[Music] I'm not [Music] a little [Music] Come to order. A quorum is present. The committee meets today pursuant to notice. Without objection, the chair may
recess the committee at any point. Good morning to each of you, to our witnesses. Good morning as well. Last Congress, the committee on education and workforce conducted vital rigorous oversight of the anti-semitic violence that spiraled out of control on college
campuses all over the United States after October 7th, 2023. Specifically, the committee focused on the weeksl long violent encampments that engulfed campuses across the country and whether universities were holding those
involved accountable. Today's hearing marks the next phase of the committee's work, an effort to understand why this wave of anti-semitism was able so easily to consume the
nation's universities in the first place. The committee will be examining several factors that incite anti-semitism on college campuses. First, we'll examine faculty and student groups.
We've long expressed concern about the group students for justice in Palestine. But after October 7th, chapters of the faculty variant of this group, Faculty and Staff for Justice in Palestine, proliferated at universities across the
United States. Over 100 new chapters have been established in an effort to bring anti-semitism into the classrooms and lend institutional legitimacy to anti-semitic actions.
We'll examine faculty unions. Secondly, faculty unions have played a critical role formenting anti-semitism at universities under the guise of labor rights. As we'll see today, unions across the
country encourage anti-semitic activism through protests, demands, and workshops. Third, we'll look at Middle East studies centers. Many such centers have become beach heads for faculty with extremist
ties who seek to demonize Israel and the United States. We support the study of the Middle East and recognize that it's it is important for our national security, but we do not support promoting
anti-semitism and Islamism, a radical political ideology. Fourth, we'll examine foreign funding. Foreign funding can influence research priorities, faculty appointments, public statements, and events on campus. This
is especially the case for US universities with a separate campus abroad. We need greater transparency into foreign funding when it comes to higher education. The Deterrent Act passed on a bipartisan basis through this committee
and the House earlier this Congress would achieve that goal. Finally, and more broadly, we'll be examining the diversity, equity, and inclusion policies universities use. The DEI ideology
embraced by so many university bureaucrats categorizes Jews as white oppressors and therefore excuses or even justifies anti-semitic harassment. The violence, fear, and alienation felt
by Jewish students is at its core a result of administrators and their staff lacking the moral moral clarity to condemn and punish anti-semitism uh that is creating a hostile environment for Jewish students on
America's campuses. We've seen that in evidence at past hearings, sadly to a great degree. Speech that is protected by the first amendment can still contribute to a hostile environment and universities are
obligated to do something about it. Universities can choose to hire anti-semitic faculty, welcome students with a history of anti-semitism, accept certain foreign funding, and let the behavior of anti-semitic unions go unchecked.
But we will see today they do so at their own risk. While I appreciated our discussions with the presidents and chancellors yesterday in my office and I sincerely appreciated it especially in light of the change in
schedule that fost forced your changes in schedule as well. It is time for clear action on your campuses that can be quantified and be can be exemplified to the watching world around.
With that, I yield to the ranking member, my friend from Virginia, for an opening statement. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our witnesses for being with us today. Let me begin by acknowledging the
seriousness of today's hearing topic. Combating anti-semitism, like all forms of hatred and bigotry, must be a moral and ci civic priority. But I'd be remiss if I did not point out that this is our ninth hearing on anti-semitism in 18
months. Um, also note that since this committee's first anti-semitism hearing in December 2023, we've not held a single hearing addressing racism, xenophobia, sexism, islamophobia, or other challenges
affecting other student groups on American college campuses. I've witnessed this committee's silence on the administration's wholesale attack on diversity, equity, and inclusion and accessibility, DEIA, initiatives designed to make campuses more welcoming
to all groups. And if we're seriously to address anti-semitism and other forms of hate on college campuses, the process we could best use would be the vigorous enforcement of title six of the civil rights act enforced by the office of civil rights in the department of
education. Yet this committee majority has said nothing about the wholesale firings attacking the office of civil rights. And while the committee is engaged in holding its ninth hearing on anti-semitism, critical issues affecting
public education in this country and vi in viability of institutions of higher education institutions have been ignored. For example, in the last six months, our administration has taken harmful steps in the area of education.
Specifically, nearly 50% of the department's workforce have been proposed to be fired, thus threatening the key role of department plays in keeping our nation schools running and our students access to safe, welcoming environments. And yesterday, the Supreme
Court majority greenlighted this fatal blow by permitting the department to proceed with its plan firing of employees responsible for managing student loans, collecting data and student learning trends and relevant to this hearing enforcing the civil rights
protections of students. the and yesterday evening, President Trump announced on a social media platform that based on the Supreme Court decision that Secretary of Education should proceed with the dismantling of the Department of Education. And we're
seeing the impact on on this action. The department is requiring many of those with student loans to change to another loan program, but those students are unable to do it because of inadequate staff at the Department of Education. And that's before more people are being
fired. Another area this committee has not held a hearing on is the impact of stripping critical federal funding on the integrity of higher education institutions and their contributions to science, medicine, and global competition. This committee has also not
examined how the recent enacted reconciliation law or as Democrats call it the big ugly bill will impact student loan borrowers. This law will raise costs for students seeking higher education by forcing student loan borrowers into unaffordable repayment
plans, eliminating resources to help struggling borrowers, pushing students into predatory private loan market by eliminating graduate plus loans, capping parent plus loans, and limiting PEL grant access. Further, the law exposes students to predatory for-profit
institutions, stopping the implementation of the 2023 borrower defense regulation, which provides student loan relief for millions of borrowers defrauded by their schools, or the 2023 closed school discharge regulation,
which provides student loan relief for students whose institutions closed because before they were able to complete their programs. Also on July 1st, with little warning and no justification, this administration announced it was pausing nearly 7
billion dollars in education programs that the administration initially proposed to eliminate in next year's fiscal 2026 budget. Again, we have had no hearings to examine the examine the effect of the threat of loss of funding
on the following programs on title 2A programs supporting effective instruction. Uh grant programs which support professional development and other activities to improve the effectiveness of teachers, school leaders, including reducing class sizes.
uh 3A program English language acquisition which supports language instruction to help English language learners become proficient in English. The student support academic enrichment grants title 4A program which provide flexible funding for school districts
for a wide range of activities including supporting STEM education, accelerating learning co courses, college and career counseling, school-based mental health services, and improving school technology among others. and another title four title four program title 4 B
the 21st learning 21st community learning centers which support high quality before and after school programs focused on providing academic enrichment opportunities for students title 1 C program migrant education which supports
educational needs of migratory students uh including children of migrant and seasonal farm workers and the adult adult basic literacy education state grants, including integrated English literacy and civics education state grants, which support
adult education and literacy programs to provide basic skills to help prepare adults and out of school youth for success in the workforce. All of these programs are at risk of the abrupt loss in funding. In response, a number of the state attorneys general have filed an
emergency lawsuit just yesterday. However, cashstrapped school districts, particularly those in low-income and rural areas, cannot afford the delay in funding and will likely be forced to either lay off staff or cut back programs and services. And we should be
having hearings on on hearings to support and strengthen our learning institutions. We should be insisting that the Department of Education not ab advocate its responsibility and ensure that all students are afforded safe quality and equitable education
regardless of their race, gender, immigration status, econ econ socioeconomic status, religion or disability status when we should call on the officials from the office of civil rights at the Department of Education to testify and ensure that they are
implementing their long-standing duties to investigate, monitor, and provide resources to victims of of potential civil rights violations and they they are enforcing the laws that fight anti-semitism. So, Mr. Chairman, as we conduct our ninth hearing on this issue, I urge you
to also focus some of your attention to those on those who have the responsibility to protect students from hate and discrimination, the Office of Civil Rights, or whatever is left of it, and the pressing issues facing colleges and students today. That, Mr. Chairman,
I yield back the balance of my time. I thank the gentleman. Uh, pursuant to committee rule 8C, all members who wish to insert written statements into the record may do so by submitting them to the committee clerk electronically in Microsoft Word format by 5:00 p.m. 14
days after this hearing. And without objection, the hearing record will remain open for 14 days to allow such statements and other extraneous material. noted during the hearing to be submitted for the official hearing record.
I'll now turn to the introduction of the four witnesses. Our first witness is Dr. Robert M. Groves, the interim president of Georgetown University right here in Washington DC. Welcome. Our second witness is Dr. Felis V. Matoss
Rodriguez, the chancellor of the City University of New York uh in New York City. Welcome. Our third witness is Matt Nozzanchuk. I hope I got close on that. A principal for Matnos uh strategies and
former deputy assistant secretary, office for civil rights, US Department of Education in Washington DC. Welcome. Our last witness is Dr. Richard K. Lions, Chancellor of the University of California at Berkeley in Berkeley,
California. Welcome. We thank the witnesses for being here today. Pursuant to committee rules, I would ask that you each limit your oral presentation to a threeminut summary of your written statement. The clock will count down from three minutes as
committee members have many questions for you and we would like to spend as much time as possible on questions. Uh pursuant to committee rule 8D and committee practice. However, we will not cut off your testimony until you reach the five minute mark. I would like to
remind the witnesses to be aware of their responsibility to provide accurate information to the committee. I'll first recognize Dr. Groves for your testimony. Chairman Wahberg, Ranking Member Scott, members of the committee.
Since 1789, as the first Catholic and Jesuit US university, Georgetown's religious beliefs have demanded the absence of anti-semitism and other hatreds.
Indeed, the church has directed the Jesuits to foster dialogue across all religions. Therefore, any hatred or fear among our students destroys that dialogue.
Anti-semitism is incompatible with living our mission. And the same applies to to Islamophobia and racism. Hence, we try to react quickly to threats on collaboration.
On October 8th, a day after the Hamas attack, Georgetown condemned it, one of the first universities to speak out. Similarly, we try to act quickly to student conduct violations, but have learned that we need to adapt
to changing circumstances almost continuously. Addressing interfaith conflict has been aided by the largest set of full-time religious leaders at any US research university at Georgetown since 1968. A
full-time Georgetown rabbi, but also Jesuit and Orthodox priests, Protestant ministers, an imam, a director of Dharmic life, and Hindu spiritual adviser. We've also built academic units. the Center for Jewish
Civilization, a center for Muslim, Christian Understanding, and the Berkeley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs, among others. We also try to cry uh carry out the Jesuit mission globally, now working in 16 different
countries around the world. This has taught us the need to respect laws of other countries and their cultures despite disagreeing with some of their government's policies. For example, in 2005 we brought Western
Jesuit education and international affairs to Qatar. There nearly 70% of our students are women, a group with historically limited access to education. There we have full control over the curriculum, admissions,
faculty hiring and research activities. At Georgetown, non US financial support is accepted only to fulfill our longstanding mission, but never to alter it. Given our Jesuit values, we expose
students to different viewpoints on the Middle East. In addition to speakers on Gaza, we've hosted IDF soldiers, families of Israeli and Palestinians who've lost their lives. US families of US hostages in Gaza. Georgetown is not
perfect, and as events evolve, we've had to clarify rules of student behavior. But since October 7th, Georgetown has not experienced an encampment, physical violence, cancellation of commencement
activities, or city police activities. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. I now recognize uh Dr. Matoss Rodriguez for your testimony. Thank you, Chairman Wahlberg, Ranking Member Scott, and members of the
committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify at this important hearing. I am Felix Matoss Rodriguez, and it's a privilege to serve as a chancellor of the City University of New York and to represent our institution here today. This committee has highlighted the
alarming rise in anti-semitism on university campuses. Our university has not been immune. But let me be clear, anti-semitism has no place at CUNI. I share your commitment to identifying
and addressing the underlying factors instigating anti-semitism on campuses. In fact, I have confronted anti-semitism since the moment I became chancellor in 2019. CUNI is a unique institution. We are the
nation's largest urban public university. We are comprised of 26 campuses spread across New York City's five burrows. We serve nearly 200,40 degree seeking students and employ
40,000 people. Each of our campuses has his own president and administration. And as chancellor, I oversee the university's operations and policies to advance our mission of providing accessible highquality education.
Our annual instate tuition, which is under 5,000 for community colleges and under 7,000 for senior colleges, remains among the most affordable in the nation. Due to our focus on affordability, educational quality, and meaningful job
opportunities for our students, we have been recognized as a powerful engine of social mobility. We are proud that we propel more students into the middle class than all Ivy League schools combined. The size and scope of our community also
comes with challenges, and we confront this head on, including the unacceptable rise in anti-semitism. Those challenges only grew more pronounced after the horrific terrorist attack on Israel on October se 7th of 2023.
And although our response has not always been perfect, our commitment to this important work has never wavered. Our commitment to the safety of the members of our Jewish community and to our entire community is nonnegotiable.
I have been committing to forging deep ties with Jewish organizations on our campuses and have invested nearly two million to educate our community to combat hate and anti-semitism. I have created a center to centralize and improve CUNI's anti-discrimination
policies. Made Title Six training mandatory and launch our constructive dialogue initiative which is designed to help foster mutual understanding and combat hate. and I have made the safety of our Jewish students a top priority.
I would like to highlight one example that I think encapsulates the challenges that we face and how we have learned from them. In the spring of 2024, an encampment disrupted city college campus during our spring break. In response, I
secure emergency funding for increased security personnel. We ended the encampment with the help of the New York City Police Department, but not before damage was done to campus property. We learned from that experience, and we
now have a zero tolerance policy against encampments. We've also hired more than 150 full-time security employees and contracted with an additional 250 security personnel. Our approach has shown results.
