creating a hostile environment through their indifference to the harassment of Jewish students. We'll hear today about anti-semitism at three institutions, Haverford College, Depal University, and
California Polytenic State University, San Louis Abyspo. The incidents we'll be discussing with our witnesses today are truly appalling and shameful. Take Havford for instance, a small
liberal arts college located in suburbs outside Philadelphia. From the time of October 7th, 2023 terrorist attack in Israel to the present, the Haverford administration
has consistently refused to act against severe anti-semitic harassments on campus. It has refused to even condemn these incidents of harassment or hostility in a clear unequivocal statement, much less meaningfully
discipline the students responsible for these incidents. Instead, the university has exhibited an all-consuming commitment to dialogue, even when that dialogue is dominated by anti-semitic conspiracy
theories or calls to violence. What's more, Haverford employs faculty members who engage in blatant anti-semitism with no apparent consequences. For example, one professor
declared online that Zionism is Nazism. The Haverford administration's failure to address anti-semitism on campus is taking a painful toll on students, faculty, and staff. Without
objection, I'd like to enter into the record a letter from Haverford's Shabbad House that was sent just yesterday, yesterday afternoon to the Haverford Board of
Managers. The letter says, "Under this administration, Jewish students have been marginalized, ostracized, and at times outright attacked. Meanwhile, their pain has been met with indifference. End quote. I also was
caught with their early statement in the letter where it says, "We've never spoken out against the college. We've never publicly criticized its leadership. We've simply tried to serve to support Haverford and its students in every way we could. But today, we can no
longer remain silent." I submit this for the record, and without objection, it's submitted. at Depal. Meanwhile, there have been multiple yet, yes, multiple instances of fiscal violence against Jewish students.
Last May, the university permitted a multi-week encampment that was so disruptive and violent that the nearby elementary school had to cancel recess. After finally forcibly shutting down the encampment, Depal still ended up giving
in to agitators demands. We have a student here today who had surgery as a result of the attack on him and a colleague. And at Calpali, at least one faculty member has been complicit in harassing Jewish students who are trying
to attend an Israel related special lecture. My colleagues and I are committed to holding these three in universities and others accountable for perpetuating anti-semitism. We're committed to enacting policies that create a safe environment for
Jewish students, one in which faculty, staff, and administrators are held accountable for the admin anti-semitism that consumes their campuses. I look forward to hearing your testimony today as it will certainly inform this committee's future
work. With that, I yield to the ranking member for an opening statement. Thank you, Mr. chairman and I thank our witnesses for being with us today. Month of May marks Jewish Heritage Month. It's when we celebrate the generations of Jewish Americans who made incredible
contributions to this country. This month, we reaffirm our commitment to combat the rise of anti-semitism both on and off college campuses. No one should be discriminated against because of who they are or how they worship. And all
students have the right to learn in a safe environment free from discrimination in compliance with title six of the civil rights act of 1964. Unfortunately, instead of properly enforcing title six, this committee is holding the eighth hearing describing
the problem and complaining about anti-semitism on college campuses instead of taking any meaningful action to actually solve the problem. Curiously, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have not had any hearings addressing other forms of of uh
discrimination and hate such as racism, Title 9 gender violations, Islamophobia, homophobia, or the challenges of meeting the needs of students with disabilities. And this is particularly concerning since we know from reports from the
Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights that on January 11th of last year, there were 12,000 open cases alleging discrimination and violation of Title 6. 12,000. And of those 12,000
cases, only 144 could be title six violations involving anti-semitism. And we know the solution of this problem is better enforcement of title six. So instead of holding another problem uh
another hearing talking about the problem which complains about the problem, we ought to be holding a hearing on what is going on in the office of civil rights OCR at the department of education. This administration is in the process of dismantling the office of civil rights
and it raises reasonable doubt about the plans for addressing anti-semitism on campus as well as racism, homophobia, sexism, islamophobia, or the needs of students with disabilities. Again, we should be focused on trying to solve the problem rather than just complaining
about it. For centuries, college campuses have served as centers for debate and discussion on polarizing issues in our country. Unfortunately, this also means that they can become flash points for controversy. But it is fundamental for us for to understand
that we must protect student safety while also fostering college campuses as a place of learning where top where difficult topics can be discussed civily without fear of retribution. OCR has typically and historically
played a vital role in preserving that balance. When a suspected incident of discrimination occurs on college campuses, OCR can investigate the claim. And when I say investigate, you've produced a letter from uh Jewish
students on campus. The administration has letters from Jewish students on campus. Nice have nice to have an investigation to find out what the facts are. But the institution but the OCR can investigate the claim and there's an established process. Should an
institution be found in to violate its duty to provide a safe learning environment, OC OCR's process to work with the school will allow it to address the harm. Specifically, the institution is expected to take appropriate action to quote end the harassment, eliminate
the hostile environment, prevent its reoccurrence, and address its effect as appropriate. And if this does not happen, the Department of Education can begin to withhold funds from the part of the institution which is in violation. However, in its first three months, the
Trump administration has closed out seven of 12 OCR regional offices, all of which conduct investigations into discrimination, and all of which um um conduct investigations into
discrimination on campus, whether based on anti-semitism or race, national origin, gender, or disability. According to public reports, nearly half of the OCR staff has been laid off. And so, one is left to wonder, how can OCR carry out
its important responsibilities with half the staff? My concerns have been confirmed by other reporting of students struggling to get assistance with ongoing cases because their attorney has been laid off. Moreover, instead of conducting investigations in according
with the law, the Trump administration has taken a sledgehammer to due process rights of institutions. The public has seen a barrage of reports of this administration taking action without any investigation, such as taking away federal funding, students
and professors having their international visas revoked, students who have been disappeared into detention centers, and threats to revoke tax exempt status of multiple universities. Schools are also told to accept a list of the administration's de demand all
without OCR first conducting a factf finding investigation. In short, that is not due process. For some of us, this doesn't come as a surprise. After all, just this past weekend, the president appeared on NBC News and was asked whether he
believes that he should uphold the Constitution. And he responded, "I don't know." Of course, one cannot forget that this is also the same president who thought there were quote very fine people on both sides after white supremist marched through
Charlottesville in 2017 chanting Jews will not replace us and what everyone including people you may disagree with. Everyone is entitled to due process and all students should be able to seek recourse if they've been discriminated against. Similarly, institutions should
be given a chance to address the harms on their campus without fear of political retribution. And perhaps we should uh be proactive and utilize agencies in federal government like the community uh relations services at the Department of Justice, which can serve
as a peacemaker when there are problems in communities. Uh, of course, regrettably, the uh community relations service is on the chopping block right now at the Department of Justice. So we hope we can have a productive conversation today that the centers of
students uh and the um and and higher education. But hopefully one day um we will begin having a hearing on solutions rather than continuing to
complain about the problem. Now before I yield back um when I said 12,000 that's the case that's the cases total cases in the backlog not the total number of cases u so that um but the point obviously is that the number of
anti-semitism cases of all of the cases is a very small number and if we're going to investigate title six uh violations we ought to be investigating all of them and we ought to be looking at what is going on at OCR because that
will be ultimately the solution uh to the problem. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 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 by 5:00 PM uh 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 our four witnesses. Our first witness is Dr. Wendy Raymond, the president of Hford College in Hford, Pennsylvania. Welcome. Our second uh
witness is Dr. Robert Emanuel, the president of Depal University in Chicago, Illinois. Welcome. Our third witness is is Mr. David Cole, the George J. Mitchell Professor in Law and Public Policy at the Georgetown University Law Center in
Washington DC. Mr. Cole was formerly the national legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union. Welcome. Our last witness is Dr. Jeffrey Armstrong, the president of California Polytenic inh State University in St. Louis Abyispo,
California. We thank the witnesses for being here today. Uh pursuant to the committee rules, I would ask that you each limit your oral presentation to a threeminut summary uh of your written statement. The clock will count down from three minutes as committee members
have been many questions for you and we would like to spend as much time as possible on questions. Pursuant to committee rule 8D, the committee practice, however, uh we will not cut off your testimony until you reach the five minute mark. I would also like to
remind the witnesses to be aware of their responsibility to provide accurate information to the committee. I'll first recognize Dr. Raymond for your testimony. Chairman, Chairman Wahlberg, Ranking Member Scott, committee members, thank
you for the opportunity to testify today. Before I begin, I want to make it clear that Havford condemns in the strongest possible terms anti-semitism in all its forms. Havford College is a liberal arts
college outside P outside Philadelphia with about 1500 undergraduate students. It's been a privilege to serve as president for the last six years. We are a secular institution established in 1833 by a group of
Quakers. That Quaker history is one of the many qualities that make Havford the distinctive place it is today. Small and close-knit, the college encourages and values open inquiry and free expression,
core tenants of academic freedom. Education here is grounded in the Quaker assumption that intellectual and ethical ethical growth are never complete. In the past few years, we have
been tested like never before. The horrific terrorist attacks by Hamas against Israel caused unfathomable pain on our campus and around the world. Moreover, the ongoing war and loss of innocent lives in Israel and Gaza have
left many shaken. In the wake of these events, we have seen a troubling rise in anti-semitism in our communities and on our campuses. In the days following the attacks, I was inspired by how the Havford community came together. At the
same time, events have occurred on our campus that are inconsistent with our values. I take these incidents and Havford's response very seriously. We have taken significant steps to address these issues and strengthen our
policies. That includes updating our policies, strengthening campus safety programs, deepening engagement with the Jewish community, launching programs to combat anti-semitism, and forming our ad hoc
committee on free expression. I recognize that we haven't always succeeded in living up to our ideals. Many have wished that the college or I as president had responded differently to various
actions and we continue to make progress and invest in the quality of the campus experience for all Havford students. In closing, I would like to address the Havford community directly. You are the ones pushing us to be
better. I hear you and acknowledge that we can do better and I can do better. And to our Jewish students, some of you who are here today, I wish to make it unmistakably clear that you are
valued members of our community and on our campus. I am sorry that my actions and my leadership let you down. I remain committed to addressing anti-semitism and all issues that harm our community members. I am committed to
getting this right. This is an unprecedented time in our college's history and I continue to believe in the Havford community. I thank you for demonstrating how together we can work toward creating
a better and more peaceful world. Thank you and I look forward to your questions. Thank you, President Raymond. And now, Dr. Emanuel, we recognize you for your testimony. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Wahlberg, Ranking Member Scott, members of the committee, I want to thank you for this opportunity to discuss Depal's efforts to combat anti-semitism and keep our campus safe. For more than 125 years, Depal's Catholic Vincension mission has been
grounded in the belief that every human being possesses inherent dignity and worth. A belief that compels us to stand firmly against anti-semitism in all its forms. Since the terrorist attacks by Hamas on October 7th, we've taken strong
steps to support our Jewish community members, prioritizing campus safety and student well-being. We've made mistakes along the way. As Depal's leader, I want to acknowledge that openly. To our students, our parents, our faculty, our staff, our
alumni, and our friends, I am deeply sorry. I know there are areas where we must and will do better. I also wish to speak directly to two of our students who were attacked last November. What happened to them was
a hate crime. No one should ever be attacked because of who they are. And I am sorry for the pain that they're experiencing. For the past year and a half, we have taken concrete steps to ensure Jewish students and all students
are safe on our campus. For example, we've just implemented a new ID verification and mass policy. We've introduced new limits on campus protests through our time, place, and manner restrictions, and we've enforced them. The operations for students for justice
in Palestine are currently suspended from campus and we banned a group not a student group behind enemy lines from our campus. We've hired a former ADL professional to assist in our Jewish engagement on campus. We've created a dedicated task
force on anti-semitism. We've supported the creation of the Jewish faculty staff alliance and now we're also launching a Jewish alumni group. We've also made substantial investments to increase security safety
across our urban Chicago campuses and I've commissioned an external review of our security programs to improve campus safety. As an institution founded on Catholic principles, we believe this moment demands moral clarity.
