions and issued its first report in early March—a lengthy review of the University’s interim demonstration policies, which the University rolled out on Feb. 19, establishing “Demonstration Areas” and “Regular Demonstration Times.”
While the committee did “generally agree with the language of the University’s rules,” it expressed “serious concerns about their enforcement,” writing that the University generally imposes disciplinary measures following rules violations but does not intervene while violations occur.
Schizer shifted his focus from the task force to the importance of protecting academic freedom.
Despite Schizer’s testimony, the task force elected not to define antisemitism—a decision for which it has come under fire.
Schizer concluded his prepared remarks by zooming out. Tabling his technical discussion of school policy, Schizer described how he understands the social role of universities.
“In all of this work, we are mindful of a university’s solemn responsibility to teach the next generation, so they think critically, seek knowledge, cherish and defend liberty, and build a better world,” Schizer said. “We may disagree, even passionately, but we are at our best when we state our positions with civility. ”
10:32 a.m.
Shafik’s remarks began with a condemnation of “the antisemitism that is so pervasive today” and spoke on her personal background facing discrimination in the “desegregation era,” growing up in Georgia, Florida, and North Carolina after immigrating from Alexandria, Egypt.
Shafik said that in the immediate wake of the Oct. 7, 2023 attack, Columbia had to figure out the balance the right to free speech and expression with “the rights of Jewish students to be in an environment free of discrimination and harassment,” calling it ““the central challenge on our campus and numerous others across the country.”
“For thousands of our Jewish and Israeli students, the catastrophe was deeply personal. Many knew people that had been killed or taken hostage in the attack,” Shafik said. “For many other Columbia students, the war in Gaza also had profound personal implications and also was part of a larger story of Palestinian displacement as well as a humanitarian catastrophe.”
Shafik spoke on the “immediate” actions taken after the Oct. 7, 2023 attack, such as attending a vigil memorializing those killed in the attacks and engaging Public Safety, the New York Police Department, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. As the crisis continued, Shafik said Columbia held over 200 meetings with members of the community, established a Task Force on Antisemitism, and enhanced existing bias and discrimination reporting forms.
Shafik said that education holds the power to ultimately combat antisemitism and said that Columbia can learn from historical moments “where antisemitism was in abeyance.”
“They were characterized by enlightened leadership, inclusive cultures, and clarity about rights and obligations,” Shafik said. “Those are the values I cherish and that I am determined to bring to Columbia, and I know together we’ll emerge as a stronger community as a result.”
A group of roughly 30 people—including Columbia students and unaffiliated activists—gathered in the hall, having not been allowed into the hearing room.
“President Minouche is inside claiming to care about the safety of students and yet we are stuck here out in the hallway, not able to hear what she is saying,” Olivia Blythe, SSW ’25, said. “She is silencing, once again, the voices who speak out against genocide.”
10:22 a.m.
The committee’s ranking member, Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA), spoke after Foxx.
Scott began his statement by showing a video of a “Unite the Right” rally at the University of Virginia where white supremacists marched through Charlottesville in 2017, chanting “Jews will not replace us.”
He continued to describe issues of free speech as something that not even the Supreme Court have been able to settle after more than two centuries.
Foxx expressed her agreement with Scott, condemning the violence in Charlottesville and white supremacy. However, she added that the Charlottesville riots differ from what is currently happening on campuses, saying as Foxx said that the University of Virginia did not endorse the march and responded “appropriately.”
The committee then played a compilation video that began with a clip of Shafik’s inauguration speech, and continued into a montage of pro-Palestinian protests on campus calling for an “intifada” and “honor[ing] all the martyrs.”
Following the video, Foxx introduced the University’s four witnesses in order of their testimony—Shafik, Schizer, Shipman, and Greenwald—asking them to make their oral testimony a five-minute summary of their previously submitted written statements.
10:17 a.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
"That a taxpayer funded institution would become a forum for the promotion of terrorism raises serious questions,” Foxx said.
The committee’s chairwoman, Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.), kicked off the hearing at 10:17 a.m., launching into a description of how “this Committee and the nation have watched in horror as so many of our college campuses, particularly the most expensive, so-called elite campuses, have erupted into hotbeds of antisemitism and hate.”
Foxx then homed in on Columbia, naming it as “one of the worst of those hotbeds.”
“Columbia stands guilty of gross negligence at best and at worst has become a platform for those supporting terrorism and violence against the Jewish people,” Foxx said.
Foxx continued by recounting three examples of the University doing “far too little, far too late” to “protect students and staff,” including a March 24 unauthorized “Resistance 101” event featuring Khaled Barakat, who is allegedly a member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which the United States has designated a terrorist organization.
“That a taxpayer funded institution would become a forum for the promotion of terrorism raises serious questions,” Foxx said.
In an interview with Spectator on Monday, Foxx said that stripping the University of its federal financial aid funding would be an “ultimate” step if Columbia fails to adequately quell on-campus antisemitism, although she said that she does not anticipate going so far.
“It would be nice if Columbia would enforce its own rules and stop the bad behavior that’s occurring on campus,” Foxx told Spectator. “That’s the best way to deal with this issue instead of having things escalate to where there might need to be enforcement at the federal level.”
Foxx then declared that the committee’s work goes beyond “just a moral duty,” citing Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlaws discrimination on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, as endowing the committee with a legal duty to scrutinize the University’s handling of antisemitism.
“As the Committee convenes today to conduct its solemn oversight duty of postsecondary education, I can confidently say that never has this duty been more important,” Foxx said.