This past spring, we applied our zero tolerance policy and work with Kuni public safety to prevent an encampment at City College. Our students safety is and must remain a top priority and we're committed committed to constant
vigilance against anti-semitism. Although I am proud of the progress that we have made, I know that we must never rest until every student on our campus is safe, feel safe, and can fully participate in student life. I hope to
discuss in greater detail today during today's hearing the many efforts we've undertaken to combat anti-semitism on our campuses and address it root causes. Thank you and I look forward to your questions. Thank you. I recognize uh
Mr. uh No, no, no. No. No. Simple to say it that way. For your testimony. Good morning, Chairman Wahlberg and Ranking Member Scott. My name is Matt Nosenchuk. I'm a civil rights lawyer with a track record of fighting
anti-semitism in the Obama White House, at the Justice Department Civil Rights Division, and as a former deputy assistant secretary in the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights. I bring three key messages today. First,
anti-semitism in America and on campuses is real. Responding to it demands actions that are tailored to universities, properly implemented, and adequately resourced. Second, this administration's approach is contradictory and counterproductive. It
includes the broad anti-democratic crackdown on foreign students, slashing funds for universities, disregarding the Title Six process, and gutting the office mandated to enforce the law while claiming to champion the fight against anti-semitism. Third, Congress must
fulfill its core responsibilities, meaningful oversight and adequate resources for effective solutions, not political theater that inflames campus climate and ultimately harms the students it claims to protect. My written testimony describes the unacceptable discrimination Jewish
students face, social ostracism, verbal harassment, sometimes physical violence. In the classroom, faculty have targeted Jewish students who've responded by dropping classes, concealing their identity, or retreating from campus life. The bottom line is this. No
students should be forced to choose between their identity and social acceptance. This includes their connection to a Jewish homeland, whether they express it through Zionism or generally identify as Jewish. When these problems persist, it's natural to demand
forceful solutions and accountability. We have robust tools under title 6. The most effective investigations OCR launched an unprecedented number following October 7th result in detailed monitored resolution agreements obligating schools to take verifiable
action. They include, for example, climate surveys, mandatory training, and ensuring all complaints get addressed promptly and effectively. Here's what one campus Hill director said about change from his campus's agreement. Jewish life has improved remarkably. Jewish students now receive responses to
bias incidents within 24 hours. The Hillel Center reported a 40% increase in daily usage. Parents feel confident sending their children there. In short, Jewish life on campus is thriving. These agreements work. That's why OCR used
them in anti-semitism investigations during the first Trump administration. Proper enforcement creates meaningful positive change. None of that is happening now. This administration boasts it is combating anti-semitism while systematically dismantling the
infrastructure needed to do it. They've gutted OCR, the office with the expertise and mandate to enforce Title Six, closing most of its regional offices and cutting staff in half. Thorough investigations are impossible. OCR dismissed over 3,400 complaints in
just three months, an unprecedented number suggesting students in harm's way are being ignored. The administration relies on press reports rather than actual complaints from harm students, sending ultimatums styled as notices of violation riddled with inaccuracies and
political hyperbole. The current approach reminds me of the Wizard of Oz projecting an intimidating, demanding, and elucory image of action. But here, the man behind the curtain cancels funds for civil rights enforcement and cancer research. Fighting anti-semitism is
actually the camel's nose under the tent for ideological assaults on universities that have undertaken extensive efforts to address the problem. Even the Wall Street Journal editorialized that the administration is overstepping its authority by imposing sweeping
conditions on funds that weren't spelled out by Congress and shooting first and investigating later. An administrative committed to strengthening enforcement against anti-semitism invests in responsible offices and critical personnel. It doesn't shutter agencies
and fire staff. Many leading Jewish community voices, and a majority of American Jews reject the false choice between confronting anti-semitism and upholding democracy. Our safety as Jews has always been tied to the rule of law and protection of rights for all. Anti-democratic actions taken in our
name don't make Jews safer, they make us targets. Harming universities makes everyone less safe, including Jews. Congress has a choice. Continue down this destructive path, gutting enforcement capacity Congress created and funded, or return to evidence-based solutions. Restore regional offices and
OCR funding to at least $200 million. Re rehire experienced staff who know how to investigate cases. Every day we delay Jewish students hurt unnecessarily, but every day offers an opportunity to choose effective action over ideological assaults. support don't weaken the
institutions charged with protecting students. Thank you. I look forward to taking your questions. Thank you. I recognize now Dr. Lions for your testimony. Good morning, Chairman Wahlberg, Ranking Member Scott and members of the
committee. I'm Rich Lions and I just finished my first year as chancellor of UC Berkeley. Thank you for inviting me to discuss Berkeley's efforts to combat anti-semitism and support our Jewish community. Berkeley unequivocally
condemns anti-semitism. Our commitment to our Jewish students, colleagues, and community is unwavering. Since well before the horrific terrorist attacks of October 7th, Berkeley has been partnering with our Jewish community to combat anti-semitism and
foster a vibrant Jewish life. I am the first to say we have more work to do. Berkeley, like our nation, has not been immune to the disturbing rise in anti-semitism. And as a public university, we have a
solemn obligation to protect our community from discrimination and harassment while also upholding the First Amendment right to free speech. After a year as chancellor, I can confidently say that Berkeley is
committed to meeting this challenge. We have adopted new initiatives to design these are designed to curb anti-semitism by confronting the rise in hate directly. I work in close collaboration with my chancellor's advisory committee
on Jewish life with the Berkeley Center for Jewish Studies and our pioneering anti-semitism education initiative. These programs help us recognize and confront anti-semitism, support the Jewish community, and
navigate the complexity of lawful protest versus harassment. We recently instituted new anti-semitism training for all incoming students. And we continue to invest in new security and safety measures to strengthen
compliance with campus rules. These are just some of our new initiatives. We continue to work with our Jewish community to respond to the ignorance at the heart of this deplorable hatred. I'm proud of Berkeley's long history and
vital contributions to our nation's success. Our mission requires that we strive for a campus where all people feel safe and respected. That same mission enables our research to advance the health and well-being and
security of the American people. That mission allows Berkeley to lift more students further up the economic ladder than any other university. Our undergraduates create more funded new businesses than any other university
in this country. As a public institution, Berkeley has a solemn obligation to protect the quintessential American value of free speech. This obligation does not prevent us, let me repeat, does not prevent us from
confronting harassment and discrimination in all its forms, including anti-semitism. I look forward to answering any questions you may have. Thank you. Thank you to each of our witnesses.
Under committee rule nine, we will now question witnesses under the five-minute rule. I'll recognize myself for five minutes. Let me ask the uh college university leaders this first question. I'd like you to to define
semitism or define anti-semitism as understood by in your case Dr. Groves um Georgetown University in all its campuses. Thank you.
We define anti-semitism as hatred of the Jewish people uh and all of the behaviors that might be connected with such hatred. Thank you. Dr. Matos Rodriguez. Yes. Thank you.
What is CUNI's definition? Thank you. Anti-semitism is uh hatred or prejudice against uh Jews or individuals who are uh perceived to be Jewish. Thank you, Dr. Lions. Similarly,
your your uh microphone. I define anti-semitism as hatred or discrimination against Jewish people. Okay. Thank you. appreciated the fact that each each of you were able to quickly define it and simply at least
for your institution as you understand it. Um, Chancellor Matos Rodriguez, does CUNU have an anti-semitism problem? Yes or no? We are not immune from the anti-semitism. It is something that I've
been committed to working since 2019. Without objection, I'd like to enter into the record the testimony of dozens of CUTUNI students who have experienced severe anti-semitism on campuses. Hearing no objection, they will be entered.
How many Jewish Jewish students have transferred out of CUNI since October 7th, 2023? I I don't have that that information. chair be good information to get. How many anti-semitism complaints has
CUNI received systemwide since October 7th, 2023? We have received uh in 2024 uh 68 complaints of anti-semitism uh on the current year 2025. We have 16.
Thank you. How many students has CUNI suspended or expelled for anti-semitic conduct since October 7th, 2023? We have over the last two years disciplined uh 18 students for
anti-semitic uh conduct and we have disciplined another 25 for uh inappropriate behavior in protest, demonstrations or rallies. Thank you, Chancellor. You have referred to the IH definition of anti-semitism as a vital
resource. Does that mean university officials are employing this definition to determine what constitutes anti-semitism across the CUNY system? Thank you for your question and that is correct and we've uh added in our training for all the individuals who
participate in the investigations on our campuses. uh the ones who are higher in this year receive new training uh on uh which includes using the definition as stipulated by OCR and is also part of refreshing courses that we have for all
personnel in addition to public safety officers. Does CUNI have any anti-semitic faculty? We have faculty that might conduct themselves uh in anti-semitic uh behavior and uh we have no tolerance for
it and uh we're clear about the expectations to follow all our rules and policies and if any individual uh breaks those rules they will be investigated and the appropriate disciplinary action will be taken if warranted. How many Zionist professors has CUNI
hired since October 7th? We do not uh track uh the hiring of faculty in terms of uh ideology or or things of that nature. So I wouldn't be able to tell you that information. But you're able to tell us that you had
anti-semitic professors. Well, that that is based on some of the disciplining and behavior that we had in in some of the campuses. So without objection, I'd like to enter in the record a complaint filed by Hunter College Jewish Studies Chair Leah
Garrett against CUNI alleging a hostile workplace environment. Without objection, I hear none. That will be submitted. While Dr. Garrett was suffering under CUNI's indifference to anti-semitism. In February 2025, Hunter College posted a job announcement
looking to hire a Palestinian studies professor well-versed in settler colonialism, genocide, and apartheid. As you know, Hunter College was forced to edit this anti-semitic job description. Did Hunter College still
hire people for this position? When that posting was reached my attention, we made sure to tell Hunter College that it was entirely inappropriate to have that posting, that it needed to be uh to be modified uh and that they needed also take steps to make
sure that any postings in the future would not contain uh language like that. Uh that hiring process is ongoing. That's an issue of great concern to us. Uh we continue to hear rhetoric denouncing settler colonialism and
Israeli genocide contribute to anti-semitism in the college and CUNI specifically. My time is expired and now I recognize the gentle lady from Oregon, Miss Madameichi. Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, ranking member, and thank you to the
witnesses. Since our last hearing on this issue in May, the Jewish community has experienced more devastating losses, including the fatal shooting in Washington DC of two Israeli embassy employees and the Molotov cocktail attack on peaceful marchers in Boulder,
Colorado. As I've as I have said before in this committee, there has been an undeniable rise in anti-semitism and hate speech across the country and around the globe. Jewish students and all students deserve to feel safe and be
safe on college campuses and everywhere. No one should be afraid of harassment or discrimination because of their faith. And I have said before that if the majority wanted to fight anti-semitism and protect Jewish students, they should condemn anti-semitism in their own party
and at the highest level of government. They have failed to do so. Multiple White House officials have ties to anti-semitic extremists. This includes the current liaison to the Department of Homeland Security, the communications director for the Office of Management
and Budget, and the press secretary of the Department of Defense, who posted Nazi slogans on her personal social media accounts and promoted the anti-semitic great replacement conspiracy theory. The leader of President Trump's so-called anti-semitism task force actually talked
about revoking Jew cards and shared a post on social media from the former leader of a white supremacist organization that called for the quote nazification of America. Donald Trump has continued to spout anti-semitic venom most recently at a rally where he
said no going to the banks and borrowing from in some cases a fine banker and in some cases shillocks and bad people. He tried to walk back those statements, saying incredulously that he had never heard the term shillock used in an anti-semitic way. Words matter and the
president of the United States should not be using words, especially anti-semitic tropes, if he does not know what they mean. Have any Republican colleagues here today condemned these acts of anti-semitism from the president and members of the administration or
called for removal of these individuals from off? No. because that would require real and meaningful commitment to rooting out anti-semitism from the top down. Instead, my colleagues are weaponizing the real problems of the Jewish community, a community I am an
active member of, in furtherance of their attacks on and plans to defund colleges and universities. As members of this committee, we sit with the responsibility of enacting policies that best educate our youth. And this ongoing
attack on higher education is shameful. As Mr. Noeneek so compellingly testified, combating the rise of anti-semitism in co on college campuses requires investing in the office for civil rights, an agency dedicated to investigating and resolving civil rights
violations, including anti-semitic incidences at schools and universities. But instead of supporting that office, Secretary McMahon has already fired about half of OCR staff and closed seven of their 12, more than half of their regional offices. Republicans have said
nothing. In the past months, what's left of OCR dismissed a staggering more than 3,400 cases, but again, Republicans say nothing. Meanwhile, the Department of Justice recently slashed hate crime prevention grants, claiming they do not
align with the administration's priorities. Will my Republican colleagues stand against the ongoing attacks on the Office for Civil Rights? And what about the hate crime prevention grants? Will any Republican colleagues advocate for these funds to be reinstated? Of course not. That would be
real action. Why do that when we can create another political sideshow instead? Education has always played a significant role in the efforts to end anti-semitism, but that's not what this committee has been doing. With drastic budget cuts, the hiring of bigoted
individuals at the highest levels, the embrace of white Christian nationalism, and I might say in stark contrast to Jewish values, the abhorrent failure to respect basic human and constitutional rights. This administration is creating
a culture of disrespect and danger, not just for Jewish students. Perhaps that should be the focus of this hearing. Additionally, instead of giving OCR the staff and resources they need to do the factbased Title Six investigation, the Trump administration has actually
withheld hundreds of millions of dollars from colleges and universities, apparently to punish for them rather than address anti-semitis anti-semitism. But this kind of imposition of collective punishment hurts all students, including Jewish students,
because it will lead to fewer academic options and higher tuition. I wonder if that isn't the point. As I have said before and will continue to repeat, I am a member of the Congressional Jewish Caucus. I am a mother who raised her children in a Jewish home. I'm an active member of my synagogue. I am extremely
disappointed in in the majority for exploiting my community's legitimate fears and concerns as they advance discriminatory, regressive, unconstitutional and harmful policy. Jewish Americans and the American people deserve better. I yield back. Gentle lady's time is expired. Now
recognize the uh chairwoman of ameritus of this committee, Representative Fox. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I thank our witnesses for being here today. And I will ask you when it's appropriate. I'd like a yes or no
answer. Uh Dr. Mattos Rodriguez CH uh Cooney's faculty and staff union, the professional staff congress or PSC has passed multiple resolutions that support
the anti-semitic BDS movement. Do you support forcing Jewish faculty and staff to be represented by a union that enfores BDS? Yes or no? Thank you. I have repudiated uh BDS uh
and have said that there's no place for BDS at the City University of New York. So you you didn't give me an answer yes or no. So I have to assume it's no. Uh or uh yes, excuse me. In 2021, the EEOC
substantiated a claim by Jewish Cooney professor that the PSC discriminated against him and other Jewish professors because of their religion. What disciplinary action did you take against those responsible?
And I am uh that case of the EEOC. We thought it was entirely inappropriate uh to discriminate against any member of our community and uh and that was a matter taken by the AU. And and so no disciplinary action. You
didn't state a disciplinary action. Not not to my knowledge. Does the PSC have an anti-semitism problem? Yes or no? The PSC does not speak for the City University of New York. We've been clear on our commitment uh against
anti-semitism and against uh BDS. So the president of the PSC personally supports BDS. Do you view this as problematic? Again, the the PSC does not speak for the city of New York. My understanding
also that the last vote that they took you obviously don't think it's problematic. Thank you, Dr. Groves. After the US uh successfully struck Iran's nuclear infrastructure, one of the professor professors at Georgetown
Center for Muslim Christian understanding, Jonathan AC Brown said, quote, "I hope Iran does some symbolic strike on a base. Is this person really suited to be educating the next generation of American diplomats?"
Thank you for the question. with within minutes of our learning of that tweet, we uh the dean contacted Professor Brown. The tweet was removed. We issued a statement condemning the tweet. Professor Brown is no longer chair of
his department and we're beginning and he's on leave and we're beginning a process of reviewing the case. So, he's been making similarly appalling statements for years. Uh but he has been kept around for years. So you are now
investigating and disciplining him from what you've said. Yeah. Yes. Uh Congresswoman, thank you. Uh Dr. Lions, several UC Berkeley faculty and staff have made anti-semitic remarks and justified
Palestinian terrorism. In February 2024, history professor and chancellor's chair USA Machi tweeted, "I could have been one of those who broke through the siege on October 7, referencing an article that praised Hamas terrorists and denied
reports of sexual violence against Israeli women in 2017. Continuing lecture, Hatim Bosian, co-founder of Students for Justice in Palestine, posted anti-semitic tweets, including one depicting a stereotypical
ultraorththodox Jew with the statement, "Mom, look, I is chosen. I can now kill, rape, smuggle organs, and steal the lands of Palestinians." Yah. An October 2023 survey found 85% of Jewish students
felt UC Berkeley had not adequately addressed their safety concerns. Understandable given the conduct of some university personnel. Dr. Lions, do you condone the statements made by these Berkeley employees? I'm unable to comment on the discipline
of an individual faculty or a comment of an individual faculty. What I can say is that you mentioned several different phrases and different events. So, um, separate from the people that you're mentioning, if I heard or saw some of
those those statements, I would both view them as objectionable, if not reprehensible, and I would also immediately report it, and I would also have empathy for our Jewish community. So what are you doing to make reforms to
your hiring practices to see that you don't bring people like that onto the campus in the future? Let's make the answer brief. The time is expired. We we use when hiring faculty, we use academic standards to hire faculty. We
don't use ideological conditions to hire faculty. Well, obviously your academic standards have been failing you, and I'd look for other standards if I were you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Gentle lady's time is expired. I now recognize gentleman from California, Mr. Tano.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to witnesses for being here. Mr. Nosench, in your time with the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights, you helped to lead the most resolutions of anti-semitism cases in OCR's history. Congratulations on that. In your
experience, is a committee hearing such as this uh an appropriate venue to determine whether an individual school individual school has violated title six laws? Thank you for the question. Title six investigations are very fact intensive.