Anti-semitism is not only a threat to Jewish students, faculty, and staff. It's a threat to the very fabric of our American society. I recognize that for many in our Jewish community, Israel is a core part of their identity. Those community
members and every community member deserve to feel safe on campus without exception. We began this work over a year and a half ago. While there's more work to be done, the changes we have made are already fostering a culture of accountability on our
campus. We recognize the vigilance on this topic that'll need to be a focal point of our work going forward. You have my commitment that we are focused on continuing to make real progress and take action. As a person of faith, I'm personally
committed to confronting anti-semitism wherever it appears in our institutions, in our communities, and in ourselves. I want to thank you for the opportunity to be here today, and I look forward to the questions. Thank you, Dr. Emanuel. And now I
recognize Mr. David Cole for your testimony. Turn press the button. Turn the mic on there, please. Sorry. Thank you. Um, uh, thank you, Chairman Wahberg. Much better. Uh, and, uh, ranking member Scott for inviting me
to testify today. I come not so much to comment on the specifics of what happened at Havford, Depal, or Calpaly, but to provide a legal framework and a cautionary note. Uh, in my work with the ACLU and others, I have defended the
speech rights of everyone from the National Rifle Association, which I represented successfully in the Supreme Court just last year, to fundamentalist Christians to Palestinian students. I've also challenged discrimination on the basis of race,
sex, and religion. I care deeply about both values, free speech, and equality, and both are at stake here. I have three points. First, anti-semitic speech, while lamentable, is constitutionally
protected, just like racist speech, sexist speech, and homophobic speech is. The Supreme Court protected the rights of the Nazi party to march in Skoi, the home of Holocaust survivors. Sorry, I
just turned my my thing off. Um, it it protected the rights of the Westboroough Baptist Church uh to to hurl homophobic slurs at a military funeral. And it protected the rights of the Ku Klux
Clan to burn crosses and engage in racist speech. As Chief Justice Roberts explained in the Westboroough Baptist Church case, while such speech obviously causes deep
harm, the greater danger is giving government officials the power to censor speech by labeling it anti-semitic, racist, or sexist. Second, Title Six does not
prohibit anti-semitic speech. It prohibits only the discriminatory denial of equal access to education. An anti-semitic slogan at a protest or online does not deny equal access to
education any more than a sexist or a racist comment at a at a at a rally does. Anti-Semitic speech implicates Title Six in only two narrow circumstances.
first where it it constitutes harassment targeted at an individual because of that individual's Jewish identity, not because he supports Israel, but because of his Jewish identity specifically. And second, where the speech is not
targeted, say at a rally, uh where it is so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it denies equal access to an education. That's a very high standard. It's almost never been met in the case
law. That means most anti-semitic speech does not implicate Title Six at all. Therefore, a school committed to free speech should be tolerating it, not suppressing it, as this committee would
ask. And Title Six governs only colleges, not students. So when a student harasses another student, that student hasn't violated Title Six and the college hasn't violated Title Six because the student doesn't speak for the college. The college only violates
Title Six if it is deliberately indifferent to the act. Deliberately indifferent, again, a very high standard set forth by the Supreme Court in the Davis uh in the Davis case and almost never met. That's basically you ignore
what has happened rather than respond. Deliberate indifference is not responding to anti-semitism in a way that this committee doesn't think is sufficient. Um, and that leads me to my third and final point. The line between
protected anti-semitic speech and prohibited anti-dismitic discrimination is necessarily factintensive. It requires a careful assessment of what was said, to whom, and why it was said.
As a result, it is not sufficient to make general accusations of anti-semitism, as members of this committee have repeatedly done uh in all of the prior hearings and already today any more than it is sufficient under Title 9 to label an encounter between
two students sexual harassment. You need to look at what happened, hear both sides of of of of the of the encounter and make a legal assessment, not a political uh herang. And therefore, getting to the bottom of what happened
here requires fair hearings where both sides are heard with about specific incidents. And this committee room is not the place to do that. This committee has not held a single hearing looking into a specific incident and having the
perpetrator and the complainant testify and as trying to figure out what has happened. Instead, it is engaged in broadbased charges of anti-semitism without any factual um predicate. With all due respect, these proceedings have
had more in common with those of the House. I'd ask the gentleman to conclude. You've gone past the five minutes. Yeah, I'm I'm sorry if I could just I have one final comment. Take me a second. Yeah, that these these proceedings, with all due respect, have more in common with those of the House
Unamerican Activities Committee. They are uh they have they are not an attempt to find out what happened, but an attempt to chill protected speech. Thank you for testimony then and it's a mistake. Thank you for your testimony and I think we uh did not step on your
testimony at that point. Thank you. Now I recognize uh Dr. Armstrong for your testimony. Good morning, Chairman Wahberg, Ranking Member Scott, and members of the committee. For the past 14 years, it's been my privilege to serve as president
of Calpali in St. Louis Abyspo, California. At Kpali, we emphasize a learn by doing approach, providing hands-on practical experience, learning from experiences, and constantly getting better. Over the past 18 months, questions have been asked about how
higher education institutions confront, prevent, and combat anti-semitism that escalated after the 2023 Hamas attacks against Israeli citizens. The October 7 attacks on innocent men, women, and children were horrific. The violence
perpetrated that day must be condemned without equivocation. and the targeting of Jewish students on campuses across the US that followed was terrible and unacceptable. Both as a university president and a human being, this is a
matter I take particularly seriously, we have to do better. At Kalpali, when people do not live up to our commitment to prohibit prejudice and and bias, we hold them accountable. We have dealt with anti-semitism and other forms of discrimination by faculty, staff,
visitors, and students. We do not tolerate threatening activity. We deploy campus police whenever there is potential for threatening activity or trouble, and they make arrests and file criminal charges when justified.
In addition, when alleged anti-semitism or harassment occurs, we investigate and impose immediate university discipline. At Calpali, we have enjoyed a vibrant Jewish community for many years. Stakeholders rate Jewish life on our campus at a high level, and the number
of Jewish students has doubled since 2011. Hell and Habad are registered Kpali student organizations and I and my wife have been invited to and proudly participated in some of their activities. I am grateful to the Jewish student leaders who traveled across the
country to join me here today. In addition to those long-standing partnerships been working with the ADL and other Jewish leaders on several ongoing and some new initiatives. First, we have continued to be uh
certain to speak out to oppose anti-semitism. Second, we are enhancing our mandatory student orientation and bienial employee training to provide greater education and awareness about anti-semitism. Our team is participating
in the fifth cohort of Hell's Campus Climate Initiative. To date, our administrators have attended eight training sessions. Third, we're establishing a new presidential anti-semitism task force that will develop an action plan focused on Jewish
student life, anti-semitism education, and cultural awareness. Fourth, we're continuing to fund raise to endow a chair in Jewish studies and build an interfaith center that includes Jewish students. Our efforts to support Jewish students and
combat anti-semitism have made progress. I want to emphasize that our goal is continuous improvement. We will work to give each student the safest possible environment free from discrimination and religious
intolerance so they can learn, grow, and succeed. We call it being ready day one. We will continue to strongly confront any anti-semit anti-semitic conducts or threats. In in conclusion, I want to thank you for the important work on this
issue and pledge our continuing support. Thank you, Dr. Armstrong. Under committee rule nine, we'll now question witnesses under the five-minute rule. I'll recognize myself for the first five
minutes. This question is for all three presidents. All of your schools have been hotbeds of semitism at some point. Please tell me how many students at your schools have been suspended and how many have been expelled for anti-semitic conduct since October 7th,
2023. President Raymond, we don't publicize those numbers and we use suspension and expelling as normal parts of our disciplinary process. But you don't have numbers to give us. So we assume there have been none.