After the committee’s Dec. 5, 2023 hearing, which featured the then-presidents of the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard University and the president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Foxx and Stefanik have seen their political profiles gain national attention.
Toward the end of her brief opening remarks, Foxx highlighted the “growing discontent between the people” and Columbia and its peers—something that Nicholas Lemann, professor of journalism and dean emeritus of the Journalism School, who leads the Task Force on Antisemitism, pointed out in an interview on Monday with Spectator.
“There’s some cognitive dissonance between how much so many Americans want to be at Columbia and universities like it and their specific disapproval of a great deal that they know about what goes on here,” Lemann told Spectator. “This is an institution of higher learning, and it’s older than the United States, and its heart is very much in the right place as it tries to manage one of the most diverse communities in the world and take on a very wide range of challenges.”
Foxx concluded by directly addressing the four Columbia leaders testifying and making clear that “antisemitism must have no safe harbor in American universities.”
“We are headed down a dark path if we cannot agree on basic shared moral values, such as the implication of calls for genocide,” Foxx said. “Bright lines must be drawn before the reputational damage to American universities is endemic and intractable.”
“This is an opportunity for each of you to address the public directly and explain your stance on one of the great moral issues of our time,” she added.
9:30 a.m.
Photo by Gabriella Gregor Splaver / Senior Staff Photographer
Yadegar, president of the Columbia chapter of Students Supporting Israel, appeared alongside Foxx at a press conference hosted by the House Republican Conference on Wednesday.
As four members of Columbia’s leadership team make their last-minute preparations before testifying, Yola Ashkenazie, BC/JTS ’24, and Eden Yadegar, GS/JTS ’25, president of the Columbia chapter of Students Supporting Israel, appeared alongside Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.), chairwoman of the committee, and Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) at a press conference hosted by the House Republican Conference on Wednesday.
Over a dozen Jewish students at Columbia stood behind the podium as the speakers entered the press room. First to the podium, Stefanik introduced the aims of the congressional hearing, detailed instances of antisemitism on campus, and condemned Columbia’s “failure to protect Jewish students.”
Stefanik discussed the December testimony of Gay and Magill, which she said “set off a long overdue earthquake in higher education.”
“Despite claims otherwise, Columbia’s leadership refuses to enforce their own policies and condemn Jewish hatred on campus, creating a breeding ground for antisemitism and a hotbed of support for terrorism from radicalized faculty and students,” Stefanik said.
Ashkenazie took the podium second, describing her experiences as a Jewish student on campus and the “endless gaslighting of Jewish students.”
Ashkenazie criticized Shafik’s Tuesday essay in the Wall Street Journal, in which she wrote that “most of the people protesting do so from a place of genuine political disagreement, not from personal hatred or bias or support for terrorism.”
“While I don’t doubt that many of my peers are seeking to express their political opinions peacefully, what I and other pro-Israel students at Columbia have been subjected to is not well-intentioned political debate,” Ashkenazie said. “It has not been debate at all.”
Yadegar spoke next, remarking on her sentiments at the congressional roundtable organized by the committee in February, where she said that “the Jewish community is alone.” She encouraged the University to continue to enforce its policies against students who violate Columbia’s rules.
“I am here to call on our university leadership to continue its recent trajectory and take meaningful, sustained steps to ensure that all students at Columbia are able to learn free from hatred, intimidation, and harassment of any kind,” Yadegar said. “I similarly urge this committee to continue to hold our university administration accountable in implementing the necessary action to effect such change.”
Foxx concluded the press conference, offering a preview of the upcoming hearing.
“While antisemitism is festering on numerous college campuses, Columbia University stands out as one of the worst offenders,” Foxx said. “Not only have Jewish members of the community experienced the administration’s failure to enforce its own policies firsthand, but their lives have also been further endangered.”
On Columbia’s campus, dozens of protesters continue to peacefully occupy South Lawn, pledging to stay until the University divests from companies with ties to Israel.
“The presence of tents on South Lawn is a safety concern and a violation of university policies,” a University spokesperson wrote in a statement to Spectator. “We are informing the students they are in violation of university policies and for their own safety and for the operation of the university they need to leave.”
Deputy News Editor Noah Bernstein can be contacted at noah.bernstein@columbiaspectator.com. Follow Spectator on X @ColumbiaSpec.
University News Editor Sarah Huddleston can be contacted at sarah.huddleston@columbiaspectator.com. Follow Spectator on X @ColumbiaSpec.
University News Editor Shea Vance can be contacted at shea.vance@columbiaspectator.com. Follow her on X @SheaVance22.
Managing Editor Esha Karam can be contacted at esha.karam@columbiaspectator.com. Follow her on X @esha_karam.
Edited by Editor in Chief Isabella Ramírez. Contact her at isabella.ramirez@columbiaspectator.com and follow her on Twitter @isabellasrmrz.
Edited by Head Copy Editors August Phillips and Yvin Shin, Deputy Copy Editors Ainhoa Petri-Hidalgo, Lanah Wyne, and Sophia Lee, Associate Copy Editors Ella Ahner, Daniel Knorek, Nola Gallo, Posey Chiddix, and Vaishu Sirkay, and Preslotters Diego Carvajal Núñez, Eli Trokenheim, Elizabeth Kushelevsky, Emily Spencer, Katharine Lee, Lily Lee, Megha Parikh, Nerea Wolfenzon, Reese Ransweiler, and Samantha Elkins.
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter and like Spectator on Facebook.
More In News
Editor's Picks