Uh when they're opened, uh OCR investigators go onto a campus and speak with people, look at documents. It it is not a u inquiry into whether any specific word is anti-Semitic, but it's a holistic determination as to whether
there was harassment or hostile environment that violates Title Six. So, it's it's a it's a it's fairly non-political uh dry fact intensive inquiry. Non-political. Okay.
The Trump administration has made a lot of commitments to combating anti-semitism on college campuses. Is the current office of civil rights or OCR equipped to fulfill those promises? From what I understand, uh, Congressman Takano, it is not. Uh, as I noted in my
testimony, the staff has been cut by half. Uh, I understand that now the average case load for the investigators remaining is 200 uh, cases per person. And it's very important to note that of the seven of 12 regional offices that were eliminated, those were the offices
where the greatest expertise um was for uh investigating uh and bringing to resolution the anti-semitism cases that uh we resolved and as I said you know we resolved a record number five times more
than the first Trump administration. So in your experience uh pursuing anti-semitism charges or or claims uh determining whether or not that they they those anti-semitism did occur or any form of discrimination under title six. It's a time inensive and staff
intensive process. Yes, absolutely. And it's it's not simply determining whether there was an instance of anti-semitism, but it's determining whether the instances that occurred rise to the level of harassment or hostile environment such that Title Six has been violated.
Thank you. OCR has dismissed over 3,000 civil rights cases, civil rights complaints between March and June of this year. Mr. Chuck, what is the difference between conducting investigations best based on press reporting and external sources as the Trump administration is doing and doing
a process-based title six investigations based on specific complaints filed as was the practice of past administrations? Thank you for the question. I think the best illustration of that is actually in a US News and World Report uh opinion piece that a
student at Harvard Sarah Silverman just published yesterday. She wrote that uh she had had her muza stripped off of her doorpost. Uh it was a one instance of individual discrimination that was detailed in the Harvard notice of violation and the administration did not
even talk to her about what had happened. So relying on press reports uh relying on uh broad uh statements or perceptions is not how Title Six is supposed to work. Again, it's looking at the uh anti-semitic
discrimination has occurred and then determining whether it has risen to the level of uh hostile environment, determining whether Jews have been targeted unlawfully. Thank you. Uh have have the Trump administration's actions made campus more safe or less safe for students who
are victims of anti-semitism? Based on everything I'm hearing uh from Jewish students, including the one whom I just mentioned, it's making uh campuses less safe. Uh Mr. Rosenchuk, Republicans claim that certain institutions of higher education like
Georgetown are subjects of foreign influence that radicalizes their students. As a former federal government employee, you've taken a number of ethics trainings in your own career, which um would you say is an example of undue foreign influence? A, a
long-standing two decade academic partnership with a foreign country that serves to build diplomatic partnerships, or B, a $400 million luxury plane gifted to the president of the United States by a foreign government for his personal use. Thank you for the question, uh,
Congressman. I would say there are rules uh for transparency and reporting that pertain to uh funding from uh foreign governments to universities and uh those I believe need to be followed. Thank you. Well, the majority uses hearings
like this one to rail against foreign influence while their own administration routinely violates clear ethics boundaries with foreign governments. They have turned this hearing room into a kangaroo court where they spend our time litigating a predetermined outcome to do nothing actually to help Jewish
students just make public theater out of legitimate pain. This scorched earth warfare against higher education will endanger academic freedom, innovative research, and international cooperation for generations to come. And I yield back. Thanks, gentlemen. His time is expired.
And now recognize the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Thompson. Well, thank you, chairman. Uh Dr. Groves, uh well, first of all, once again, thank you for the care at Georgetown University Hospital, uh that I received with some treatments. Uh just very impressed
there. Uh Dr. Gross, recently something did come to my attention. Uh and uh I want to make see if you're aware of it. Are you aware that in uh 2024, flyers designed to mimic eviction notices were placed on Jewish students dormatory
doors on your campus, falsely accusing Israel of genocide and ethnic cleansing. I am aware of that. Uh we we uh this was during movein weekend for our new students. We acted on that immediately.
removed the eviction notices with a assembly of of staff around uh identified the perpetrator of of this and and discipline was uh was uh uh done for him. Very good. So obviously this violates uh
the Georgetown policies. This this was abhorrent uh and uh for for the students who saw this and were hurt by this uh we apologize as a as a university. This is intolerable at Georgetown. We cannot have this sort of
behavior. Well, thank you for taking that action and thank you for taking the disciplinary action. Uh uh incredibly important. Um Dr. Groves, does Georgetown employ any anti-semitic faculty members or fellows?
We have faculty that have the range of uh opinions on every issue facing humankind. uh uh we police carefully the behavior of our faculty in the classroom and
their their research activities. uh they are free as all residents of the United States uh to have speech uh in in the public domain. And yeah, I wanted to wanted to point out u
u one in particular one to start with anyone I shaheen a senior fellow at Georgetown Center for Muslim Christian understanding uh which I find interesting Muslim Christian understanding and he applauded the terrorist attack on October 7th
stating it would quote bring about this change that we long for. is um uh Jaheen's description of the October 7th terrorist attack, the the quote change that we're we long for in quote violate your university's harassment and
discrimination policies. Uh that was an important um uh tweet that was sent out. Uh that is not the Georgetown policy. Um what we do in in cases like that is to asssure that uh
the student welfare and the welfare of the GEO community is protected through through events like that. So the protection did that include disciplinary action or an investigation into Immod Shaheen for a statement? Uh we we have I I I can't cite that
particular case, but I can assure you, Congressman, that that we have dismissed faculty for anti-semitic behavior on social media in the classroom and also dismissed staff for the same behavior. Well, there's another one. In a social media post, the associate director of
the bridge initiative of Georgetown, uh, Mubashra Tazamal reposted a statement that said, "Israel has been recreating Oswitch in Gaza for two years. Uh, do you believe it's appropriate for a Georgetown affiliated scholar to
publicly endorse a statement comparing Israel actions in Gaza to uh to the uh I mean the evil of of of I reject those kinds of statements. That's not the policy of Georgetown. And
I want everyone to know that to the extent that that hurt Jewish students, Jewish faculty, Jewish staff at Georgetown, I apologize for that. Uh but that's behavior uh of uh covered under the first amendment on social media that we don't intervene on. What we do
intervene on quickly is behavior that affects our students in the classroom and research related activities that involve students. So there's uh for so this individual didn't face any disciplinary action or consequences. Uh not to my knowledge.
Yeah. In a director position no less. Uh Dr. Dr. Rose, what message do you think the university's inaction sends to Jewish students on your campus? You know, we have a variety of of of ways to uh stay in touch with our Jewish
community. Uh our our uh Jewish life office is a wonderful resource. We meet with our rabbi. We meet with Jewish students. We meet with Jewish faculty to keep our a sense of the pulse of of the culture. Dr. Rose, I appreciate. Let me My time
is almost gone if if I may. Just one more question. When When hiring faculty, does Georgetown currently have a vetting process that includes screening for anti-semitic content and a candidate's public record? Uh, not at this time, Congressman.
Thank you. Thank the gentleman. Time has expired. And now recognize the gentle lady from North Carolina, Miss Adams. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and and thank you to the witnesses for being here today. Uh, let me start with something that shouldn't need to be said, but it must be said clearly. Anti-semitism is
real. It's rising and it has no place on our campuses. We have a responsibility to make sure that that every student, Jewish, Muslim, black, brown, or otherwise, feels safe and respected where they live and where they learn.
And that means calling out hate when we see it. It also means upholding the civil rights protections that have long protected our students from discrimination. Now, I spent over 40 years as a professor and and what I know
is this. Classrooms are where we ask questions, where we challenge each other, and yes, sometimes where we disagree. But I'm concerned about what I see happening here because instead of of solving a problem, we're watching some
try to use anti-semitism as a reason to go after higher education. I've heard it in this committee that DEI is to blame, that foreign scholars are a threat, that faculty ought to be punished for their views. But I'll tell you, we don't need
political scorecards. We need real solutions. And and that means following the law. It means fully funding the Office of Civil Rights, not hollowing it out. And let's not forget, as we sit here today holding this hearing, the
Department of Education is withholding more than $6 billion in congressionally mandated funding from our K12 schools. That's money for students, for teachers, afterchool programs, and for communities
already stretched thin. So my question, Chancellor Lions, thank you for being here. Your institution has a long history with student protests, some of it deeply troubling and some of it a reflection of the moment that we're in.
But I want to ask you something else. How does your institution protect academic freedom while also keeping students safe? And and what does it say? What does it say about your values when those freedoms are tested?
Thank you for the question. Uh you're describing what is a very complex set of questions. Um the freedom to discover, the freedom to learn, the freedom to teach, these are fundamental freedoms.
And and so when we talk about academic freedom, let's just be clear that those are those are the fundamental freedoms that we protect. And at the same time, we have this obligation toward free speech. Uh it's it does it frustrate us
as presidents? I'll speak for myself. This is frustrating. People say, "Well, just drive down the middle of the road." This is a very complex road to drive down. And so we are constantly making judgments around how do we keep people safe and supported and also how do we make sure that we are protecting free
speech and the marketplace for ideas. Thank you, sir. Let me move on. Uh um Chancellor Moss uh uh s Chancellor Moss Rodriguez, thank you as well. Cooney is a large and complex system, 26 campuses
across five burrows. That's no easy task. So let me ask you first, have some of the protests we've seen involved people from outside the community? Uh absolutely appreciate the uh the the the nuance. uh our our our campuses are
the city of New York. Uh so in many many cases uh some of the events that occur are really occurring in the streets of New York City uh that are contingent to uh to to our campuses. So that presents uh so you can give me a yes or no. Yes.
Okay. Thank you. Second, how is CUNI working across New York's diverse neighborhoods to confront anti-semitism in a way that includes everyone? Thank you. Uh since I mentioned I've been committed to this since I became chancellor in 2019. Uh I had learned as
president of Queens College that you needed to bring uh people together. We had at Queens College the largest Muslim and Jewish uh populations of of our campuses at CUNI and I learned the value of bringing people together. So, I have
uh a Jewish advisory committee on Jewish life uh that I brought together in 2023 to listen to the members of the community to get their feedback and get answers. Thank you so much. Let let me let me uh ask you uh one f say one final thing. We've heard concerns from faculty who
were recently not reappointed despite having full enrolled classes scheduled for the fall. And I understand that those matters may be may be going through a formal process. I I know you may not be able to speak to individual cases, but as a former professor myself and a department chair, somebody who
believes uh deeply in transparency and fairness, I want to ask you, would you be willing to follow up with my office and provide more information on the policies and procedures that guide faculty appointments and reappoints at CUNI? I appreciate the question. Uh we're here
to answer all the questions and cooperate fully with the committee. Okay. Thank you, sir. I think my time is up, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. I thank the gentle lady. Now I recognize the gentle lady from New York, Miss Stefanic. Thank you. I want to begin by discussing the heinous scourge of anti-semitism on
your watch as chancellor at CUNI. You are aware aware at Baroo, Jewish freshmen were welcomed with heinous anti-semitic taunts about the hostages killed by Hamas. Quote, "Where's Hirs, you ugly expletative expletative? Go
bring them home." End quote. quote, "You ain't going home tonight. Go back to Brooklyn. All Zionists are terrorists." End quote. Are you aware of those anti-semitic harassment slurs? Those are deplorable statements. Uh, and if they were associated with the event
at Baroo, an investigation was done and students were disciplined. And was there students were disciplined in both of those cases. At Hunter, Jewish students were forced to enter the main university building under a swastika for hours. Is that correct? My understanding of that is that the
swastika was placed outside and we have a custom of erasing OS's deplorable symbols. In that particular case, uh there was a delay because it had to be referred to the NYPD for the anti-hate investigation. Let me remind you of this particular
case because that's not according to your own staff. In fact, the Hunter College Director of Jewish Studies emailed university leadership requesting that the swastika be taken down and instead this was the response for everyone to see. Apologies, but it is not that simple. Is that the position of
CUNI? It is entirely unacceptable that and was this administrator disciplined who emailed again in in in that particular case we were working with the new was this administrator disciplined for sending this response? We we we any case
that we have will investigate and the appropriate action will be taken. So what was the appropriate action taken against this administrator in this case? In in this case as I mentioned to you the uh we are working with the New York City Police Department. So no disciplinary action has been taken by CUNI. Is that correct?
We will investigate any action. So an investigation but no actual action like so many of these failed university presidents. But it's not just this case. You talked about how you focused on this since 2019, but let remind you in 2021
you hired Abdi Allah as CUNI's chief diversity officer and this role includes overseeing anti-semitism complaints and initiatives. Were you aware at that time that this senior administrator you hired was previously employed by parliamentary inquiry?
The Council on American Islamic uh relations. Gentle lady will suspend uh my time. Can you hold the time? It was 2:25. We'll hold the time. Does the committee have a um policy on
publicizing people's personal emails? This is a university, administrator's email, addresses, email addresses. Policy on that? No, we don't have a policy, I'm told, on that. And again, this is uh this is at the university. This is a university email, a public
university in the state of New York. Um, following up at 2:25, which my time is, I'm referencing the CUNI chief diversity officer who you hired in 2021. They were previously employed by CARE, the Council on American Islamic Relations. Is that
correct? So, uh, she was hired at the to be the chief diversity officer at the central office with no responsibility over cases that have to deal with, uh, students or, uh, faculty. But yet you were aware that
she was previously employed by care. Again, I was not directly responsible for that. Uh even though she was the senior chief diversity officer, as I mentioned to you, I was not directly responsible for that hire. So is it okay from your perspective? Obviously, it is to have a former
employee of Care. Let me remind you, Care was a co-conspirator in a terrorist financing case and has ties to Hamas, a designated terrorist organization. Is she currently still employed by CUNI? She is.
There you go. So, no action, just words here today. Um, even further, and by the way, this her salary is paid for by the New York taxpayers. Correct. We have the expectations of total professionalism and compliance with all
the rules and policies of CUNI. Any employee that breaks our policies or our rules will be investigated. But it obviously doesn't break CUNI's rules to have a senior employee who was previously employed by a terrorist affiliated organization. That is
unacceptable to New York taxpayers. It is unacceptable to American taxpayers. But it's not just that. Are you familiar with CUNI Clear? This is the clinical arm of CUNI School of Law. Clear? I'm not familiar with them. Well, I will remind you the CUNI Clearar
founder and professor is the head of Mahmud Khalil's legal defense fund. Are you aware of that? Uh, no. Does it concern you that New York taxpayers are paying the salary for the legal defense fund of Mahmud Khalil? And
I'll remind you who Mahmud Khalil is. This is the chief pro- Hamas agitator that led to the anti-semitic encampments at Colombia, the rioting and violent takeover of Hamilton Hall, the harassment and physical assault of Jewish students. And we do not condone any kind of
anti-semitism. But you allow the head of the clinical legal organization and a professor to be the chief legal aid to Mahmud Khalil and do his legal defense fund. Those decisions are made in the clinics are made in the individual campuses. It
goes up to you. You are the chancellor. Those decisions are made. So you take no responsibility. I take responsibility for any behavior of our faculty. So is this acceptable? Is this acceptable? Any behavior that is anti-semitic? Is this acceptable that the legal
defense fund for Mahmud Khalil is the head of CUNI Clear? That's acceptable under your watch. We do have no tolerance for anti-semitism on our campuses and we've been very So will this person be fired? Anybody that breaks our rules and our policies, there be an investigation, we'll
investigate. And if if there's any disciplinary action to be taken, we'll take it. Let me make a prediction. No disciplinary action. This individual is not going to be fired because it's all words, no action. You have failed the people of New York. You have failed Jewish students in New York State. And
it is a disgrace. I yield back. Thank the gentle lady. The gentle lady's time is expired. I recognize gentleman from California, Mr. Dson. Thank you, Chancellor. Do you want to have a few moments of my time to respond to that outrageous attack by my colleague?