We do not talk about those numbers publicly. Um Mr. Manuel, thank you for the question. Uh post October 7th, there were eight student groups uh investigated. Two were suspended and put on probation. I
believe there were two arrests after the encampment dissolution. One of them I believe was a student. Thank you, President Armstrong. As a result of events in 2024, we've had
a total of six students disciplined with the discipline arrang ranging from uh two quarters suspension to deferred suspension to probation. Thank you, President Emanuel. You say you're committed to addressing anti-semitism on campus. The group Students for Justice
in Palestine or SJP is at the very center of your anti-semitism problem. Students have been physically and verbally assaulted at multiple SJP protests. SJP was central to the May 2024 encampment which caused $500,000 in
damage. SJP has also circulated deeply anti-semitic posts on Instagram, including a recent post accusing Israel of being just like the Nazis. President Emanuel, considering SJP's history of harassment and violence against Jewish students and its repeated refusal to
abide by university policies, will you commit to finally permanently permanently banning SJP from campus? Thank you for the question. Uh SJP has been uh suspended. They are on probation and this post that I think you're
referring to happened on Thursday. They were immediately suspended in all their operations from campus pending a new hearing. The cumulative effect of their work will be considered in the results or the outcomes of that next hearing. I'd be happy to report back to you on
their I'd be glad to receive that. The cumulative effect seems like it's gone on and on and believe it'd be a point in time for banning. President Raymond, in March, the Havford and Binmar uh group faculty and staff for justice in
Palestine or FSJP praised a Palestinian terrorist who led an attack in 1978 that killed 38 Israelis including 13 children. S FSJP claimed that the terrorist and I quote, scarified herself for her country and fought for the
freedom of many Palestinians. Does praising the murder of Jews violate any Heatherford policies? Of course it does. There is no place for that ever anywhere. Uh, another FSJP post applauded a member of the Popular
Front for liberation of Palestine, a US designated terrorist group because she trained for military operations. Did Havford professors in this group face any consequences whatsoever? I am not aware of that particular post
and anti-semitism is in any of its forms is not tolerated at Hford College. Both these these faculty it seems to have been. I'm going to ask uh you a few questions about statements we've heard on Hford's campus since the October 7th
terrorist attack against Israel. And again, I will not display all that's in this book, but this reminds us that the attack was not from Israel. The attack was from Hamas. Brutal, unprovoked attack as well. Is the phrase long live the
Inifata protected speech on Havford's campus? Yes or no? That is an anti-semitic form of speech. is the phrase from Gaza to Lebanon, Israel will soon be gone. Protected speech on Havford's campus
that is repugnant speech. I disavow it. It is anti-Semitic and and happening is the phrase resistance is not terrorism protected speech on Havford's campus. Any anti-semitic speech I will not
defend. And at Havford we do protect speech. Do these do these statements call for the genocide of Jews? There is no tolerance for any such speech that would call for that. Well, we hope we see that soon to come. Hamas
is gaining support and comfort from schools that allow this to go on. And these go beyond just simply words. They include faculty and students blocking the freedom of education and
life itself for Jewish students. I yield back. And now I recognize Representative Bonamichi, gentle lady from Oregon, for her questioning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As I've said before in this committee, there has been an undeniable rise in anti-semitism and hate speech
across the country and around the globe. Anti-semitism is a real problem that has existed for thousands of years and should be taken seriously by schools and universities and by elected officials. Jewish students deserve to feel safe and be safe on campus and everywhere. No one
should be afraid of harassment or discrimination because of their faith and I strongly condemn acts of violence and want to emphasize that people who break the law must be held accountable. But if in instead of engaging with this topic genuinely and constructively, we
have another performative hearing during which the majority will try to blame the left and what they consider liberal or elitist institutions and colleges for acts of anti-semitism. It's another chapter in the majority's battle against higher education. And as we've discussed
repeatedly, but is worth restating, when white supremacists marched in Charlottesville with burning tiki torches, chanting, "Jews will not replace us," President Trump said there were fine people on both sides. And I don't recall the Republican majority calling that out. General Kelly, who served as chief of staff in the first
Trump administration, said that Donald Trump spoke favorably about Hitler, saying that Hitler had done some good things. Some Republican members of Congress have promoted conspiracy theories like Jewish space lasers that control weather and have accused quote
Jewish globalist elites of pulling strings behind the scenes of government. Another a member of this committee quoted Hitler on the steps of the Capitol. Several members of President Trump's inner circle have public and prominent ties to white nationalist and
white supremacist groups. There are more examples, but I've made the point. If this committee is going to tackle the rise in anti-semitism, let's start there. Let's denounce and condemn condemn all instances of anti-semitism, including from colleagues and the
administration. If we truly want to protect Jewish Americans, we need to speak out regardless of this source, and not turn a blind eye when anti-semitic attacks come from leaders of a political party. For those of us who do want to stop the rise of anti-semitism on
college campuses, I remind you that the federal government already has an entity in place to investigate and resolve anti-semitic instances, the Office of Civil Rights, and it is housed, at least for now, in the Department of Education. But unfortunately, Secretary McMahon has
fired almost half of OCR's staff and closed seven of their 12 regional offices. President Trump's recent budget called for a 35% cut to the Office of Civil Rights. Will any of the Republicans on this committee stand against the dismantling of the Office of
Civil Rights? I doubt it, because that would require a real commitment to combating anti-semitism. And if you truly want to stand up for the Jewish people, condemn the white Christian nationalism seeping into policy in the White House. Speak up against the attempts to end the separation of
religion and government. Show your support for freedom of religion. It is unconscionable to weaponize the real problems of the Jewish community for political gain. And I'm not going to engage in more back and forth in this hearing with people who call out anti-semitism when it's part of their
anti- higher education agenda, but not when it's coming from their side of the aisle. Mr. Chairman, I request unanimous consent to enter in a statement into the record from Northwestern University in which more than 100 Jewish faculty and staff members raise serious concerns
about how Congress is addressing anti-semitism. They say we come from different points on a political camp compass. We express our identities as Jews in myriad ways, but we are united by the conviction that our Jewishness must not be used as a cudel to silence
the vigorous exchange of ideas that lie at the heart of university life. And I also request unanimous consent to insert into the record a statement from the Jewish Council on Public Affairs and a broad coalition of Jewish groups in which they emphasize that they quote firmly reject the false choice between
confronting anti-semitism and upholding democracy. Our safety as Jews has always been tied to the rule of law, to the safety of others, to the strength of civil society, and to the protection of rights and liberty for all. It continues. It is both possible and
necessary to fight anti-semitism on campus, in our communities, and across the country without abandoning the democratic values that have allowed Jews and so many other vulnerable minorities to thrive. Mr. Mr. Chairman, as a mother who raised her children in a Jewish home
Without objection, they will be received. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As a mother who raised her children in a Jewish home and as an active member of my synagogue for more than 25 years, I can no longer pretend that this is a good faith effort to root out anti-semitism, especially when the Trump
administration and the majority party are regularly undermining Jewish values, including justice, loving kindness, free speech, freedom of religion, and the Jewish responsibility of Tunalam to repair the world. I yield back.
I thank the gentle lady. I now recognize the gentleman from South Carolina, Representative Wilson. Thank you very much, Chairman Tim Wahlberg, and I appreciate your leadership for promoting real academic freedom with real diversity of ideology, with equality,
and with real political inclusion. With that in mind, all Americans in good faith want college education be uplifting for students and to achieve the American dream. But unfortunately, the barbaric mass murder of October 7th by Iranian puppets of Hamas invading
Israel has shockingly revealed that many college campuses are anti-Semitic in defending the maniacical Hamas agenda. The world should know that the Hamas covenant of August 18, 1988 declares in the midst of insane provisions, article
7, quote, "The day of judgment will come when all and not come and about until Muslims fight the Jews, killing the Jews. When the Jew will hide behind stones and trees, the stones and trees will say, "Oh Muslim, there is a Jew
behind me. Come and kill him." End of quote. That's their ideology. Free Palestine from the river to the sea is a code for death to Israel, death to America. We know that anti-Zionism is anti-semitism. I'm very grateful that I grew up in South Carolina and represent
South Carolina. At the time of the American Revolution, the largest Jewish population in the new world was in Charleston, South Carolina. The very first provincial constitution to recognize Judaism was the provincial constitution of South Carolina. The first Jewish-American elected official
in the new world was the Provincial Assembly of South Carolina. And sadly, the first Jewish-American kill of the revolution uh was in Charleston, South Carolina. And so that's the environment I grew up in in South Carolina. We do not tolerate anti-semitism. Uh we
promote diversity of ideology uh equality and we promote uh ideolog uh additionally ideological inclusion. President Raymond, uh, we know that unfortunately anti-semitism has existed long before the murderous atrocities
October 7th. And, uh, sadly, I had the I visited, uh, Kabit's near Oz. I visited the music site, uh, where the slaughters occurred, uh, the mass slaughters. The committee recently learned that in 2020 you met with a Jewish student about the
severe harassment and cyber bullying that he was experiencing at Hfordford because of his Jewish identity. In response, you allegedly gave him a book by a Buddhist monk and told him that he should accept the harassment and quote, "Let it wash over." End of quote. Should
Jewish students at Harvard simply let the experience of anti-semitism wash over them? Our Jewish students and our Jewish community are highly valued at Hford. They have been an important part of our
community for a long time. And my top priority is ensuring the well-being and safety of all of our students. And so I'm confident you've changed policy since then. Uh with this uh Dr.