Again, uh thank you for the opportunity. Uh I just want to make clear that uh the rules of the City University of New York apply to all our students, faculty, and staff. anybody who behaves in any way that it is anti-semitic that uh is you
know sponsors violence against members of the Jewish community or any community discriminate harass you know will be investigated and held accountable uh based on on our rules that it's clear it's our commitment uh I have been
engaged in fighting anti-semitism as chancellor since I became the chancellor in 2019 have been working very closely with many of our Jewish stakeholder organizations led a delegation of presidents and deans to Israel back in
2019 to encourage our ties with universities uh in Israel and cultural institutions and artistic institutions in Israel. Uh we have made very clear our time and place and manner policies on our campuses to make sure that
individuals can exercise their right. Uh thank you chancellor. Appreciate it. I want to save a little bit of my time, but I appreciate it. Uh, Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter from Jewish faculty at the University of California supporting the actions of the
administration against anti-semit. Without objection and hearing none, it will be entered. Thank you. I want to thank all the witnesses here. Um, Dr. Rose, I want to start with you as a proud alumni of a Jesuit education where they they taught
us to service to others and uh lifelong learning. So, thank you for your presentation and uh you have an example of that Jesuit education with former member Moran who's a proud graduate like myself of the College of the Holy Cross sitting behind you. Um uh Chancellor
Lions, it's always delightful to see you. I don't have the honor of representing the campus itself, but I like to say that I can I can look down on your campus from Grizzly Peak on my side of the district. I want to uh first of all mention that you are from the
high school of business, one of the best business schools in the country. How hardly a hotbed of uh anything but excellence. So you as the dean of that school uh it's sort of the stereotypes uh that we get into. It's very big school with a lot of great programs.
It's also can be proud of the fact that uh out of the University of California, Berkeley, there have been 59 Nobel laureates between alumni and faculty. Uh I would also add as a a friend of the current rugby coach, it's also the home of 29 rugby championships. Um but could
you talk about some of the things you've already mentioned that you've done? elaborate to any degree you'd like about your involvement and your predecessors in trying to balance the first amendment rights as a public university, the best public university in the country and
arguably the best in the world against uh hate and and violence and anti-semitism which is no small feat. Well, thank you. I think um a place to start is around what are so-called time, place, and manner rules. uh we uh en
encourage uh the expression of free speech on the Berkeley campus. That's an important part of a vibrant campus. It's an important part of a vibrant society. Uh at the beginning, so I've been in my role for a year now and we were very very clear at the beginning of the year across the whole UC system I should say
certainly at Berkeley uh tents are not allowed. Tents are not part of uh an expression of free speech. Were we tested? We were tested. We took them down immediately. There's a gate on the campus called Sather Gate. It's right in the middle. Uh it got partially blocked and some of
the times before I became chancellor, one of the no tolerance rules, we communicated it clearly is no blocking the gate and any part of the gate. There was a suka that got erected uh in front of the gate. We we took it down
effectively immediately. Uh so anyways, part of the time, place, and manner rules, that's not just something to counter anti-semitism. Those time, place, and manner rules need to be contentneutral, and they are. But we need to communicate what the standards are while at the same time making sure
students know that expressing your views consistent with the first amendment is something that Berkeley doesn't just condone, it it actually encourages it. And consistent with the letter from the faculty that I am submitting, how is it? How have the the various communities
responded to that? Well, thank you. I you know, I'm I'm particularly heartened by that faculty letter. They did not need to do that. There were over 80 of them. These are our Jewish faculty who are saying not that Berkeley is perfect. As I said in my opening statement, we have some getting better to do and we're going to
do it. But the idea that we've made a lot of progress over the last year and they are with us and with me is is heartening. And they like what they say. We've made a lot of changes not just around time, place, and manner. We're connecting with the Jewish community and Jewish leadership in in new ways. We
have changed our education and and uh training initiatives. Uh we have a new course called uh uh openness to opposing views that we we we plan to roll out as much as possible to incoming students. So there are many fronts. Appreciate appreciate that. The gentleman's time is expired. I recognize
the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Allen. Uh thank you, Mr. chairman and I want to thank all of you for being here today and testifying. Um, growing up uh my parents uh basically ingrained in
me the biblical definition of free speech and that was my mother always said if you can't say something nice about somebody or your country don't say anything at all. AI says in a biblical context, free
speech is not an absolute unrestricted right. Instead, it is a freedom that comes with responsibilities and limitations. While the Bible emphasizes the importance of speaking truth and building others up, it also highlights the need for restraint, gracious,
graciousness, and love in communication. Wouldn't this place be a better place if we could all behave like that? Ain't that a Is that amazing? So, I got to ask some hard questions. Dr. Gross, are you familiar with
Francesca Abanessa? Yes, I am. In 2014, Abanessa wrote America and Europe. One of them subjugated by the Jewish lobby and the other by the sense of guilt about the Holocaust. When did Georgetown bring Albanessa
on as an affiliated scholar? Uh I I think she came in 2015 roughly, but she only gave a few lectures. She is not on the payroll of Georgetown and never was. Congressman,
was Georgetown aware of Albanessa's anti-semitic statements at that time? Uh not to my knowledge. That's the first I've heard of that statement. In the decades since, Albanessa has continued to endorse terrorism and spread anti-semitism.
In that time, did Georgetown consider terminating its relationship with Alanessa? Uh, I I don't know the answer to that. Happy to follow up on whether that was a consideration, but she is not at Georgetown. She is not on the payroll
and and she's not present on campus. Last week, the Trump administration sanctioned Alvinessa over her long track record of supporting terrorism and perpetrating anti-uhmitism. Is Alvinessa still an affiliated scholar of Georgetown?
Uh she is still uh uh listed as an affiliate but she's not present on campus nor participating in the center that and and let me tell you the problem we have here is uh you know like I said with the way I was brought brought up you have accountability. Okay. In other
words, you got to have guard rails. And if you get outside of those guardrails, you do something about it. You don't let this stuff linger on because it just rots. And that's the problem we all I think have up here is for crying out
loud, you got to get rid of these people that are perpetrating this hate. Uh a question uh here last April the violent encampment at Colombia filled headlines city college of New York this encampment caused 3 million worth of damage for
example how many cutuny staff students staff and faculty were involved in the encampment do we know so we ended up uh disciplining uh seven uh individuals in that encampment who
ended up breaking into one of the uh one of the buildings. Well, I mean, was were they put in prison? Are they have they been indicted? Uh have they uh gone before a jury of their peers for their crimes?
We collaborated with the with the district attorney in in those cases. Uh and there were seven individuals who were disciplined. I cannot comment on the individual discipline, but what I can tell you also, we have a zero tolerance policy or encampment. some of the lessons learned in that encampment
have guided our work after that and that we've been successful in making sure that we have had no other encampments in our campuses as a result of that experience. Well, all I can tell you things have changed a lot since I was in college. Where I went to college, they didn't put
up with this stuff. Uh and you knew it and that's why you stayed within those guard rails. Of course, that's the way it was in high school and and middle school as well. Uh how many students uh are have been suspended expelled this year that uh because of this uh violence
and vandalism? How many students have been expelled at at because of the of the encampment? Right. We had we had uh three students of the seven that were that were disciplined as a result of the How about faculty encampment? There were four.
When you say discipline, what does that mean? I cannot comment on the individual cases. discipline goes from uh uh reprimands, training, uh suspension or uh termination and we have terminated uh individuals in the faculty and staff for
violating our policies on anti-semitism. Well, the great thing about this country is you have the right to prove that you're innocent. But if you're guilty, you know what? You get you get fired. The gentleman the gentleman's time is expired. I now recognize the gentleman
from New York, Mr. Manion. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to all the witnesses for being here today. Uh the rise in anti-semitism across the United States is profoundly troubling. We simply must do more to respond uh to these actions and ensure our Jewish
neighbors and communities can live free from harassment, intimidation, and violence. We uh all must stand together to reject any targeted hatred or bigotry against any group due to their religion, ethnicity, or other demographic. Um but
as we hold this hearing, let's be clear about the problem that we're facing. Anti-semitism is not limited to just college campuses. It has spread rampantly in our communities, our online platforms, and our politics. Yet, the majority of this committee
are set on repeatedly singling out higher education and attacking university presidents and labor unions that represent their faculty while refusing to pursue serious comprehensive solutions. In fact, they've supported
this administration's moves to gut the Office of Civil Rights at the Department of Education, cancel grants for hate crime prevention, and openly has embraced individuals with known records of in offensive conspiratorial hateful
rhetoric. I call my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to hold those in their own party accountable and approach this issue in a more thoughtful manner. Chancellor uh excuse me, Chancellor Matoss Rodriguez, given the importance
of combating anti-semitism in our state, I'd like to give you an opportunity to elaborate on CUNI's efforts. Your testimony describes the independent investigation that was commissioned and the resulting report which included a set of recommendations. What steps is
the CUNI system currently taking to implement those recommendations? I appreciate the question and and those are the recommendations from the the Litman report which we collaborated fully when the judge was conducting it and we have uh embraced the recommendations that came from the judge
and his team. One of the main ones was indicating that a decentralized structure uh made the follow through in the cases of discrimination uh and the investigations uh not as responsive as they should be. something that we knew
that was a challenge and we have been um uh advancing our work in that area. So I created a center. Now all the complaints around uh discrimination, harassment are handled by one single center which works on the training of all the individuals
conducting the investigation. So we have more timely investigations. We're more responsive uh to that work. We also had a lot of critiques, valid critiques to a portal that we created to centralize some of that before. uh and now we have
procured a state-of-the-art system to manage all those cases so that we can be more responsive to the individuals who submit the claims and they can be informed so we can have better data to be more transparent to to uh all the stakeholders that that that uh hold us
accountable uh and to manage those cases uh more more effectively and to have best practices uh all across the system replicated. So that's one of the recommendations from uh the Litman report that we have embraced. The Litman
report also ask us to invest more in bridge building and giving tools to our faculty, students and and staff to navigate difficult conversations and issues. We launched the um constructive dialogue initiative. Actually we have uh
half of the campuses in training today at the central office. I would have been participating there had I been on on the campus and this is to give faculty, students and staff tools to be able to have difficult conversations. We do not want people shying away from difficult
conversations. They need to do it civily. They need to do it respectfully and they have to do it following the rules. So those are some of the investments that we've made as a result of the uh of the judge's uh recommendations. Yes. And you have communicated the
progress in certain ways. Can you elaborate on how you've articulated that progress to students, faculty, and the broader community? So, we've been uh engaged in communicating the work that we h we have done. I've indicated before that I have uh a Jewish advisory life committee that
has been both uh a resource to us of listening to what the community thinks, you know, we should be doing, but also as a way for us to convey some of the work that that that we have been doing in in in this arena. and we remain committed to this work with many of our
Jewish uh stakeholder partners. Give your hands suspend the lady. [Music] Mr. Manion, you may proceed. Thank you, Chancellor. Go ahead.
Thank Thank you. Uh I was going to mention uh one of the the the great joys of of being the chancellor of CUNI is that we provide about a third of the new teachers that go to the public schools in New York every year. Uh we have a partnership in a pilot with the UAA
Federation of a training for all our students who are going to go to teach uh in managing difficult conversations in anti-hate and anti-semitism so that the teachers that are going to the New York City public schools are better equipped to be handling um uh some of these
issues. So we are deeply engaged in in in in this work. Um and it's our commitment that we continue to do so. Thank you, Chancellor. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Gentleman's time is expired and now recognize the uh vice chairman of this
committee, the gentleman from Utah, Mr. Owens. Thank you so much, uh, Mr. Chairman. I I would say that start off that little outburst we saw a minute ago is exactly why we're having these hearings. Uh, the genesis of this anti-semitism, this hatred that we're seeing across our
country is coming from our universities. They come there with their tails wagging, ready to go out and build their dreams. They leave hating our country, hating each other, and anti-semitism is flourishing because of it. This has been going on way too long, and we're going to have as many hearings as we have to
to dig this cancer out of our system. Our kids need to be leaving here knowing how to talk to each other, respect each other, and not having that kind of stuff we just had a minute ago. By the way, I don't doubt we might have some more before this all over with. That's how they think they can get their their message through. Uh we're going to have
as many oversight meetings we have to to eradicate this evil of discrimination that we've seen on college campuses. Um we have a dual mission here with this committee to be the voice of Jewish students who pay good money $70,000 per year to be harassed to be hated and to
be disrespected. The message very simply to college leaders is very simply this. Either eradicate this cancer or there will be consequences. This is coming from top down, not bottom up. We're going to make sure we change that. Uh there's been a lot of debate over the
what constitutes uh anti anti-mitism. I just want to ask real quickly for the leaders here, the college leaders. Um yes or no. In denying the Jewish people their rights to self-determination, is that anti-semitism? Yes or no? Start with Yes.
Yes. Yes. Is celebrating violence against Jews with phrases like globalized the impata, anti-semitism. Yes or no? Uh as a as a threat absolutely, Congressman, any call to violence against Jewish
members of our community is anti-semitic and against our policies. If it's an incitement to violence, yes, it is. And I I I agree with your comments. Unfortunately, it's been so normalized, nobody seems to to be held accountable for it when this stuff happens. By the
way, just want to make that point. Um, uh, Dr. Groves, you're familiar with Hammad Elcord. Elur, right? No, I don't know that name. Uh, Muhammad Elkur. No. Okay. Uh, he's an activist that has
been spending a lot of time on on your campus. Um uh he's he says Israelis harvest organs of the the martyed and to have a and they have an unquenchable thirst for Palestine blood. He's also said that the Jewish um people control
the media and wish that every single Zionist to Paris. Uh would this be considered anti-semitism? Absolutely. Congressman, he's also stated that Hamas had good political reasons for taking hostages and captives and were well treated. Now
this is after 250 innocent men and women and children were taken hostages, women raped and children killed by Hamas. Uh would you consider good political reasons as agreement with what he would just said about Hamas? No, I I find that abhorent. Okay. Would you agree that that's pure
evil for what they did and for those who support what they did? We we abhored that attack and made the first statement uh on Can you can you agree can you agree with me that it's pure evil? Yes. Okay. Um,
this uh same person uh back in Georgetown October 23rd, the same month of the the massacre, uh he uh El Elkurd described Hamas as the liberation movement and that the October 7th attack was a resistance tactic after 1,200
people have been massacred. Um, any any idea how many times Georgetown students and faculty have invited Muhammad Alcart to speak at uh in the last three years that you're at Georgetown? I I'm I'm not aware of how many times. Four times. Four times. The last one was
February 16th of this year. uh in partnership, Georgetown University in partnership with the Georgetown Falcony and Staff for Justice in in Palestine invited him to to pump his books to launch his books book tour. Um you and I came through the same same
era, the 50s and 60s. Uh Dr. Cro, so I I would imagine when I know how you're going to answer this, I think uh would you allow a member of the KKK who wished the deaths of black Americans to speak at Georgetown? No, but we we endeavor to have speakers
from many different sides uh to so KKK member in today's environment you would invite you give him No, I I I don't think we would we we do want to have our This is very specific. This is very Yeah, this is very This is a hate you talking about. You know, you remember
what the KKK used to do to black people, right? Okay. So, would you give him the platform to do that? No, I don't believe. Okay. Uh well to that point if Georgetown would prevent KKK white KKK bigots on the campus uh why would the
university would would disallow it why would the university allow on by faculty or students to to to invite Palestinian anti-semitic bigots because that's what this guy is. Um I'm about to run out of time. I just I just want to want to say this. You have
um your time has expired. Yes. Okay. It's time to get this together. I'm glad. Thank you, Mr. for for chairman for doing what we're doing right now. Appreciate it. I thank the gentleman. I now recognize the gentle lady from Pennsylvania, Miss Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Like uh like
like others, I've expressed my concern that despite nine hearings on anti-semitism since I've joined Congress that we've yet to have a single hearing on any of the other very pervasive forms of hatred uh that's rising in our country right now. anti-blackness, of
course, which remains foundational anti-Muslim hate, which is approaching levels unseen since 911. We can't pretend that uh these are not pressing when a member of this committee who is black and Muslim is being called a terrorist by another member of this
committee. Still, I was encouraged that today's hearing was planning to focus on the underlying causes of anti-semitism and hate, something the previous eight have quite frankly failed to do in earnest. because we do need to address the underlying factors if college
students and any of us ever hope to live in a peaceful and a safe society. Instead, uh, it was made immediately clear, uh, unsurp unsurprisingly, that this is yet another hearing to demonize Muslims and their religion, to demonize Palestinians, including those in Gaza
who have undeniably faced unspeakable uh, harms and humanitarian crisis and human rights crisis, and particularly the young students, activists, and faculty who are determined to stand up against human rights violations. This is predictably another public opportunity for Republicans to bit to pit Jewish
Americans against Muslim Americans, Muslim against Christian, black against white, to reinforce the actual underlying factors of hate, which are real systemic harms of white supremacy and its reinforcement at its highest levels of government. One glaring example is the administration's
selective misinterpretation of the weaponization of the civil rights laws. Mr. uh Nosenchuk, in your testimony, you discussed how the Trump administration is imposing draconian penalties that are completely divorced from supporting Jewish students or addressing anti-semitism. Briefly, how is this
administration's assessment of civil rights violations undermining meaningful oversight of campus safety efforts that would support students? Thank you for the question, Congresswoman. As I said in my testimony, there is a uh proven way to address civil rights violations.
Congress. This body charged the Office for Civil Rights with enforcing title six of the Civil Rights Act and ensuring that all students have an opportunity to access their education uh free from discrimination. Uh so when you know we
would conduct an investigation and reach a resolution agreement uh it would result in a whole series of steps uh that many of which uh my fellow panelists here have discussed uh to address the anti-semitism as that has occurred and to change the campus
climate uh so that that anti-semitism doesn't exist. Um, in addition, you know, when investigations are conducted, you know, it's not like there's only one type of discrimination that's occurring. Often, uh, when an investigation is conducted and there's evidence of, say,
anti-black discrimination, we might also have found evidence of anti-semitic discrimination and expanded the investigation to encompass that. We had that flexibility. imposing a $900 million penalty on a university is not going to prompt university presidents
sitting here to uh think about how they're going to address anti-semitism. They're going to think about how are they going to fill this huge hole in their budget that's just been created by a penalty that has nothing to do with the discriminatory conduct that has actually occurred. Thank you. I mean, and I want us also be clear like that we don't allow ourselves
to be lost in rhetoric. This administration's attack on colleges isn't just about campus safety. I argue it's not about it at all. It's about suppressing education. The point of college, we've talked about, is to for students to expand their worldviews, develop critical thinking skills, make them less susceptible to disinformation,
and navigate how to stand up for what's right and important to them um against things that they disagree with, which might include authoritarianism. That's why this administration is doing everything and beyond in its power to dismantle higher education sensor descent. freezing funding, forcing
university presidents to resign, threatening to remove accreditation, bl b banning entire offices uh and departments and revoking students visas, disappearing students, eroding student loan programs, gutting civil rights resources, and of course, as it was mentioned at the outset of this hearing, putting an end to diversity, equity, and
inclusion and accessibility, the boogeyman uh of MAGA Republicans who are determined to so hate and division instead of equity inclusion. At the same time as their crusade against diversity, the Trump administration and Republicans have said that colleges must hire more conservative faculty to increase viewpoint diversity on campuses while
calling for disciplinary action against professors who believe they disagree with. Um, really very quickly, uh, Mr. Nosen, do you think it's appropriate for colleges to make higher and disciplinary decisions based on pressure from whatever party happens to be in Congress in charge? Yes. Yes or no? Uh, no.
Thank you. These attacks on colleges are not solving the real problem. So make mistakes. This is yet another opportunity to exploit legitimate concerns of anti-semitism on college campuses to further their attacks on the institutions of learning. I think that it's incredibly clear hearing the opening testimonies and statements uh
and the testimony that we will continue to hear throughout the day. I hope that you will consider that. Uh thank you and I yield back. I thank the gentle lady. Now I recognize gentleman from California, Mr. Kylie. Uh good morning uh Chancellor Lions. Uh thanks uh very much for being here. I want to say from the outset, I know you've only been chancellor for a year.
Uh so I just want to ask a few questions not for the purpose of assigning blame uh but for getting a better understanding of the expectations that members of the Berkeley community can have uh going forward. And I also want to say at the outset that while I think Berkeley's reputation as being kind of a
cartoonishly leftist institution is well-earned in some ways uh in other ways that that's it is an enormously important uh institution for our country uh that does tremendously beneficial uh research continues to do so uh and provides uh tremendous opportunities uh
to students across all of its campuses. So I want that to be acknowledged as an important part of the story uh as well. But let's just start with a a simple question. Why do you believe anti-semitism is so pervasive at Berkeley? Anti-semitism is pervasive in the world.
It's pervasive in this nation uh in society. I think our universities are reflections of our societies, especially a large public university. But I think we'd agree that universities have been where the problem is probably
most uh visible and institutions like Berkeley among a handful of others have uh been the the worst offenders in a sense. Why do you think that is? Well, I you ha has have they been where it's most visible? I think um I'm not
sure that it's where they're most present, but I think part of what we do see in universities is there is a freedom to express one's views even if there's some you know some learning that needs to happen through that process and I think uh that's a a healthy part of
what universities do. So students do express their views. You know, if 200 students express their views on our main plaza called Sprout Plaza, uh that's that's one one fifth of 1%, I guess. Why does it exist at all? I mean, we're talking about not something
like littering on campus. You know, this is the world's most retrograde prejudice. It's the prejudice at the at the heart of the worst crime in human history. Why does this exist at all on your campus? Have you thought about that? What's the what the explanation might be? Well, I I think we we have to
come back to your anyone's use of the word anti-semitism. I mean, if if somebody is expressing pro Palestinian beliefs, that's not necessarily anti- you've acknowledged that there that there is an anti-semitism problem that predates October 7th and there's been a
disturbing rise. So, I'm asking why. Why do you think that is? Uh I'm I did agree to that. Uh, I believe that part of it has to do with geopolitical events and a war in Gaza.
Okay. I mean, I'm that's I'm not sure that's a a full explanation, but I do want to move on to a couple other topics. So, there were some incidents that were deeply disturbing on your campus, such as uh a checkpoint at Sathergate where uh Jewish students their movement was impeded. Uh would you
agree and I'm not asking you to comment on individual cases but that going forward a student or faculty member who physically obstructs the movement of someone on the basis of their race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, that that is just an automatically expelable or fireable offense.
Uh going forward we have a very clear no tolerance rule for blocking say their gate for any reason and I will enforce it and we have enforced it. And I mentioned that in an earlier comment, but if if if someone does this specifically against a Jewish student or
or for someone any other form of identity. I mean, what should the expectation be for what that student's or faculty member's punishment will be? I think there are some things if someone's convicted of murder, you'd say automatically expelable offense, I'm sure. Right. So, what's the what's the punishment here? Well, it's an important question. And as
we and most universities implemented more sharply defined time, place and manner rules, we also have to think about how are we going to enforce those rules usually with some kind of what we call tiered response. So the question is, is this a first offense? Is it a
20th offense? Was it, you know, how extreme was it? So I mean, I'm I've given you a very specific example, though. I don't know if it matters to me whether that's the first or 20th offense. If you're physically stopping someone from getting onto their campus because of who they are, that person should be expelled, shouldn't they? Well, part of it is were they were they
physically restricting people that that were from a different identity group? At the same time, there just a lot of context and facts before somebody could say we need to jump to the point where somebody's getting expelled and we investigate those. We're very rigorous about our investigations.
Yeah. What about the uh the encampment? So, we know that your predecessor reached a deal with the encampment uh uh organizers and part of which was to endow this uh this chair this department that's now headed by the the wannabe terrorist Magdesci.
Um would you agree going forward that it's not appropriate to make policy changes in response to demands made by those who are in the process of violating campus rules? I can't second guess my predecessor. the the facts and circumstances under which
she was leading us at the time. Really, I I was not in the role as as you've pointed out. Um, going forward, I I can speak to that and that's why you invited me here. And going forward, we you know, for example, there are certain things
that we talk to students about all the time. They make demands. Let's let's let's leave ourselves beyond the anti-semitism question is like do we discuss improving the campus with students gentleman's time is expired. Sorry. My time is expired. I think that the issue with the encampment was that it
clearly violated campus policies but that was rewarded by the then uh chancellor uh by accinged to their demands and I would hope that that is not going to be the approach taken by Berkeley going forward. I thank gentlemen and I recognize the gentle lady from Arizona Miss Ansari.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to all the witnesses for being here today. Anti-semitism has undoubtedly been on the rise for years. As we all know, although Jews cons constitute only 2% of the US population, anti-semitic attacks account for 15% of all hate crimes and
almost 70% of all religion-based hate crimes in the country. In the current climate, almost 50% of Jewish college students report feeling uncomfortable, unwelcome, or unsafe on campus because they are Jewish. That is unacceptable. Particularly on college campuses, we've
heard concerns about faculty members using rhetoric that at times crosses the line into anti-semitism and creates hostile environments for Jewish students. And while we are holding hearings to combat anti-semitism on campuses, the very office in the
Department of Education that works to protect Jewish students, the Office for Civil Rights, has been attacked, undermined, and cut by the Trump administration. This office works to protect individuals based on race, color, or national origin, sex, age,
religion, and disability. And I would be remiss if I didn't mention that in addition to the sharp rise in anti-semitism, data shows a very clear rise in Islamophobia as well, especially in recent months, a rise in anti-Asian hate, persistently high rates of bias
motivated crimes against black communities. And FBI data also shows prejudice against sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability bias. And just yesterday, the Trump administration and the Trump appointed Supreme Court affirmed his plan to
dismantle the Department of Education and fire nearly 1,400 employees, onethird of their workforce. Mr. Nosenek, what effect will the decimation of the Department of Education and especially this Office of
Civil Rights have on efforts to combat college anti-semitism? Thank you for that question. Uh, Congresswoman, it is the job of the Office for Civil Rights to enforce civil rights laws and keep students safe. If there aren't the investigators uh and
the resources to do the job, who is going to be going on to these campuses in response to complaints when instances of anti-discrimination occur to protect these students? I'm trying to think of another instance where uh there's a policy preference that says we need to
prioritize this particular policy objective and now we're going to gut the office charged with the responsibility to do the work and since mass layoffs earlier this year has the pace of investigation and resolution become faster or slower?
Uh my understanding is it's become slower. uh and and that you know one approach that's been taken is just to dismiss wholesale a whole uh host of complaints some uh unprecedented number within a three-month period. So on that note, if you could clarify,
do you know how many civil rights cases have been dismissed by the Trump administration and how that may compare to prior administrations? Well, I do know that there was this of 3,400 that were dismissed within a three-month period from uh March through June as that that outpaced any uh rate
of dismissal before. You know, the way in which OCR operated when I worked there is every complaint that was filed that stated uh uh claim that was which was within the jurisdiction of OCR was opened for investigation. doesn't mean that it necessarily resulted in a
resolution agreement, but it was open for investigation because the belief was that every student who has a complaint uh needs to be heard and and their complaint examined to determine whether there has been uh discrimination that rises to the level of harassment or
hostile environment uh under title six and what the university that is accountable for protecting that student's civil rights is doing about it. Thank you so much. This year, in addition, the Trump administration shuttered seven out of 12 civil rights enforcement offices, including the offices in New York City and San
Francisco, two of the regions that are obviously represented on this panel today. Those offices were in the middle of handling over 6,000 cases. Uh, Mr. Nosenchuk, what role did these offices play in combating anti-semitism under your tenure at the Office of Civil
Rights? Thanks for that question. They played a very significant uh role. the offices that were shuttered were some of the most effective offices within OCR. I don't think frankly that that's a coincidence. And it happened that a number of those officers were the ones
where a significant majority of the unprecedented number of uh anti-semitism related investigations that we opened were being handled and there was tremendous expertise. You know, if you added it up, I imagine it would be, you know, decades or centuries of expertise if you added all the years of all the
investigators who worked in these offices and are really were deeply committed and are now shattered by the fact that they've lost their jobs and seen the office that they were uh dedicated to uh be basically uh eviscerated. Thank you. This administration has been
weaponizing the rise of anti-semitism in their war against higher education. if they were serious about protecting Jewish students and educators, they would be providing more funding and more staff for the Office of Civil Rights. Thank you. Thank the gentle lady. Her time is expired. And I recognize the gentle from
gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Rand. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to all the witnesses for being here today. Um, Chancellor Lions, um, the UAW represents 48 uh,000 academic workers um, on the in the University of um,
California system. How many on the Berkeley campus? Are you aware? I I don't have it. Yeah. Well, the UAW has endorsed uh encampments that feature imagery supporting terrorism, has led student
sessions on how to agitate on campus. Union leaders have even come to campus uh participating in anti-semitic chants. um the microbi microbiology grads a microbiology grad student filed a lawsuit Yanniv versus UAW4811
um alleging that the U the union's activity contributed to a hostile work environment in violation of title 7 and the California Fair Employment Act in your opinion uh does the UAW contribute to anti-semitism on the University
California Berkeley campus or in the system. It would be inappropriate for me to speak to a case that is clearly uh in in litigation. So, I I won't do that. Um I
think it's it's also important to understand that unions are independent organizations, right? We don't control them. They don't control us. Um so it's not something that we have any directly direct control over.