Armstrong uh you're identified as an outspoken DEI proponent. I believe that uh DEI it chills and actually restricts and restrains academic freedom. It's been my view that diversity means uh no
ideological diversity, no conservative. I remember in college uh with my national review, I would fold it in half because I didn't want my professors to see I was reading the writings of William F.Buckley Jr. uh sedicious uh with the equity. What that means is that
all are the same regardless of uh what's the achievement level and it denies uh equality of opportunity and inclusion uh again is uh so uh political uh that means no Republicans. I remember uh that I had uh in my undergraduate and law
school one Republican professor uh professor JD Futch III of Baltimore uh and I knew where the others were coming from and so uh what is your interpretation of DEI because as it's being experienced it's chilling as
uh Mr. Cole said uh what what's your experience? Well, thank you for your question. I, you know, I go back Calpali since I've been there. We've focused on student success and all student success. So, we've been Does that mean that does that mean equity for everybody? They all get
the same grade. Oh, no, sir. Calpali is a very competitive university and we have been uh admitting students under uh Prop 209 has been in existence for more than 25 years at Cal in California. So we've been operating under an
affirmative action ban during that time and we have had significant changes in the makeup of our population because we've increased financial aid and made students more able to as we conclude I would really like to know the percentage
of conservatives on your act on your of professors the percentage of Republicans because I I'm sadly concerned they're none or very few. Thank you. I yield back. I thank the gentleman. I recognize gentleman from California,
Representative Tano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, I want to associate myself with the remarks of my colleague Suzanne Bonamichi. I know of no member who exemplifies more the
principle of takun alone than than her to repair the world. uh and I saw some rolling of the eyes which is a an of course a entitled people are entitled to their opinions and we are a country have
different viewpoints and we must we must seek uh not only tolerance but encouragement of a difference of a of a of a point of view. Um I too condemn anti-semitism unequivocally. I condemn Islamophobia
unequivocally. I condemn all discrimination based on religion and universities must set that principle. But you know we have a system we have in place legal mechanisms to uh
to hold the universities accountable who receive federal money uh to uh hold them accountable for discrimination that occurs on the basis of religion. Mr. poll. If a student or faculty member feels that their title six civil rights,
you know, their their ability to not be discriminated based on their religion, that those title six rights have been violated, what federal agency is tasked with the investigation of their claim and enforcement of civil rights law, the office of civil rights of the
department of education. So, the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights, which prior to the Trump administration was the largest federal agency tasked with the enforcement of civil rights in the country, and that would include Title Six rights, which involve religious discrimination. That's
right. Uh, how many OCR field offices have been closed under the Trump administration? Uh, my understanding is seven of the 12. So, more than half have been closed. Seven of the 12. In the remaining offices, we hear anecdotally that some attorneys are being tasked with up to 300 cases per staffer. How
long do typically does one case take to get resolved? It can take a very long time to get resolved. And if you cut the uh the uh staff in half, it's going to take twice as long. And why does it take so long? You mentioned earlier in testimony, it it takes so long for a
couple of reasons. One is you actually have to look at the facts. Not make broad allegations as this committee seems to do, but rather look at the actual facts of what happened. Assess both sides of the story, not just one.
Um uh then then make a determination as to whether it is actually discrimination. Then if it actually constitutes discrimination, then you um you go to the university and you say, "How did you respond?" And if the university responded by holding a
hearing and making an assessment, that's that no violation has occurred. Only if the university was deliberately indifferent, ignored the violation and and established violation is it is it responsible. So you have to actually have a fair hearing. You have to look at
the facts. You have to hear both sides, not simply come into a a a committee room and make broad allegations without any assessment of what the actual facts are. Thank you, Mr. Cole. I note here that we have universities that are near San
Francisco, Chicago, and Philadelphia. All three of those offices of the of OCR, Office of Civil Rights for the Department of Education, those field offices have been closed. So what would happen to a student who had a claim of
religious discrimination in any one of these three universities? What is their recourse now? I don't I don't think they have much recourse. So the concern over this committee about anti-semitism in reality seems to be
very hollow and empty because they're not concerned about how you actually uh investigate and adjudicate a claim of religious discrimination. Am am I correct? Right. They should be calling uh sec secretary of education McMahon before the committee and asking her uh
why she has decimated the very office that is supposed to be enforcing anti-discrimination law. Uh Mr. Cole, do you do you view universities as kind of a kind of places of independence that
government should not be imposing its politics on on a university? I mean I I heard implied here that maybe there should be some influence over who gets hired as faculty. Yeah. And not only do I believe that, but the Supreme Court
believes that. It has said that academic freedom is a special concern of the first amendment. And what academic freedom means is that government officials, including members of Congress, don't have the power to decide that a particular university has too many liberal professors or too many
conservative professors. That is for the university to decide. It does not empower members of this committee to complain about DEI programs that they don't like. That is for the university to decide under academic freedom under the core principle of the first
amendment that universities make these decisions, not politicians. I yield back. Thank I thank the gentleman. I now recognize the gentle lady from New York. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. Thank you. A question for each of you. Is calling for the genocide of Jews protected speech on your campus? Starting with Havford? No, of course not. And what disciplinary action has been taken or would be taken if someone made that call?
Representative, there have been no such calls and we would use all of our disciplinary actions to follow that follow through on any such call. I would never expect that to happen at Havford and if it would, we would deal with that swiftly. Well, let me ask you a specific question then. There was a student group
on Havford's campus who called for the complete dismantling of the apartheid settler colonial state of Israel by all means necessary. What does by all means necessary mean to you? Invoking that kind of terminology is
repugnant because of what it can mean and I will not So does that depend on the context? I will not defend that statement. So what disciplinary action was taken against that group or those individuals who made that
call? Any disciplinary action? Was there any disciplinary action taken against that group or those individuals? Those kinds of statements are I'm not asking you if they're repugnant. I'm asking about the disciplinary action. You were the one
university president who failed to lay out if any disciplinary action has been taken if any suspensions or expulsion. So I am asking you was there any disciplinary action taken? Disciplinary action can include expulsion and I'm not asking what it can
include. I'm asking was it taken? I will not be talking about individual cases here and I'm saying that that is so have there been any disciplinary actions taken by Havford related to anti-semitism any disciplinary actions
are absolutely in our work have they been taken against anti-semitism have they been taken by Havford yes there have been some I want to ask you another example there was a professor of mathematics and statistics who posted after the October nomber 7th Hamas
terrorist attacks. Quote, "We should never have to apologize for celebrating these scenes of an imprisoned people breaking free from their chains. This was a historic moment to be recorded in their history books. Jewish students have reported that you said this post could be quote perceived in many ways.
Does this post simply depend on the context, President Rabin, and were there any disciplinary actions taken against this professor?" Such posts have been incredibly harmful to our entire community and I disavow
them and that outcome for us. Was there an investigation of the professor? Investigations happen in all such cases. So yes, in this case, investigations happen in all such cases as I have said
and we follow. This is a simple question. The other presidents are answering this straightforward as to disciplinary action. Again, these university presidents who are former presidents failed to answer these direct questions. In this case, was there disciplinary action taken or an investigation of this professor?
Respectfully, representative, I will not be talking about individual cases. Respectfully, President of Havford, many people have sat in this position who are no longer in the positions as president of universities for their failure to answer straightforward questions. Another question I have because this is
a theme at Havford. There was an administrator who said that quote racial minority students have never felt safe at Havford and that Jewish perspective students should not expect to feel safe and should instead be brave. This was according to litigation against your college. Was there any investigation
into this administrator for making those statements? That report does not reflect the administrators that I know who stand strongly with me and the entire college against anti-semitism. So that didn't happen is your position. Did that was
that statement not made by that administrator? That statement does not comport with those administrators that I know. I'm not asking if it comports with the administrators that you know. I'm saying, is it your testimony that that statement did not happen even though it's coming out in
litigation? So, are you saying it did not happen? What I am saying is that I cannot imagine that happening from those colleagues of mine. Well, let me ask you, if it did happen, what disciplinary action would Havford take against that
administrator? At Havford, we do not tolerate discrimination or harassment or bias. And what does that mean not tolerate? Does that mean suspension, firing of that individual? What does that mean?