Okay. Um now here is an area where the union does seek to interact with with um Berkeley. Um the U the UCUW strongly supports uh BDS boycott devest and
sanction and is looking to impose its uh impose it on the U of California system. In January and April of 2024 the UAW passed re resolutions to that effect. Um, if in the next round of collective bargaining the UAW demanded a provision
that implements BDS, would you counsel for agreeing to such a provision or oppose it? It is the stated policy of the University of California that we do not
boycott countries. uh we do not we have specific rules for when divestment can be considered and we're very systematic about how we apply those rules. I can speak for myself personally. Personally, uh I would
oppose it. Thank you. And it's been reported that the UC UAW um prepared a list of um members of the UC Board of Regents with Jewish or Israeli uh ties um and uh targeted them
for investigation. What if UAW proposed a provision um in under which Berkeley and other University of California schools would disclose to the union any grants, donors, programs or professors with ties to Israel. Would you counsel
for agreeing to such a provision? There were some facts on the front end of your your question that I take to be true, but I have no no information on so I I can't comment on that whatsoever. Um
I if if they were asking for in in general, we do not provide information uh to the public or to outside entities like unions and if it's publicly available um then it's publicly available. they can find it. So, in
general, we we would not provide that kind of information unless there's some legal reason why we needed to. Thank you. Thank you. Um Mr. Mr. Groves, um so Georgetown has a number of foreign
campuses, Jakarta, Florence, London. I I was wondering I found myself wondering how did the the Qatar connection and Qatar campus of Georgetown University come to be? Did Qar approach Georgetown or vice versa or how did that work?
This happened way before my time. So it's only through uh oral history that I know the answer. How long has it how long has it been? 2005. So it's been 20 years ago. And my understanding is that uh uh the the vision of the cutter foundation at the
time was to build uh a group of western universities in Doha that would offer western education to uh the region in a vision that uh cutter would gradually
become a hub for higher education and research western style Jesuit style higher educ in the Middle East. Thank you. I'm out of time. Thank you very much. I yield back. I thank the gentleman. Now I recognize the gentle lady from Georgia, Mr.
McMath. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to our ranking member, Scott. Thank you to all of you that are witnesses today. We appreciate your time and being here. I also want to thank the students that are watching today. And I want to say again
to each and every one of them, I am very sorry to those who have been victims of violent hate crimes at some of our um other schools and that have appeared previously before this committee. As a mother of a child myself who was killed
in a racially motivated shooting, I know what it is like for your family to be attacked solely because of who you are or how you were born. I know how painful it is for those preconceived notions that someone may
have. Preconceived notions that have nothing to do with the actions you have taken as an individual. For those notions to drive someone's entire view of you or your loved ones as a person,
that is the type of dangerous mindset that took my son from me. And I want to remind everyone here how important it is that we engage in good faith to get this right.
Anti-semitism remains a growing threat on campus today. But the actions taken by the majority are not motiv motivated by the rooting out of the evils of anti-semitism and other forms of hate in
American society. These actions today, they're not going to improve the situation. They are only fostering further distrust between different groups on and off campus. Instead of taking real steps to address
anti-semitism, the majority has cut the funding, as was mentioned earlier, by one of our witnesses, and fired the federal employees tasked with responding to these incidents on school grounds. They have paused funding meant to
protect synagogues and other Jewish community centers from shootings through the nonprofit security and targeting violence and terrorism prevention grant programs. They have openly defended the actions of
violent felons and rabbit anti-semites, criminals that were directly involved in attacking police and killing an officer here at our capital. On January 6th, when white supremacists marched through
the University of Virginia chanting, "Jews will not replace us," the president said that there were very fine people on both sides. These are not the actions of a party or
president who is engaging in good faith. The attempt to explain away one of the oldest forms of hate solely for political gain is truly wrong. It undermines the centuries of interfaith struggle to build bridges and take the
difficult but very necessary steps that will bring peace. It cheapens the sacrifice, the contributions of countless everyday people who have lived these realities, who put their reputations on the line and found it within themselves to put those
preconceived notions aside to really try to solve and resolve these differences, not just talk past each other. Fighting anti-semitism should not be used as a political tool. The work is simply too important. The stakes are just too high.
Today, Georgia is home to the largest population in the deep south. My state, my home state, has become a beacon of prosperity for Jewish families, hoping to live together in peace, free from judgment regarding their faith. But it
has not always been this way. I live just a few miles from the site of one of the most heinous and violent acts of anti-se anti-semitism in the history of this country, the lynching of Leo Frank. It takes the vigilance from all of us to
ensure that the atrocities of the past never repeat themselves. I ask the American people and all those who care about religious freedom in this country. All those who want this country to live up to the promise that all of us
were created equal, please compare what they hear from my Republican colleagues during these hearings to the actions that they take when the cameras aren't rolling. And I
yield. Thank the gentle lady. Now I recognize the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. McKenzie. Thank you, Mr. chairman and I appreciate the fact that we're continuing our hearings about anti-semitism in higher
education uh because it continues to be a persistent problem that we see far too often. Uh my first question is for Dr. Lions. This is the education and workforce committee. Uh we just heard from the last uh questioner on our side
of the aisle about the relationship with the union UAW local 4811 uh at the UC system and how they have been engaging in explicitly political activity demanding devestment from Israel and you've said that you don't
support that. So what guard rails is the university going to put in place uh to make sure that collective bargaining is not used to push foreign policy demands. I'm not an expert in collective
bargaining but I uh demands can be made. The other side of any negotiation is free to make demands. I think the position of the University of California has been clear and will continue to be clear.
The gentleman will suspend. All in attendance are reminded in accordance with rule 11 clause 4 of the House of Representatives to observe standards of dignity, propriety, courtesy, and decorum traditionally observed by the House and this committee.
The chair notes that there is this disturbance that takes place, but uh this committee will continue and we'll complete its its planned hearing. I now uh recognize the gentleman from Pennsylvania to continue.
Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and uh I I would just go back to the the questioning here. uh they can certainly make demands, but in a negotiation, if the administration stakes out a very clear position uh that they will not be accepting of foreign policy considerations being forced into a union
negotiation, obviously that would help your leverage in in this process and make it less likely that those things would go forward. Is that something that you're going to be willing to do? I I I just want to double underscore that the University of Cal California position is
that uh we will not be boycotting Israel or any country. That is my understanding of an already wellstated and clarified position. In any event, um I can speak for myself, which is all I can speak for in the in response to your question and and the answer is yes, that that
position is that we should not go in that direction. Thank you. Next, I'll go to uh Dr. Matoss Rodriguez. Uh, and this is relating to the unions that are representing uh, some of your faculty and staff on your campus. Uh we have
heard uh and there was a Wall Street Journal Journal opinion article uh just from last week how labor unions are feeding the anti anti-semitism on campus and the unfortunate incidents where uh members of the faculty and staff from Israel to gain the representation that
they seek in a union are being forced to to sign up with a union that holds explicitly anti-Israel positions. uh and so I would like to understand uh what you might be willing to do uh to help those faculty and staff because of that exclusive representation uh provision.
How do they accurately uh express their views uh in a college setting and make sure that uh the union uh who is their representative is not running counter to their own interests. Thank you for uh for your question. Uh
our first responsibility is to make sure that uh in our campuses the freedom to express your opinion is is preserved and individuals who might have different perspectives as the ones that you um commented in your in your question need
to be suspend time. [Music] I don't know if it's appropriate but I was expecting that one. I now recognize the gentleman to continue his questioning. So uh so uh
having said that the other part of that is that uh we expect uh everybody to conduct themselves every faculty staff member uh and student at at the City University of New York with the uh utmost level of professionalism and to abide by oral policies. Uh so our role
is to make sure that we make those policies clear that we make everybody understand that they have to abide by them. Uh and if anybody uh breaks them that we investigate and take the appropriate action. So that that would be our role in making sure that um the
the policies against any kind of discrimination against any kind of harassment are not tolerated and that that's fine. I understand that. What is the recourse for an individual faculty member? Uh if the representative
body is a union that holds explicitly uh positions that run counter to their their own interests, can that person go around that uh exclusive representation? Would you support that? Those individuals have the resources available to them uh uh privately. Uh
what we can do is make sure that the voice of the city university of New York uh as I mentioned to you no tolerance of of anti anti-semitism uh northstar of safety uh that everybody in the university understands that and is safe to be able
So would you negotiate a contract with an individual not in the union? That is not something that that that we are allowed to do by law. But would you support that? Because again, if the only representative body is one that is anti-Israel and this
faculty member is from Israel, you're putting that person in a catch 22. We are clear about what the positions of the university are. I have been very clear about my uh opposition to BDS and I have traveled to Israel with our presidents and deans to show that it's
not just a statement that we are building bridges uh and connecting with universities and cultural organizations there. uh our role is to make sure that we put together what the vision of the university uh is and in in labor has um
you know they're they're independent so that um they they don't speak for the gentleman's time is expired and now I recognize the gentleman from Florida Mr. Fine thank you Mr. Chairman, I'm going to be honest. I find the testimony today both disgusting, dishonest, and and to be
gaslighting. And I'm going to point it out here. We've heard that we unequivocally denounce anti-semitism, unwavering support for our Jewish students. We have a zero tolerance policy, and we will not put up with a call for violence. So, let's explore that. I'd like to start with Dr. Rodriguez. Emanuel Nes, the chair of
your political science department, said he supports quote resistance by any means necessary, which includes violence. How can you say those statements that you support your Jewish roots? Shut up and get out of here. Gentlemen will suspend. Gentlemen will suspend. Get out of here, you loser. Come on. By
the way, to be clear, I hold you all responsible for this. It is the attitude that you have allowed on your college campuses that make people think that this is okay. That is why this happens because you have someone like Emanuel Ness that says resistance by any means necessary. And I assume this person
still works at your school. Is that correct? of violence. Microphone, please. Any call for uh violence against Jewish members of our community is entirely unacceptable. So, why does they why does this person still work there?
Any any individual of our faculty that has uh a complaint of uh breaking our rules, we will investigate them and take the appropriate disciplinary action if warranted. Karina Mullen at John J. College College said after October 7th, the right of
Palestinian armed resistance is just and just last month was filmed chanting up up with freedom down with Zionist scum. This is a professor that teaches your Jewish students. How can you say you have an unwavering zero tolerance policy
when this person teaches at your school? And I I believe that that faculty member is no longer uh teaching uh with the with the university. Any call for violence, any call for supporting Hamas or terrorism is entirely unacceptable. And we made those statements several
times. At Berkeley, you're next. You created in the fall of 2024, you named Usamai the inaugural chair of a new endowed program in Palestinian Arab Studies. On October 7th, McDezi described the Hamas attack against Israel as quote resistance. Why
would you give a job? See, I understand freedom of speech, but you get to decide who to hire. Why would you give a position to someone who said October 7th was justified? Why? Usama Mtees, Professor McDez, is a fine
scholar. He was awarded that position from his colleagues based on academic standards. Great. So on February 5th, 2024, this great academic, you're showing the problem, said, quote, I could have been one of those who broke through the siege on October 7th. This is what you think
is good. And then we're surprised when people come in here and behave this way. I'm going to move on to Georgetown. You've got a campus in Qatar. I note when my colleague uh Vice Chair Owens said, "What would happen with a KKK student on campus?" You said, "Yes, but
that's the problem with all of this. We believe that we should deal with racism and we should and I did a lot in the Florida legislature to do with that. But there should not be a butt after it when it comes to anti-semites. So at your school in in Qatar, you had a a October
24th, 2023rd a a an event titled decolonization is not just a theory. It was a exhibition of armed resistance in Africa in solidarity with Palestine. What does decolonization is not just a theory mean to you? And what does it
mean to Georgetown? I don't uh have a I don't have knowledge of that exhibition. This was a student-led event, Congressman. All right. So, my I have 90 seconds left and I'm going to end with this. I have a 17-year-old who will be applying to
school next year. He's in Washington interning right now. And how in good conscience could you tell my son who is Jewish, who's the reason I wear this keepa, how could you tell my son in good conscience that he would be safe at any of your schools? I'll give each of you, you know, 20 seconds to try to answer
that question. I I would deeply hope he would feel safe. And and there's a reason for this at Georgetown. If uh Jewish students don't feel safe, if they have fear, if uh it's not just hurtful to them, it it
destroys our mission of interfaith dialogue. They don't feel safe right now. Your turn. I have spoken to many students. We have recruited actively in the Jewish community at uh at CUNI. have actually
began a program of extending uh a program that we have of recruiting in the high schools to the yeshivas uh which is college now and and again we have listened I have met with the students gone to the hl listened to their concerns and I've told them that we need to do better we have made the
changes uh and we're showing the results and and listening and being committed to their safety is something that I wake up every day to do yeah I don't even need an answer from Berkeley given the answer to that to that question about that Professor, I would tell you this, the Jewish students
on your campus, they do not feel safe today and you all should be ashamed about that. With that, I yield back. I thank the gentleman and I recognize the gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Grothman. Thank you. First of all, just a quick
general statement. Uh, this is has been talked about the third or fourth, fifth, whatever, uh, committee hearing dealing with anti-semitism on American campuses. the fact that uh in many campuses the Jewish students don't feel safe because
of what's going on or not being done on the part of the administration. I'll point out we're never going to we could sit here for years. We're never going to have a committee hearing on anti-semitism at the construction site. We're never going to have one
anti-semitism working in retail or working in manufacturing or in the military or anti-semitism in the retirement home. This is basically a university problem. Um, and I think it became a problem because we have such a
slanted overall view of the world and the university compared to the country as a whole. You know, in in a in an ideal world, I think you'd say that the university faculty represents a cross-section of the country, but we all know that's not true. If we talk to
university professors, they'll tell you I was the only person out of 20 people here who voted for President Trump in my department or whatever. And you know not every state keeps track of you know
which party you register in but in in in universities that they do keep track or people do studies the universities are just overwhelmingly Democrat which is a breeding ground for this anti-semitism
because right now the progressive wing of the Democrat party not the entire Democrat but the progressive wing of the Democrat party which kind of drives the train over there uh this anti-Israel feeling has become one of the things
along with global warming or ex racism or or whatever uh that becomes the norm. I I'll ask a couple of you guys uh I guess I'll start with do Dr. Lions. Do you feel your university ideologically
across the board represents the the the country as a whole or even uh California as far in uh in disciplines in which there's an ideological component law school journalism school political science
did you does it bother you if that it is you know the country as a whole right now is about 5050 does it bother you that you do not that I assume Like most college campuses, your student body and your faculty, especially your faculty, don't even remotely uh represent
America. Ideological or political considerations are not conditions for employment at UC Berkeley. That's No, the question is if we were talking about affirmative action and you had 8,000
faculty and five were black, you would say that's a problem. Uh, now given that everybody brings a certain ideology to their job, particularly if you're teaching students,
that is a problem if it doesn't represent America. I mean, I've been doing this for over 20 years, a politician back home in here. Again and again and again, I hear from college students who can't say what's on their mind in an essay or whatever
because they know the teacher give them a bad grade or feel the teacher give them a bad grade if you didn't give the progressive viewpoint of the world. Does this bother you? And do you think this is any of the problem? We'll ask you, Dr.
Well, that the your your statement about getting a bad grade because of uh of uh Does it bother you? Does it bother you that you're does it bother you that your uh your faculty does not remotely represent America? It is
disproportionately not only Democrat but progressive Democrat, which is where this idea that that anti-Israel is the thing to be come from. That's where it comes from, the progressive left. And way disproportionately your faculty also comes from the
progressive left. That's why these people get away with this and think it's normal. What what bothers me, Congressman, is anything that interrupts a dialogue across different intellectual positions. Well, it doesn't bother you if 95% of your faculty and in disciplines that
have an ideological component are progressive democrats. Not if we have a thriving dialogue. Okay. Mr. Rodriguez, what do you think about that? Well, we have about 20,000 faculty members at the City University of New York and they are uh a diverse group of
Do they represent Do they even remotely represent America as a whole? I I I have no way of knowing that. You must idea when you walk around campus and it was a week going to the last election were there robust debates in which half the people were for Trump? Of course not. It was you're very very
skewed faculty which is where this whole problem comes from. Do you do you feel do you acknowledge that your faculty does not ideologically gentlemen finish the question as quickly as possible? Again we have uh large number of faculty and they represent uh diverse points of
view diverse uh political views point uh all across the city university of New York. If I ask you to name the gentleman's time is expired. Thank you for being friendly. He yields back. I now recognize the gentle lady from Minnesota Miss Omar.
Thank you, uh, chairman. It seems that the majority on this committee is eager to continue enabling this administration's repressive agenda. President Trump's attack on civil liberties and academic freedom are well documented. While
Republicans continue their charade, new information about the Trump administration's policy of ideological deportations is coming to light. Last week, a senior ICE ICE official testified in court that the agency is
using the weight website Canary Mission to target students for deportation. Canary Mission is an anonymous site that blacklists and doxes individuals charging them with anti-semitism through little evidence or zero due
process. It has long been criticized for its McCarthyism tactics that surveil students, repress speech, and instill a cultural of fear across campuses. This is a site that reframes
attending an anti-war protest as supporting pro- Hamas rally. It is not known who runs this site, but the agenda is clear pro- Palestinian advocacy cannot be tolerated. And now
this ideological agenda has a direct line to state power. Let's recall the highprofile case of student Romesa uh Otak who was illegally detained by ICE and held for six weeks after writing
an op-ed in support of Palestine. Curiously, that oped was published an entirely a year before ICE chose to target her. But right before her abduction, Canary Mission posted a profile of her on its website accusing
her of anti-Israel activism for writing the article. The same profile that ICE has now admitted to using in their internal memo. In a matter of weeks, she was picked up and her student status was terminated. Connor Mission loudly
claimed credit for her detention and it seems that credit is was earned. This shameless authoritarian display of weaponizing a blacklist to crack down on political speech and detain academics
is a page directly out of a the McCarthy playbook. President Kroves, Chancellor Rodriguez, and Chancellor Lion, this question is for the three of you. In the light of these escalations, with students facing detention, deportation, and retaliation for their clearly
protected speech, how are your campuses protecting students who are exercising their First Amendment rights? We have uh free speech policies that are crystal clear and in fact we've clarified them over time to permit
speech. Uh we don't permit any violence with regard to to the promotion of any particular viewpoint and we try to act on violations of those policies quickly and fairly. Thank you. Chancellor May Rodriguez.
Uh we make sure that all students are informed about our policies. Uh we want students and all the members of our community to exercise the right to free speech, but they have to do it abiding by uh by our rules and regulations. We're also investing, as I indicated
earlier, in this constructive dialogue initiative. We want individuals to have the tools to have difficult conversations to be able to have them, but to do them in a way that is respectful and civilized. And the best way also to empower the students is to provide them with information. M Jess Lions
we are supporting with education and training over 30 antibbias initiatives to make sure that students can see into these issues more deeply new curriculum like what I mentioned earlier of course like openness to opposing views sharpening where where the the no
tolerance lines are uh which was very very helpful I believe for the students to feel like they could safely express their free speech rights and understand and at at at what stage do the three of you again. Will you intervene when students are being uh doxed? We've seen
fans in front of your campuses with students being doxed. Well, al at at at Berkeley, the question there is uh we if a doxing or other discrimination or harassment uh event
would be reported and we would follow it up with with an investigation and make a decision. and and we have uh a web page uh that we uh indicate to members of the community as a resource for the different uh things that can be done if someone is a
subject of doxing. Reports of doxing are acted on quite quickly and investigated. Appreciate that. Thank you. And I yield back. I thank the gentle lady. I now recognize the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Harris.
Thank you, Mr. chairman and I thank all of you for uh your time and your patience and being in the panel. I appreciate your uh written testimonies and had an opportunity to review those as well as well as hear you today. Uh Dr. Groves, in your testimony, you said,
and I quote, "As a Jesuit university, we believe that working with someone with conflicting views to yours does not imply that you've been captured by their beliefs." End quote. And I agree with that statement. Unfortunately, it seems that
Summit Georgetown have been captured by the beliefs of some ideologies that are at odds with Georgetown's Catholic and Jesuit mission. In fact, it looks like you are celebrating ideas that are in direct opposition to those values.
Earlier this year, you awarded a medal to Shika Mosa Bent Nasser, the mother of Qatar's Emir and chair of the Qatar Foundation. Yet months prior to giving this award, Shika Mosa had posted on
social media comments praising the October 7th attack on Israel. She praised the mastermind of the October 7th attack, Yaha Sinoir, saying, quote, "The name Yaha means the one who lives.
They thought him dead, but he lives." End quote. And she added, apparently referring to Israel, quote, "He will live on and they will be gone." End quote. I I mean I I have to ask why did
you give a medal to someone who had made such anti-semitic comments and represents a government that supports a US designated terror organization like Hamas? Well, thank you. Thank you for the question.
The award to Shikamosa was given for her work decadesl long work for educating getting access to education to the poorest children around the world. At at this point there are 22 million children in the world that would not have had
access to education without her work. It was for that work that we honored her. Okay. And and I hear that. But you also said at the award ceremony that the medal quote is reserved for individuals whose contributions reflect the
university's deepest commitments end quote. Is a destruction of Israel something Georgetown would support? The deepest commitments of of Georgetown stem from our Jesuit heritage of educating
youth around the world. and and she amplified she uh uh she's a great example of that uh through her work over the decades. But I'll repeat the question. Is the destruction of Israel something Georgetown would support?
I I don't support that tweet. Uh that tweet is not consistent with Georgetown policy. We honored her for her decades of work in access to education to the poorest children of the world. Okay. If her remarks don't reflect the
university's deepest commitments, would you consider revoking the medal? Uh, we will not revoke the medal because the reason for the medal remains true. Her decadesl long work and educating the poorest children of the world. 22
million children having education that they wouldn't have had without her work. Chancellor Moss Rodriguez, a Jewish student, withdrew from Brooklyn College after her professors repeatedly described Jews as white oppressors. They
told her that Jews, therefore, had no right to speak about their history of oppression. Are Jews white oppressors? I I do not share that belief. I find the commentary entirely uh unacceptable. And I also find deeply disturbing that uh a
student that was accepted to one of our schools felt that needed to do something like a transfer because of that. DEI is fundamentally based on dividing people by the color of their skin and categorizing them on that basis as oppressor or oppressed. With that in
mind, do you believe that DEI ideology makes campuses a safer place for Jewish people? Uh diversity has been part of the city university of New York since its founding. Uh we represent the diversity that we have all across our five
burrows. It's been one of the key elements to the DNA of CUNI since the founding of the free academy. So we are committed to that work of of diversity and um and it's been part of CUNI's work uh since its founding. So are DEI
programs an effective way you would say to address anti-semitism? We uh in our work when we work with students who are coming in and we teach them about the diversity of all our communities, we include uh anti-semitism and the members of the Jewish community
as part of that diversity effort. Okay, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. I thank the gentleman. I now recognize the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Mesmer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, uh, Mr. Meadows Rodriguez, following up on Miss
Stefanic's line of questioning from earlier, in 2021, you hired Sali Abdala from as Cooney's chief diversity officer despite her previous previous employment at the Council of American Islamic Relations or CARE. The director of CARE
said after the October 7th attacks that he was happy to see people breaking the siege. Is CARE an anti-Semitic organization? Again, the the comment uh that you describe is entirely unacceptable and inappropriate. Uh I don't I mean care I
don't I don't know about their their policy about being anti-semitic or not. For the City University of New York, we do not tolerate anti-semitism of any kind. Okay. Thank you. You previously stated that Abdala does not handle cases directly pertaining to students and faculty, but she is the chief diversity
officer. Considering her background, was it important? Was it appropriate to hire her to oversee Cooney's anti-dis discrimination efforts? Again, uh that hire was not a direct hire that I made. Uh our commitment is that all our employees and faculty and
staff abide by by our policies and by our code of conduct uh which would include no um uh tolerance for anti-semitism. That's the conduct that we uh expect. And if any employee uh is seen to be breaking those rules, they'll
be investigated and the appropriate uh disciplinary action will be taken. Okay. You have said that Abdalah's work at care is consistent with Cooney's commitments to inclusion and respect. Do you remain confident that she can objectively objectively investigate anti-semitism at Cooney?
We have had no uh complaints uh u with that uh employee. Uh and again as I said before uh our commitment is if any member of the CUNI community faculty staff or student violates our our policies violate our code of conduct we
will investigate. We've done it and we've taken action. Has she been removed from any anti-semitism investigations at this point? Again, there was one case in which uh uh in the petition by um uh an
individual involved uh suggested and we uh accommodate that individual. Okay. Uh chancellor, earlier you said that only three of the seven students were disciplined at Cooney for their participation in an encampment. Why were only three disciplined and what kind of discipline did they receive?
Again, I cannot speak to the specific uh uh cases of of of of discipline. uh we we worked with the district attorney's office in in in that case. Um one of the things and and and they were individuals that were engaged in uh breaking into
the administrative building at at City College. As I indicated before in my testimony, uh the experience of that encampment is one that we've taken to heart. uh we have zero tolerance for encampments uh in CUNI right now and we have doubled down in our efforts to make
sure that our uh rules about time, place and matter are clear to the students and we've also invested heavily in additional security uh to be able to prevent uh any such situation occurring again. Okay, thank you. at Chanter Lions.
Berkeley professor Usama Mcdis Mc Mdesi described Hamas's October 7th attack as resistance. He also reposted an article praising determination and courage of of Hamas terrorists, saying they heroically defended their homeland. These
statements endorse violence against Jewish people. I I cannot speak to the specific elements of that. I different people have different views on that. I I
any call to violence or repeat of the horrific violence of October 7 in my perspective is objectionable and unacceptable. So those that would view those remarks uh that way uh would would have to take it the same way. They are
they are unobjectionable and arguably a call to violence. Uh about a year after the October 7th attack, Berkeley rewarded him by naming him the inaugural chair of a new Palestinian studies program. This this was one of the demands of the UC
Berkeley's violent anti-semitic encampment in April of 2024. Berkeley contributed $500,000 to the new to this new program. I know you were not chancellor then when it was stood up, but in your view, was this decision to appease anti-semitic violent student
demonstrators wrong or right? I can't speak to the context. I don't have the facts or the circumstances upon the making of that investment in that program. I will also say that a very similar investment was made in our Jewish studies program. At the same time,
okay, thank you. I yield back the rest of my time. I thank the gentleman. I recognize the gentleman from Washington, Mr. Bombgardner. Thank you uh Mr. Chair. Uh well, it very much pains me what has happened to higher education in America and its
current status. I'm the son of a university professor. Actually, I spent a year in between WSU and Harvard teaching at the Catholic University of Mosamb beek uh with the living and working with the Jesuits. So, I have strong affinity uh for the Jesuits. But the radical leftward bent of America's
higher education system has accelerated uh in the last uh 5 years has been extremely concerning. Uh the diversity statements that you have many uh college administrators have forced their faculty hires through to promote uh even more of
a radical ideology I think is uh very destructive. And I think what you're seeing from Congress these days is representation that the American people have very much lost trust or large segments of the American people have very much lost trust in higher education and that trust needs to be restored. Uh
it is my belief that one of those ways that trust could be restored would be to uh fully account for any foreign influence or foreign spending on your college campuses. And Dr. Dr. Groves, I'd like to start with you. Uh, does
Georgetown fully account and are is Georgetown fully transparent uh with foreign money spent on your campus? Uh, we we certainly attempt to uh report all of uh our receipts from uh non US
sources. One measure of that was uh with regard to section 117 reporting uh that there was an investigation of Georgetown along with other universities and after months of reviewing the data
we had submitted to the department of education we received a letter commending us for our reporting. uh this is in 2021 2022 and can you commit right now to the American people that every dollar of foreign spending uh you will be
transparent uh I would be happy to commit to that. Okay. Thank you. Uh Dr. Lions, could you talk to us about uh foreign spending on uh University of Berkeley's uh campus? Do you do you think the American people have the right to know if foreign
dollars are being spent on your campus? We like other universities were very very careful about any foreign monies that come into the university. The university is funded across many many different sources. Um and we are very
very careful to uh to vet countries of concern as as America's interests would would require us to. Um and you would commit to to full transparency of foreign spending on your campus? Well, as a public university, I
I am not ready to commit to that on the fly. I there there are different different donors to the university who request uh anonymity. What do you think that says the American people when you want to hide foreign influence on your college campus? Do you think that restores trust? I can assure you and what I'd be very
very happy to be very transparent about is exactly what is our process for vetting those things. We say no to a lot of foreign money. I promise you that. Give me an example of foreign money you've said no to. I'm not in a position to provide that that information, but I I'm I'm very happy to be fully
transparent. But you could understand at a time when large segments of the American population has seen university campuses go ever farther leftwing and more radical and there's a deep concern about foreign influence on college campuses.
uh lack of uh ability for uh Americans uh un uh high school graduates to be able to get spots on college campuses. You could understand why it would be concerning to have a university president come before Congress and say we don't want to be fully transparent about foreign influence.
I want to be fully transparent about the process by which we make sure that our process has integrity and that we are acting in America's best interest. But why why if why if a foreign government wants to put money onto your campus, wouldn't you be willing to tell lawmakers, the American people, about
that? Well, my understanding is that there in fact currently a lot of disclosure requirements around that, although it's not an area of my specific expertise. I think we we disclose an awful lot of that information to the government currently. Okay. Well, I'm just going to ask you one more time. Do you commit today to
being fully transparent uh every dollar of foreign spending that takes place on your college campus, you would let the American people know about? I am glad to bring that back with my team and and consider it. Uh but I'm not ready to make that commitment today.
I yield back, Mr. Chair. I thank the gentleman. I recognize the gentle lady from Michigan for her five minutes of question. Miss Mlan, thank you and thank you all for being here today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing. Um I want to start
with you. Um Dr. Alliance. Uh, you're the chancellor at the University of California, Berkeley, and you've been at the university for how many years? I was an undergraduate there. Um, and came back on the faculty just over 30 years ago. Okay. So, you've been around, you've
seen a lot of a lot of things. Um, do do you believe that Jewish students feel safe on your campus? I believe that most Jewish students feel safe on our campus. You think there's any that don't? Yes.
Yeah. Why do you think that is? Well, I think there are Jewish people that don't feel safe in lots of parts. I'm not talking about lots of parts. I'm talking about the university in which you are in charge of. Why do you think that is?
I think there is anti-semitism in society and we I'm not talking about society and I appreciate your diversion of the question. I'm talking about the university. So, why do you think Jewish students don't feel safe at your
university in which you are in charge of? Just curious. Well, I think part of safety for most people is some of it is physical, some of it is more more emotional and am I being harassed but but not necessarily
being confronted potent with potential violence. So I I've admitted already there is anti-semitism on campus and I think that and I'm asking a simple question. Why do you think that is? And we've spent almost 30 seconds you avoiding the question.