It means following all of our policies which begin with investigation and then can lead to any of the aspects that you that you listed. For the American people watching, you still don't get it. Havford still doesn't get it. It's a
very different testimony than the other presidents who are here today who are coming with specifics. So, uh, again, this is completely unacceptable and it's why this committee has stepped in because higher education has failed to address the scourge of anti-semitism
putting Jewish students at risk at Havford and other campuses across the country. I yield back. I thank the gentle lady. I recognize now the gentle lady from North Carolina. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I mean, as a former college professor, I really hate to see that we're threatening uh our our um
leadership of these schools. But thank you, Mr. Chair. We're here today to discuss something that should never never be up for debate. Every student, regardless of background, deserves uh to feel feel safe and welcome and protected on campuses, on all campuses. And that
includes Jewish students, that includes Muslim students, that includes every student. Anti-semitism is real. It's rising and it has no place uh in our schools, our communities, or in our country. And I want to be real clear about that. But this week, my office and
I met with a group of Jewish students from Colombia. Students who came to Washington, not to cause controversy, but to be heard. And they told me what they're living through. Jewish students denied housing after participating in a protest. Religious observances
disrupted. students locked out of dining halls during kosher Passover or unable to gather for Shabbat. Uh others disciplined for simply wearing shirts that say ice off campus. And perhaps most troubling, uh students forced into
anti-semitism training led by someone who really wasn't even Jewish. Uh I share these stories uh not to spark outrage, but but because they're real. Uh but I believe that we cannot confront hate uh unless we listen to the people living with it. And so when Jewish
students say that they feel unsafe, we have to take that seriously. And that also means upholding civil rights under title six, not replacing legal standards with with partisan scorecards. And that means resourcing the office uh for civil
rights, not cutting it. And that means fostering interfaith efforts that build bridges, not eliminating uh DEI programs that were designed to create belonging for everyone. And let me just say that plainly, Jewish safety and free
expression are not mutually exclusive. Uh we can and and we must protect both. And that's why I was encouraged to hear about Calpali's interfaith center, a space designed to include Jewish students, not just in name, but in purpose. And because when students
gather across faiths and and backgrounds to talk, to grieve, to organize together, that's how we that's how we build resilience. And that's how we push back against hate. And that's how we remind each other that the loudest voice aren't loudest voices aren't always the
ones speaking for all of us. And so today, I do want to urge our committee to move forward carefully. Let's not act on faith, not fear. Let's not address hate. uh not weaponize it or let's address hate and not weaponize it and let's protect students not politicize
their pain. It's prevention. It's education and it's showing every student from the Ivy League to the community college that they belong. Uh Dr. uh Raymond um we've seen members of this committee and even the president uh
blame diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts uh for the rise of anti-semitism on college campuses. But but I've always believed DEI when done right help build understanding and safety for all students. So my question, how is your
campus making sure that anti-semitism is directly addressed in your inclusion efforts, not ignored or sidelined? And and how do we do you ensure that Jewish students feel seen, included, and protected in the e in these efforts? And have you found that this kind of work uh
supports Jewish student safety rather than undermines it? Inclusion work at Havford is just that. It includes everyone. We are committed to supporting all students in our Jewish community and all of our Jewish
community. And our work in inclusion and belonging is exactly that. We have three Jewish student groups on the campus who are very active. We have an active staff and faculty Jewish group and all those
come under the over the arch the and the ark of inclusion and belonging. Thank you very much Dr. Armstrong. uh in your written testimony, you noticed that Calpali is establishing an interfaith center which includes participation from
Jewish students and I've heard from students across the country who've said that their interfaith spaces when done thoughtfully uh can make a real difference. So could you share a little bit more about how that initiative was developed, who was involved, and how has it helped build
trust or provide support for students who may feel targeted, especially in this tense moment on so many campuses? Well, thank you for that question. Uh we've been working over a number of years to make sure all students have a way to connect. We've been talking with
Habad and Hell about this project as well as other religious leaders for several years. And you know co and uh like many things slowed us down a bit but we view that as an opportunity where students can come together where they can have the dialogue. Uh we recently had a
presentation that uh brought together a Palestinian and an Israeli view and it was university and hell habad and hell participating in that. Thank you sir. I'm out of time and Mr. Chairman I'm going to have to yield back. I thank the
gentle lady. She yields back. I now representative Miller, the gentle lady from Illinois. Thank you, President Manuel. Of the three schools represented here today, Depal had the worst
encampment. From the days the tents went up, the encampment on Depal's campus was a hotbed of anti-semitism. Signs featuring terrible anti-semitic slogans and images glorifying terrorism were displayed in
the encampment. We saw images of a flag depicting the spokesman of the terrorist group Hamas. We saw a sign that said, "Jewish safety cannot be achieved until Palestine is freed." There were reports of people at the encampment threatening
to to slit Jews throats. one student walking through the university. Well, there were a thousand complaints from students in the community. The encampment remained in place for 17 days. President Manuel, how many
students were suspended for their conduct at the encampment? Thank you for the question. the security and safety of our students is the top priority in that moment. The moment we realized that safety uh was
being jeopardized, we moved with Chicago Police Department to abandon the encampment. Please know that our public safety officers are not sworn officers and we need to work with CPD to make that happen. In review of of the encampment, there were eight groups, eight student groups that were brought
in for uh investigation. Two of them were immediately suspended and put on probation, which means they can't access um university resources, including financial resources. There were two student I'm sorry, there were two people that were arrested. I believe one of
them was a was a student in the aftermath of that. But what what happened in the aftermath of that is we realized our inadequacies in in that moment and were able to put together a culture of accountability that includes new masking and ID policies, new time,
place and manner policies and since that moment we've been able to repel four uh such efforts for outside entities to come and take over campus properties. I'm glad to know that you are moving forward on better policies. So, you're
saying that this encampment remained in place for 17 days and there were $500,000 worth of property damage and you were only able to suspend two students. I'm saying that the the lessons we learned from that moment students two
students were arrested. I mean, not arrested, suspended. Uh, two student groups were suspended. Two stu two people were arrested. I believe one was a student for $500,000 worth of damage in 17 days. You got two. Woo. Okay. The
DEPAL's student conduct code also states dismissal as a permanent separation from the university. How many students were dismissed from DEPAL as a result of the encampment? Our codes have been updated as a result of what we've learned from the
encampment. from that encampment. I don't believe any students were permanently dismissed or expelled. But the new accountability code we have has has prevented these action. Before you have your new accountability code, uh you didn't have anything in place where
a student was could be dismissed for violence, violent speech, and for causing $500,000 worth of damage. anybody who caused violence or damaged property could go through that process. Regarding the encampment, that's where
we learned that we need to do better at applying ourselves to those policies. And that's where the policy engagements came came in place. That's where the changes. There were a thousand complaints, 16 instances of intimidation, four credible threats of
violence, 77 reports of individual safety concerns, four allegations of battery, 13 harassment allegations, and at least one death threat. And you allowed this encampment to continue for 17 days, and two people were suspended.
None were dismissed. Again, President Manuel, during the encampment, one Jewish student told our committee last month that when she reached her dorm lobby, two students shouted at her, "We don't f with Zionists, even though she was not
wearing anything to publicly indicate a Jewish or Israeli identity." She did not know either of them, but the incident made her think that they knew who she was. Were these individuals disciplined? every individual that was reported came
through our system was investigated and and results happened. I agree with you uh representative that so were they disciplined suspended or dismissed? I I I gave you the results of our of who was suspended and arrested. I don't know of
all the incidents that were there. I will tell you that the numbers that you mentioned were on a website that I released so that I could educate the community about the dangers of that encampment. That's when we learned we had to do better and we had to create a culture of accountability. So much of the information I read earlier regarding
hundreds of complaints and violent anti-semitic signage had been posted online. However, the university has taken that website down. Gentle lady's time is expired. Thank you. Need move on. I recognize uh
gentleoman from Georgia, Miss McMath. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh thank you, Mr. chair and also ranking member Scott. And thank you to our witnesses for taking the time to be with us here today. I also want to thank the students, any
students that are with us, any students that are watching this morning. Uh, and I do say that I'm very, very sorry to those who are victims of hate crimes. My son Jordan was unfortunately killed in a racially motivated shooting.
So, I know what it's like for your family to be attacked solely because of who you are or how you were born. Anti-semitism remains a growing threat on college campuses today, but the
actions taken by President Trump and House Republicans seem to be motivated more by going viral on social media than rooting out anti-semitism and other forms of hatred on campus and in our
society. The actions taken and supported by the majority will not improve this situation. They will only foster distrust between ethnic and religious groups on and both off campus. Instead
of taking real steps to address anti-semitism, the majority has chosen to cut the funding and fire the federal employees that are tasked with responding to these incidents on our school grounds.
They have paused and threatened funding meant to protect synagogues and other Jewish community centers from shootings and other threats through the nonprofit security and targeting violence and terrorism prevention grant programs.
They have pardoned and defended the actions of violent felons and rabid anti-semmites, criminals that were directly involved in attacking police and killing an officer here on Capitol
Hill January 6th when white supremacists marched through the University of Virginia wielding torches with the purpose of publicly intimidating Jews and other minorities. The president said that they were very
fine people on both sides. They are not the actions of a party or a president who is engaging in good faith to address this very real crisis and problem. Any
attempt to explain away one of the oldest forms of ethnic and religious hatred solely for political gain is truly a disservice to the American people. It cheapens and it undermines the
centuries of sacrifice and interfaith struggle to build bridges and take the difficult but very necessary steps that will bring peace and allow people to practice their faith free from
intolerance. Fighting anti-semitism should not be used as a political tool. The work is simply too important and the stakes are simply too high. Today, my state is home to the largest Jewish
population in the deep south. Georgia 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-semitism in the history of this country, the lynching of Leo Frank. I have been to the halls of names at Yad Bashim in Jerusalem a number of times. It takes commitment from every single one of us to ensure
that the atrocities of the past never repeat themselves. I ask the American people and all those who care truly care about religious freedom in this country. All those who want this country to live up to the
promise that all of us every single one of us is created equal to compare what they hear from my Republican colleagues today to the actions that they take when the cameras aren't rolling. And I yield
back. I thank the gentle lady. I thank the gentle lady for her experience that informs her as well. Um, now I recognize a gentle woman from Michigan, Miss McClan. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. And I happen to agree with my colleague, actions speak louder than words, and we need action. And that's what I hope that we see here today, not just uh you know in the in the week leading up to this hearing, we all of a
sudden uh find a conscience and start action. Um so let me start with you uh Dr. Emanuel. On October 18th 23, Depal students for justice in Palestine held a rally calling for the inifat revolution
encouraging terrorist attacks to be perpetuated against Jewish civilians. On the same day, Jewish student leaders contacted Depal administrators expressing feelings of increasingly that saying they were increasingly scared that the safety and for the safety of
the Jewish community. Does that ring a bell? Okay. The following day, October 19th, 2023, pro- Hamas rallies on campus resulted in the physical assault of a Jewish student. Sound familiar? Six months later on April 29th 24 a pro
Palestinian and pro- Hamas mob occupied Depal's Lincoln Park campus. So there was an encampment encampment on April 29th. Correct. Correct. Did you remove or disable it on that day? No, we did
not. Okay. Why representative? We we we learned an awful lot from I'm not asking what you learned. I'm asking why you made the decision because I'm going to refer you to your policy that you
have in place. Why didn't you follow your policy? Our immediate instinct was to work with our students. The the reference How' that go? Not very well. You want to ask Michael how that went? Yeah, it did not go very well. Thank you. And I apologize for that. Your apologies are a little hollow. On May
10th, you issued a statement. So the encampment's still there. April 29th, it's now May 10th. On May 10th, you issued a statement titled quad safety concerns. So you knew there was a safety issue, hence is issuing the statement.
Here was the statement. You urged all members of the Depal community to avoid the quad. Well, that's great. again. Hey, let's make sure that we attack the lawabiding citizens but not
deal with the problem of the encampment. So you knew yourself there was a problem but decided not to remove it. Why? So that at that moment we realized that the security and safety of everybody was
in jeopardy. That is the moment that we decided to work with CPD to and it took you six days. Our public safety officer I mean no it took you six days because you knew it was dangerous. You didn't remove it on the 10th. You didn't remove it until 6 days later. So it took you
six days to coordinate an effort to to remove an encampment. It took us the moment we realized we went to CPD and asked for which was when when did you realize you had a problem? We started working with CPD from the first day so that they were aware of those situations. So three weeks. It took you
three weeks. It took us from the time you mentioned until the 16th or 17th to coordinate with CPD to get You think that's acceptable? I do not. And Okay. Wonderful. Wonderful. Wonderful. So I don't think the issue is more policies.
I think the issue is action. So the people that are in charge, would you say that that is an acceptable amount of time for action? I would agree with you that we need to do better. Great. So would you agree with me also that almost
three weeks from the 29th to the 16th is not an acceptable time for security to take action to disin disassemble an encampment. Would you agree with me on that? I would. And thank you very much. So, who has been fired or who has been
replaced? Because that doesn't seem real tough to me. Anybody? What we have learned? Anybody been replaced? Uh, there has been turnover. It's not I'm not asking turnover. What consequences happened for the people who were supposed to be in
charge? The development of our accountability. Any consequences? Yeah. Just were there. Let's start with a simple Let's start with a simple one. any consequences uh to student groups. Yes. Not no not to I'm talking to the people who it who
didn't follow your procedures of three weeks because let me just read it just in case you don't know your policy but let me read it. Um this is from your policy may not impede passage or in or out of any facility. May not involve activity that is violent or otherwise
threatens the safety of demonstrators or any members of the community. may not interfere with business or academics of the university. These are these are your policies that it that did anyone get like reprimanded for that? What I mentioned is that we have done
significant review and learned from this our count you don't need to do review did anyone was anyone held accountable other than Michael and his friend that that sustained a concussion and a broken wrist. So what actions changed? Because you got
great policies and you got great lip service. The problem is you need action. And unless you as the president of the university is willing to take action, not lip service. I can talk about working out all day long. But there's a lot difference between me working out
and me talking about it. So my question is if there is another encampment on that, are you taking it down that next day? Gentle lady's time is expired. Thank you. I thank the gentle lady and I recognize the gentleoman from Connecticut, Representative Hayes. Good morning and thank you to our
witnesses for being here and to all of the students who are following along and paying attention to this hearing. It is incredibly painful for me as a member of Congress to sit and
witness anti-semitism and discrimination against students on college campuses being politicized over and over and over again. As the ranking members stated, we've had eight hearings on this topic. There are members on the other side who
only show up for hearings on this topic. And yet no real action has been done. When we talk about actions that are taken, I I heard members talking about property damage. There was over $2 billion in property damage and expenses
to taxpayers as a result of January the January 6 insurrection. And the president gave sweeping clemency to 1600 people. And it's been celebrated by the other side. Confederate flag was flown inside of the United States capital for the first time
in our history and the people who did that are being celebrated. So we have to take a stand against discrimination in all forms on this committee and all students on all campuses should feel free from
discrimination and protected and have their right to learn in an environment. To the college presidents, you will find no safe harbor here if you have not taken actions and steps to ensure that students are
safe on your campuses. All students, hostility and prejudice against Jewish students is wrong. And similarly, other protected class other students who are not feeling safe on on
campuses is also wrong. And this committee has done nothing. Actually, some of the actions taken by this committee have targeted some of those students and literally made them unsafe on campus. So, we think
we need to all agree that discrimination is intolerable on college campuses and you have a duty and a responsibility to ensure that the civil rights of students are protected. I have a bunch of questions but because I want to know about actions, but just please yes or no. I'm
going to just go down. Um, Dr. Raymond, are you prioritizing the physical safety of students on your campus today? Yes, safety is top priority. Dr. Emanuel, do you believe that teaching
the history of discrimination, even when it's painful, is incredibly important for our institutions of higher education? Yes. Dr. Cole, have you clarified and publicized the rules surrounding campus protests for all students to see?
I'm not speaking here on behalf of Georgetown, but we have a clear policy at Georgetown. Is it publicized? Absolutely. It's on our It's on our website. I was the chair of the working group on free speech and campus culture. Um uh we we believe in
free speech and we believe in protecting people from discrimination and we believe in making a distinction between the two which unfortunately many members of this committee do not believe in. Thank you. Dr. Armstrong, have you implemented implemented reporting
mechanisms for incidents of bias on your campus? Yes. Dr. Dr. Raymond, have you clarified and raised awareness around university standards for anti-discrimination educational programs?
Yes, we have. Dr. Emanuel, do you believe that it is it is important that students see themselves reflected in the faculty at your university? I do. I ideologically and and uh every
other category as well. Yes, Dr. Cole, not on behalf of your university, but are students allowed to connect and engage with members in faith-based groups on campus so that they can express their ideas and ideologies in a
protected way. In on every campus that I'm aware of? Yes. Thank you. Dr. Armstrong, have you convened a task force to combat anti-discrimination on campus? Yes. Dr. Emanuel, do you understand the role
of the Office of Civil Rights at the the role that the Office of Civil Rights at the Department of Education plays in protecting students from discrimination at colleges and universities? And do you think that this would be helpful as you move forward trying to keep students safe on campus? I do and the OCR has
been very helpful in helping us understand how to comply with the law. Thank you. And with that, I think that this committee should be working on keeping OCR together to help you enforce these policies moving forward so that all students are protected on college
campuses. With that, I yield back. I thank the gentle lady. Now, I recognize the gentleman from North Carolina, Representative Harris. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and uh thank you to all the panelists that have been a part of this today for your perseverance and your uh your time. Uh I want to address a
question uh to President Raymond. President Raymond, days after the October 7th attack on Israel, Haverford College released a statement that highlighted, quote, tragedies across the globe that had occurred, quote, since the start of the semester. The email
mentioned earthquakes in Morocco and Afghanistan, wildfires in the United States and Canada, and a two-year long war in Ukraine. The email only made a passing reference, and I quote, the outbreak of war in Israel and Gaza that
had taken place just 48 hours before. We all know in this room, October 7th was not a mutual quote outbreak of war between two countries. In fact, it was a terrorist attack by Hamas on Israel. Babies were butchered, women were raped,
1,200 innocents were slaughtered, and over 250 people were kidnapped. I have to ask, why did Havford lack the moral clarity to immediately and clearly condemn the attack on Israel?
Representative Harris, we did condemn the attack by Hamas on Israel and it was not. You are correct in that email which I was responsible for and I would do it differently now. This is an example of a
difficult period of learning where I did not get it right. Okay. So you you say in your testimony, and I read your testimony beforehand, the written testimony we received, that uh quote, "Any failures and fractures at Havford are ultimately my responsibility as
president." So do you take responsibility for this failure to call the attack what it was immediately? I take responsibility for the judgment about that communication. That's right.
Okay. Well, on January 4th, 2024, an anonymous author, presumably a Havford student, published an article on the political science department website expressing dismay for the response of the campus to October 7th. The article
highlights the morally bankrupt responses of students to the violence, for example, sharing how students posted phrases like, quote, "Freedom has only ever been achieved through resistance. stand with Palestinian resistance." End quote. The author wrote in reaction to
seeing these statements posted on his or her classmates that quote, "Up until October 7th, I had truly believed that at a liberal arts institution like Havford, there was no place for anti-semitism. But I do not know how else to label cheering the death of
innocent Jews." Many students, student activists across the country have used the slogan, resistance is justified when people are occupied as their motivation for praising the violence that was perpetrated against Israel. I ask you,
President Raymond, yes or no. Was the October 7th attack on Israel justified? Absolutely not. Thank you, ma'am. No. And I agree. And it's good to hear you confirm that. And I certainly hope and
pray that students around the country, including those enrolled at Havford, come to realize this very thing as well. I I want to turn in my last minute or so um to President Emanuel. I want to ask you a series of questions if I will.