Well, I do believe that public universities are reflections of society and I believe that the anti-semitism on society is present on our campus. Do you believe you can influence the direction uh and and and
how people feel on your university? Do you have any influence on that? Do you believe the actions that you or your staff or faculty members take have have influence on that? Yes, I would agree. Are you committed to taking the action to making sure that all Jewish students as well as all
students feel safe on your on your campus? We committing to striving to reach that goal. Correct. Wonderful. Okay. So, just quickly, if a black student's home was vandalized with a noose and racist graffiti and a note was left saying that
you're next, would you consider that an example of racism or discrimination? On its face personally? Yes. Wonderful. Well, in December of 2023, while you were a senior executive there, a Jewish student's home was robbed and a
note was left saying, "F you." They wrote out the real word. Um, free Palestine from the river to the sea. You think that's helpful for the Jewish students? No. No. What action did Berkeley take?
I believe that would predated my time. But what I can say is it predated your time as chancellor, but you were there as a senior executive. Well, I I don't know this for a fact sitting here, but I would I am almost sure that that was reported and that was
investigated. And I And what was the result? It is hard. I mean, it's great that we we report it and we investigate it, but you you notice the one thing that's missing is like the result. Okay, we're gonna All right. In your
testimony, you rightly acknowledged Hamas's invasion of Israel as a terrorist attack. Dr. Makadi, a professor of history at Berkeley University, on the other hand, said, "I could have been one of those people who broke through on the siege on October
7th." What do you think he meant by that? What? I I can't speak to I know, but you're a pretty intelligent man or at least come off as a pretty intelligent man. What do you think he meant by that?
Put yourself in a Jewish students. You know, I look I I think I I want to separate the phrase from the person. If if I heard some other person, we can't separate the phrase from the person because of this professor who works at the university in which you are
in charge of. So, as much as we want to separate it and dance around it, let's not because the person that works at your university said this. So, I would like to know because you're so educated and you are and you touch yourself at that and you've earned that. What do you
think the professor meant? Hello. I believe it was a celebration of the terrorist attack on October 7. Right. Does do you think did you have any conversations with this professor?
I've had conversations with this professor. Yes. Yeah. And what was his response and what were the conversations? That's he's a fine scholar and that's a fine scholar that spews hate
and the people who pay the students don't feel safe. That's great. He's a fine scholar. I'm sure there's a lot of murderers in prison that are fine people too, fine scholars. But they they do some pretty nefarious and heinous acts. So you want to explain what the conversation was?
Gentle lady's time is expired. Saved by the bell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentle lady. Now I recognize the ranking member of the committee, Mr. Scott from Virginia. Uh, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Um, Mr. No, no, Chuck, we've had a lot of um comments entered into the record, complaints and comments with no indication of the resolution or status of an investigation.
What's wrong with drawing conclusions just having one side just having heard the complaint? Thank you for the question, Congressman Scott. What's wrong with that is that the investigation hasn't been uh completed. You know, there is such a
thing as due process uh and there's such a thing as process. Uh and both of those need to be uh observed uh so that everyone involved in a particular investigation uh has their uh views and
uh or perspectives heard and then the evidence can be evaluated and a determination uh can be made as to whether you know in the case of a title six violation the criteria for harassment or hostile environment have been met. Yeah. Title six has a process starting
with a complaint, an investigation, an opportunity to cure, and then a sanction if it's not successful. Uh what's wrong with imposing a sanction in the beginning like withholding funds
or something like that before the investigation is even taken place? Uh thank you for the question. What's was wrong with that is first of all it prejudges the situation. It preempts uh the longestablished processes. As I said in my uh testimony today, you know,
previous administrations, including the first Trump administration, have adhered to these processes in order to hold um universities responsible for title six violations. Uh and in in addition to that, uh you know, taking huge amounts
of funds away um ultimately, you know, hurts the very students who it's supposed to help. um and you know depletes the university of resources that it could use to address issues like rising anti-semitism on campus and this
focus we've been focusing on anti-semitism alone none of the other forms of hate um what's wrong with that well we are living in a time uh of increased uh hate and prejudice and
bigotry uh of all types you know many of the investigations that OCR resolved involving anti-semitic discrimination also included uh instances of anti-Arab, anti- uh Muslim, anti-Palestinian discrimination, race discrimination. You
know, the fact of the matter is that if a university is falling short in its responsibilities to protect one group, there's certainly the possibility that uh their policies and procedures and responses are inadequate to protect other groups. Thank you,
Dr. Groves. Um, we've heard a lot about foreign influence. Can you tell me what influence your university has had on the culture in in Qatar? We're very proud of our mission in
inqatar. It's completely consistent with the Jesuit animation of working at the frontiers of of serving groups that are not served uh easily in in in Washington. So, we are giving a
curriculum that's precisely the same as the curriculum we give in our DC campus, but we're giving it to students who represent 80 different countries of the world. Uh they are receiving the the
Jesuit education. They take two theology courses and two philosophy courses. uh on our campus they enjoy all the give and take of academic freedom that takes place uh at our DC campus and um 70% of
the students are young women a group that is underserved in that region so over the 20 years and what is that what effect does that have on the culture I I'm convinced that gradually uh
opening the eyes to new ways of thinking uh that we represent there uh is you can see the change occurring already. Our alumni are taking positions of of great importance uh over time in in many countries of the world.
Thank you. Do any of the colleges have title six monitors? Yes, we we do. Georgetown does. That is that is done by the new center that we that we instituted. Okay, Dr. L. Yes, Berkeley does.
And what is what is Well, I guess I'm out of time. Thank you. Why are you worried about being out of time? Nobody else is. I'm trying to. That's why I like my ranking member. Ah, I recognize now the gentle lady from
Illinois, Miss Miller. Thank you, Chairman Wahlberg, and I especially want to thank you for your continued commitment to rooting out all anti-semitism on our college campuses. In recent months, and since the October
7th attack, anti-semitism has exploded, especially on the campuses that we're discussing today. Many of these colleges are hiding behind the First Amendment, claiming that anti-semitic speech is protected. However, title six of the
civil rights act specifically prohibits harassment that creates a hostile work and learning environment on any campus that receives federal funding. Sadly, dozens of anti-semitic incidents have occurred in my home state of Illinois at
Northwestern University, Depal University and the University of Illinois, Urbana Champagne. This committee has taken the lead on addressing anti-semitism on college campuses, all to ensure that Jewish students and faculty are protected. We
will continue to hold every college accountable for anti-semitic rhetoric and acts of violence on their campuses because this hateful ideology has no place in America. So, Chancellor Matoss Rodriguez, a
professor at the CUNY Graduate Center, Sodia Tour, referred to the terrorist group Hamas as resistance fighters. Secondly, a professor at Brooklyn College, Emanuel Ness, has said the Zionists are Nazis.
So what I want to know is how can you expect to have a safe campus for all students, faculty and visitors when your professors publicly condone violence against Jews? Well, I have been very clear uh that
Hamas is a horrible terrorist organization and we have no con no uh tolerance at the City University of New York uh for anyone who would embrace that uh support of of Hamas. So in light of having no tolerance, does
that mean that these professors were dismissed then? And I I don't know the the the first case of the professor. Let me just tell you that I clearly condemn uh the statements and it's been uh my testimony
here and our practice that if any member of the City University community violates our policies and our code of conduct, we will conduct an investigation and if discipline is warranted, we will take it and we will not hesitate to do that and we have done so.
Is this the first you're hearing about these two professors? that I I I am not familiar with the first. The second one I'm familiar with. Uh was there a hearing and an investigation and I am not familiar with the with the comments that you made which as I
mentioned to you I find entirely uh you know reputable but uh my commitment has always been and our policy is that if those things come to our attention they will be investigated and action will be taken. Well, now that it's brought to your attention, I trust that you're
going to go back and there will be an investigation and consequences. One thing I learned when I raised my children, you could say whatever you want, but if there aren't consequences, the behavior will not change. Um, uh, Dr. Lions, in February, the gender and
women's study department at UC Berkeley hosted an event entitled Feminist and Queer Solidarities with Palestine. During the event, speakers repeatedly denied that Israeli women were gang raped by Hamas terrorists on October
7th, 2023 and argued that that Israel was weaponizing feminism. So, I want to know why was this event ever allowed on UC Berkeley's campus? This was uh an online event uh and it
was an event that was pulling together faculty. It was organized by one of our fine faculty, a full professor and we knew that the ideas might be controversial. We did not know exactly what people were saying. It was a
legitimate event. uh I did not prevent it from happening because I felt that uh keeping the marketplace for ideas open was really important in this instance. Well, you called the faculty a fine
person or whatever and and this is what they said. So was there any is has there been any other kind of investigation into this professor? So th this what what you quoted was not something as I understand it that the Berkeley faculty
member said. There were four or four people that were involved in this event. It was organized by a Berkeley faculty member. Did that faculty member um dispute this? Did they uh call it out as reprehensible? They did not call it out as
because silence uh is it means something. So this is terrible and I yield. I thank the gentle lady. Now I recognize the uh ranking member, gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Scott, for
his closing remarks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before I give closing remarks, that is unanimous consent to enter the following documents into the record. A letter from to the chair and ranking member dated July 11th from six family members of hostages
taken on October 7th entitled in a time of imag unimaginable pain George Georgetown made space for us. A second letter for the record to the chair and ranking member dated July 10th from Jamie Baran CEO of been the ark Jewish
action. Third, an op-ed that appeared in the US News and World Report yesterday by Sarah Silverman entitled, quote, "I faced anti-semitism at Harvard. Don't destroy the university in my name." And finally, uh, report from the an audit
from the Anti-Defamation League from 2024 that shows that anti-Semitic incidences are all over the United States, not just on college campuses. Without objection, they will be received. Hearing none.
Thank and thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to take a moment to note two incidents that occurred during this hearing that demand a response. First, a committee member used a visual exhibit displaying an email that did not redact the email addresses of sender and
recipients of the email. There's no reason not to redact the addresses on that email. the truth of the matter being asserted in the email was clear without the personally identifiable information. So to not redact it was unnecessary and can lead to harassment
and members ought to be sensitive to that. Since October 7th, we've seen insidious incidences of doxing of individuals on all sides of the issue and the committee should not be contributing to that. I understand based on my parliamentary inquiry that the
committee does not have a policy on this, but I urge that we work together to develop such a policy. Duly noted. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Further in the line of questioning, Chancellor Rodriguez was asked questions about
choices made at aun law clinic as to who they choose to represent. And this is not the first that basically I I think it's wrong to um evaluate lawyers based on their clients,
but this is not the first time the committee has uh asked questions about how a law school clinic operates and who they represent. The last time they um we attempted to do so, the clinic hauled the committee and two of the chairs into
court uh arguing in their lawsuit that the letter quote reflects a bare desire to harm plaintiffs for their association with left-wing causes that the committee does not like and for the protected speech reflected in their progressive left agenda. At a hearing, Matthew
Barry, the house council representing the committee, said in regard to that legal clinic inquiry, quote, "I want to be absolutely clear that the formal request has been withdrawn. It is not um a cover for and there's not going to be any informal behind the scenes request
for the same documents. I find it troubling that what we promised not to do in one to one school in court, we've attempted to do in another school in an open hearing. I want to re reiterate something fundamental. Institutions of higher education must be places where
all students, faculty, regardless of background, can learn and teach free from discrimination, harassment, or violence. This is not a partisan issue. It's a moral imperative. But what we've seen from the Trump administration is not a goodfaith effort to uphold those
values. Instead, we've seen a radical reinterpretation of our nation's civil rights laws, one that weakens protections for students while empowering political actors to middle and academic spaces. If shifted the standards schools must meet, stripped
institutions of clear guidance, and in doing so created an atmosphere of fear, confusion, and intimidation. If the administration was truly concerned with civil rights enforcement, they wouldn't have gutted the Office of Civil Rights, the very agency charged with investigating discrimination on
campuses across the country. You can't claim to be a champion for civil rights while disarming the body meant to enforce them. Now, we need to be honest about what's happening. The Trump administration is destabilizing higher education itself, eroding trust,
silencing disscent, and undermining universities ability to promote diversity and critical inquiry while at the same time sabotaging the office of civil rights. One in who suffers most from the stat from the strategy, it's
the students, Jewish and non-Jewish, marginalized and unrepresented. They're the ones who will be the they're the ones left vulnerable and voiceless. And this should not be a partisan debate. It should be about ensuring that our schools are safe, inclusive, and
intellectually vibrant. If we're serious about fighting anti-semitism and all forms of hate, then we must be equally serious about defending institutions that educate the next generation and serious about increasing funding for the Office of Civil Rights at the Department
of Education. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. I thank the gentleman and I thank the uh panel for being here today. It's been a long long hearing, but I think it's important hearing. I will stand by the contention that these
these hearings must continue. Um, we need to continue to highlight bad actors in our higher education institutions. That's the reason we have an education and
workforce committee to deal with education. philosophy of this administration as well as mine is that our responsibility at federal level is to make sure that the local schools K12
are primarily manned, encouraged, directed, guided by and cared for by the state and locals. But our institutions, especially those that receive federal dollars, we have an oversight responsibility.
and in this light with anti-semitism that's gone on all under the hands most egregious in most recent history took place with OCR and Mr. Mchug I'm glad that you're here.
I appreciated your responses, but I must state that some of the most egregious events occurred. Encampments, violence, destruction of property, fear production in Jewish students lives
took place while OCR was allegedly at full strength. But I've seen that at the universities as well encouraging that Georgetown disciplined Professor Brown. But this was long overdue.
I'm disappointed that in our what we've heard today as a chancellor, Mr. Rodriguez, you couldn't say care is anti-semitic. Georgetown refuses to recognize
anti-semitism at its cutter campus, at least unwilling to say that their responsibility is to make sure that the activities that go on at the campus that the awards that are given to people who are anti-semitic
um seems to continue. I'm concerned about that. Berkeley admits abhorance of the views of the professor at rewarded with his his own program but won't do anything about it and refers to him as a fine scholar.
That's something I not I could not refer to him when he misses a moral issue of humanity. Georgetown um couldn't affirmatively say it wouldn't allow a member of the KKK to
come speak. CUNI severely underrepresented the number of anti-semitism complaints received. So those are concerns that we still have. I express appreciation for the statements that each of you have made
about attempting to do better to push back on anti-semitism. I express appreciation sincerely for that. I hope that other institutions that watch this hearing are enlightened of the fact that that's expected of him of them as well. We also
know that there are hundreds of higher ed institutions all across this country who have none of this anti-semitism in a virulent nature evidenced on their campuses. They're still humans on the campuses. We get
that. But we have to end this. And then I would also add that our concern is that as students leave these campuses with the experience of anti-semitism and faculty members that are
indoctrinating them in that direction, that our K12 students are in danger next. And that's what our states will have to face as they come to understand that this is something that can be experienced and
accepted if we're not careful. So I say we ought to have these hearings and we'll have plenty of other hearings as well on other issues and topics. But I would contend as well that
anti-semitism is also available to express anti-Americanism as well. We have a responsibility for that. So I thank you again for being here today. I would say for those that are
watching, we expect you to step up to the plate and aggressively end any type of anti-semitism, racism, we'll add that as well. Islamophobia phobia or anything else to
make sure that we have diverse campuses, but they promote education that refineses, builds up, and is secure for all students on campus. I would like to thank our witnesses again and I'd like to ask that they be
allowed to leave before the rest of the audience because of some of the concerns. And I note that it was not the Jewish spokespersons disrupting this this hearing today.
I think that can be noted all across. But we'd ask that the witnesses be allowed to leave first um without objection. There being no further business, the committee stands adjourned.