Have there been violent protest on your campus in response to the war in Sudan? Uh not that I'm aware of. Did Depal experience encampments over the war in Ukraine? Also, not that I'm aware of. Have there
been chance calling for the eradication of other people groups on your campus besides the Jewish people? Again, not that I'm aware of. Thank you, sir. I I think we all know why there is no such focus on the world. Why there is
such a focus on the world's only Jewish state. Unfortunately, anti-semitism has been spreading like wildfire among our nation's campuses. And as a result, anything Israel does to defend itself and its people faces increased scrutiny
that no other nation on earth seems to face. I'm glad we're having this hearing today, and I commend our chairman for helping us shine a light on this very important problem that is plaguing American higher education. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back my
time. I thank the gentleman. I recognize gentleman from Texas, Mr. Casar. The Republican majority has called a hearing on anti-semitism. And so I have some questions for my colleagues on the
committee. Donald Trump said after neo-Nazis marched through Charlottesville that there were quote very fine people on both sides. If you condemn Donald Trump saying this, will you raise your hand? RFK, the head of Health and Human
Services, spread an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory that COVID was engineered to target white and black people, but spare Jewish people. If you condemn the head of the US Health
and Human Services for spreading this anti-Semitic conspiracy theory, will you please raise your hand? Nobody. I'd suggest the hearing is to question the witnesses that are here who have spent time and energy to come here. I have a question for you, Mr. Chairman.
So, I think the the questioning is Mr. Chairman, will you condemn I'm not on the witness stand, M. Mr. Chairman, my this is my time and I'm happy to ask you then. Would you condemn Donald Trump for pardoning a January 6th rioter who praised Hitler and encouraged more
killing of Jewish people? Mr. Chairman, since you just used some of my time, you can use more of it. Will you condemn Trump for pardoning an anti-Semitic rier? I'm seeing four witnesses waiting for your question. I'm I'm asking you a question, Mr. Chairman. Your microphone
works. Do you condemn this? Um, I will yield time to the witnesses to answer questions that are pertinent. So clearly, Mr. Chairman, not a single Republican today has been willing to condemn any of this anti-semitism. Unfortunately, the party
of very fine people on both sides or Jewish space lasers does not give a damn about stopping anti-semitism. If my Republican colleagues want to stop the spread of anti-semitism, maybe they should stop apologizing for and promoting
anti-semites. And with all due respect to the congresswoman from New York who's back to join us. If Republicans want to fight anti-semitism, they shouldn't go graveling to the most anti-semitic president in modern American history. They shouldn't be trying to quell
questions about the anti-semitism that we see at the White House and in the cabinet at the Department of Health and Human Services. In my city of Austin, swastikas have been drawn on the doors of school houses. Synagogues have been
firebombed. Anti-semitism is an assault on our community safety and on all of our values. And we could do something to combat anti-semitism. In Congress, we could strengthen the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights, but instead, Trump has cut it, and my
Republican colleagues have done nothing about it. Congress could strengthen anti-hate crime programs to address anti-Semitic violence. Trump has cut those programs. Again, Republican members of Congress done nothing about it. We could fully fund the security
programs we have for Jewish nonprofits and synagogues, but Trump has frozen those programs. So, Republicans have called this hearing on anti-semitism, but they've cut back our ability to address hate crimes, have cut back our ability to protect synagogues, have cut
back our ability to protect students from discrimination. But what they have ramped up is deporting students for writing opeds in their campus newspaper advocating for peace. What they have ramped up is arresting
non-violent professors and students, Jewish and non-Jewish, just because they dare talk about the killing and starvation in Gaza. This hearing called by the Republican majority is all about Trump Republicans distorting the definition of
anti-semitism to silence anyone, including Jewish students, who speak out nonviolently against what the Israeli government is doing. The Republican plan is not about keeping Jewish students safe. It's about keeping the Israeli government safe from any form of
criticism. That is a disservice to the truth. It is a disservice to us and our job as members of Congress, and it's a disservice to the safety of everyone, including and especially Jewish Americans. I yield back. The gentleman yields. And now I
recognize the uh chairman emeritus of this committee, gentle lady from North Carolina, Miss Fox. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank our witnesses for being here today. President Raymond, in August 2024, Guanchinha, a religion
professor at Havford wrote on X that quote, "The state of Israel must be dismantled and the society denazified. Zionism is Nazi. It is fascism. Zionists are racist. Professor Ha also wrote, quote, "The only way to
deal with Zionists is to stop talking to them and refuse to let them waste your time. Liberal Zionist in particular, and I learned a new term, reluctant Zionist, and I guess there were plenty of reluctant Nazis, too. Perhaps a majority
of them were." End quote. Do you believe there's a distinction between anti-sionism and anti-semitism? Representative Fox, first of just a quick answer, yes or no? I want to say that we support all of our Zionist students, staff, and
faculty at Havford, and we are squarely against anti-semitism. Do you believe anti-ionism is any more acceptable than anti-semitism? Anti-semitism is unacceptable. There is no place for it. How about anti-ionism?
There is room for criticizing the is the government of any nation. Yeah. But the state of Israel has existed for almost uh um 80 years under the premise of anti-Zionism. A Jewish state as exists today shouldn't
exist. Is that what you believe that Jew that Israel should not exist? Pardon me. That is not at all what I said or what I meant here. Okay. So what are anti-ionists actually advocating for when the Jewish state has existed for
nearly 80 years? 80 decades, excuse me, eight decades. I do not support those statements at all. But that's a professor at your university. On the extreme, this means the genocide of Israelis. At the very
least, it reveals national origin discrimination violations if done in programs or activities in higher ed. Dr. Raymond, do you believe that Professor Ha's insistence that Zionists shouldn't be engaged with and that they should be compared to Nazis could be a violation
of Department of Education civil rights protections? Yes or no? We do not tolerate discrimination, harassment, or bias at Hford College. And Dr. For Dr. Armstrong. According to reports, Calpaliy's history department hosted UC
Berkeley professor Yusama McDesi, a self-avowed anti-ionist. Do you believe anti-ionism could constitute national origin discrimination? Yes or no? Yes. Dr.
Manual pre uh does Depal University support BDS. We do not and we've come out uh strongly against it at least in the two and a half years that I've been there including a rebuke of a student uh government. Um um and have will you will
you supply that uh statement to me after this? I would be happy to. Dr. Armstrong. Does Cali support BDS? No. Dr. Emanuel, in it's my understanding you gave into some demands made by the
student coalition behind Depal's violent anti-semitic anti-semitic May 24 encampment. Even though the encampment had to be forcibly removed, the encampment coalition demanded that Depal eliminate quote discriminatory study
abroad program trips to Israel that propagandize and normalize that occupation end quote. As you may know, this has been a key goal of anti-semitic BDS activists at universities across the US. In June, Depal said it agreed to
discuss inclusivity with regard to its Israel study abroad program. Does inclusivity mean, what does it mean in this context? Thank you for the question. The 10 demands that were delivered by the
students were rejected and none of them were adhered to. None of them were agreed to. Okay. What my question is, what does inclusivity mean? I I I believe that the program you're talking about, the students were concerned that there was a limitation on
who could take it based on visas given from Israel. Uh and we still support that program. Do you commit you commit to continuing the university study abroad program in Israel? We commit to studying to to continuing all study abroad programs uh through and and
compliant with the law. Do you reject do you commit to rejecting changes that demonize or delegitimize Israel? Yes. And do you commit to ensuring that the study abroad program affirms the Jewish people's right to self-determination?
Uh yes. I believe self-determination and the right for Israel to exist is is a primary function. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. I thank the gentle lady. I recognize the gentleman from Georgia, Representative Allen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to
thank our witnesses for being here today. U obviously, and you've heard this over and over, we're all extremely troubled by the anti-semitic activities occurring on college campuses across the country. Our country's made tremendous strides in uh
uh you hopefully getting along with our friends uh from all over the world and uh our institutions of higher education uh seem to be serve serving as breeding grounds for anti-semitic activities. Uh
this anti-semitic rhetoric has reached institutions beyond just the so-called elite schools like Colombia or Harvard which we had we questioned uh uh some time ago. Uh as I stated before is the oldest most established democracy in the
region. Israel exemplifies the core values of freedom and democracy. Uh Jerusalem is the center of the universe. A lot of people think Washington is but uh that's where it's going to happen. Uh and of course uh you know for those who are familiar with the
the Bible, a book of uh of uh the word of God uh uh Genesis 12:3 states, "I will bless those who bless you." Talking about Israel and whoever curses you, I I will curse. And that is a serious issue.
In fact, uh it also goes on to say that all nations will be blessed uh through Israel. In fact, in John 4:22, Jesus said, "Salvation even for Gentiles will come through the
Jews." And so, Dr. Paul, this is a serious serious issue we're talking about. In fact, it has eternal consequences. Uh, and and uh I mean, Depal President, Dr. Robert Manuel. With
that being said, the anti-Semitic extrem extremist group behind enemy lines continues to trespass on Depal's campus and harass Jewish students. This is the same group that made a wanted poster featuring a Jewish Israel Israeli
Israeli student at DEPAL. In January, the group handed out flyers on campus that urged students to get dangerous. Then just this past March, the group was able to infiltrate a Depal building as part of its week of defiance. Dr. Emanuel, were any arrests
made in either of these instances? Thank you for the question, Representative. Once we saw that post, we immediately trespassed Beel from our campus. We're an urban campus with many public streets and right ofways. We're working with our elected officials to
see if there's not more we can do to stop the harassment of BEAL against our students. Uh so uh were any of these students arrested? Again, we we kept BEAL from being on our campus and on a number of occasions where they were involved in protests. Uh
our relationship with CPD prevented them from coming onto our campus uh to engage our students. So what are you doing to pre prevent this from happening again? uh we are training our public safety officers. We're working with the alderman, the elected officials in our
area to see if we we can't get uh broader protections in the public space. And we continue to report things like you mentioned in the social media both to the FBI and to the CB and to Chicago police. Uh President Raymond, let's talk about restorative practices uh a group
to resolve discip disciplinary issues uh in your university. The directors of the group, Dr. on Mckenry and Dr. Jill Staer both publicly support the academic bar boycott of Israel and um and Dr. Dr. McHenry is a member of the Havford
faculty for justice in Palestine and in December 24 liked an Instagram pa post glorifying a member of the popular front of the liberation of Palestine a US designed terrorist organization with a history of murdering Jews with the caption reading from the river to the
sea Palestine will be free. Uh would a Jewish student feel comfortable uh with Dr. Mckenry leading restorative practice giving her glorification of violence against Israel. Representative, we are committed to supporting our entire Jewish
community. We are proud of it and intersections with all aspects of our disciplinary processes are ones that I take very seriously. They must be done well.
Well, it would seem that you would put into practice uh those things that I mean you're we're hear I mean we're hearing and and and it's been the testimony is correct about what's going on on these campuses but you know the
action that we're hearing you know like I said we got to fix this and so uh with that I'll yield back Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman. I recognize the gentleman from from Utah, vice chairman
of this committee, Representative Owens. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh it is really unfortunate that it's been over a year since our first hearing on anti-semitism. A year and a half since October 7th and we're talking about still talking about rooting out anti-semitism on our college campuses.
The vision of our educational institutions from our very founding has been tied to the aspirations of our nation stating in the preamble of constitution to become a more perfect union. We are failing our kids. What are we getting instead? Students graduating with enormous debt knowing nothing about
our country's history, culture, vision, or sacrifices. Students who are angry, lacking common sense and common decency toward anyone who looks different than them or holds different a different opinion. Our educational institutions become the feeding grounds for Marxists,
an ideology that horrors our culture of faith, family, the free market, and wisdom through education. Young people who supposedly be our future leaders are being taught to hate America and hate Israel. And they have no shame in
running around in gangs, hiding their faces as they burn and break other people's property. They intimidate, threaten, and attack people who they don't know because they've been taught to hate by their college professors. These cowardly bullies feel no threat
about accountability because apparent the adults in charge have empowered them to negotiate their anti-semitism, anti- sympatic views on their terms. We're seeing too many words and too little action. As an observation, as someone
who grew up in the deep south, 1960s Jim Crow uh deep south, the KKK would have loved the environment that we're now seeing on too many of our colleges, and many of them would have graduated with honors. With our new administration, a majority in the House and the Senate,
this is going to come to a screeching halt. Accountability is back. Um Dr. Raymond uh Harson's social honor code which students are required to pledge to commit states that the acts of
discrimination, microag microaggression and harassment including and not limited to acts of racism, sexism, hope homophobia, homophobia, transphobia, classism, abbleism, which I have no idea what that is, tokenism, culture in
insens insensitivity, demonstration de uh u discrimination based on citizenship status, discrimination based on religion and discrimination based on natural origin, accent, dialect or usage of the English
language are devoid of respect and therefore by definition violate this code. First of all, uh doctor, who who made who made up this code? Who who the authors of this code of uh of conduct?
Our honor code which is both governing our social action and academics at Havford is written by students and approved by sounds like I then take responsib um that have been taught how to be Marxist by the way. Um this part
of this is the uses of the lang of the English language is that now a form of discrimination? I see this in the code. um the usage of the language, English language. What does that have to do with the code of of conduct?
We are in actively revising that code to better meet the moment. All right. Um they also state that habit students commit to being a second here. Commit to being actively
anti-racist and particularly commit to rejecting antilackness. recognizing white privilege, challenging structures of whiteness and white comfort, and crediting the work of black, indigenous, and people of color, and especially
women of color. Uh, so are Jewish people considered white privilege by chance. We do not tolerate any discrimination or bias at the college. And as I said, that code is under active revision. I I would
suggest that you put somebody in charge that are adults. All right? Because obviously this is from folks who've been trained how to hate and now it's becoming a policy of the college which should not be acceptable. Um uh Dr. Emanuel, uh first of all, I'm impressed with the actions you you're you're
saying you're going to take. We look forward to following up on that. Uh I think part of the problem is what's the teaching that's going on in between. You have someone uh Taran Webb who made this uh some very appalling statements about Jewish people. Uh says this historical
fact that American Jewish immigrants have been have always been the foundational building block for white supremacist infrastructure in this country. He also said the state of Israel much like us is facilitating a white supremacist racial cast. Let me
just say this. Leadership has to figure out how to get rid of this rot within your colleges. It's great to say these great things, but if you have people that hate our kids and hate each other and teach that uh it's not going to change. We have to we'll have to address it on the federal level. We can't change
it on on your on your area. Okay. So, with that, I back I yield back. I thank the gentleman. I now recognize the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Mesmer. Uh thank you, Mr. Mr. Chairman, and thank you for the witnesses for being here today. Uh, President Raymond, despite
your opening statement that you condemn anti-semitism, multiple Jewish students on the campus you preside over report feeling ostracized for the sole fact they're Jewish. Do you think Herford still has an anti-semit anti-semitic problem? Representative, I know that the effects
of what have what has happened at Havford have been very concerning to me and to many of our Jewish students, staff, and faculty. It's been a troubling time for many of us, and we are working to combat anti-semitism.
Okay. Well, other than describing as it being anti-semitic, how else would you describe a campus where a Jewish student wrote that the multiple classmates have refused to speak to me after learning I'm Jewish? or how could you possibly interpret signs at a protest that say decolon decolonization is not a
metaphor. Those Harvard faculty and students participating in these acts are sending a clear message to the Jewish student body or anyone any student with ties to Israel. You're not welcome here and extermination of Israel and the Jewish people who have sought refuge there is our goal. This is a very
serious matter. One student said they felt sa they felt safer in Israel which is a combat zone than attending your school in the fall. They wrote, "I'm scared I'm not going to learn and I'm not going to be safe." President Raymond, are you comfortable with Havford driving away
Jewish students who have been accepted admission or are you going to establish more useless listening sessions and ad hoc committees while putting out bland statements approved by lawyers to cover your legal legal obligations? Is that really what Jewish students at Havford
deserve? What you read, representative, pains me deeply. Those experiences of our Hford students are not experiences that they should have on our campus or anywhere. And I I commit to the work of this
campus to making it a much more welcoming place for all of our Jewish students and staff and faculty. Thank you. Um, are protests calling for the genocides of Jews a violation of your university's rules or code of ethics? And if they are, and such
statements are made, what is the repercussion for students or faculty that make them? Such calls are horrific and absolutely not acceptable anywhere in the world. No such calls have been made at
Hford College. Any such calls would be of course followed up immediately with all of our disciplinary processes. And what would that discipline be? The discipline would be what that process would would
eventually call for. Okay. All right. Uh Dr. Manuel, how about how about at your university? If there's a protest calling for the genocide of Jews, what would what would be the replica replication for a student or faculty that made them? Thank you, Representative. Anybody who
would make those kind of statements for the genocide or killing of anybody would be immediately brought in put through our through through our adjudication processes. The result could be anything up to and including expulsion. Okay. Dr.
Dr. Armstrong, same thing. Yes, sir. U anyone calling for the death of any group or harassing or discriminating uh would be subject to discipline. And what would that discipline be? Well, for students it could be suspension. It could be if repeated expulsion. Uh and
then we also have procedures for our faculty and staff that could result in discipline. Okay. Thank you. Uh Dr. Emanuel, uh instead of checking IDs for protesters that are wearing masks, why don't you prohibit the wearing of masks for for those that are protesting? How
does that part of their their uh free speech rights? Thank you. uh we have uh people on our campus who are imuno compromised uh folks who have religious beliefs. We wanted to accommodate that. We also wanted to prevent people from evading
identification during critical moments on campus. What I mentioned in my ID masking policy that we adopted is part of the larger culture of creating accountability. the changes in our time, place, and manner, the additional 30%
spend on our public safety, the bringing in of the ADL expert to help with Jewish engagement. Together, they represent a change to action in the way that we hold ourselves accountable to our to our community. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for all being here, and I yield back my
time. I thank the gentleman. I recognize gentle lady from Minnesota, Miss Omar. Thank you, chairman. Uh it is abundant abundantly clear that the cynical work of the majority
party on this committee is now being expanded and weaponized by the administration seeking to squash dissent. We are seeing the heavy hand of the state through this administration and the body being brought down against
students and faculty for engaging in protected speech. We saw this in the case of Mahmud Khalil who on March 8th became one of the first student activists to be detained by ICE despite not being criminally charged and despite
the agents lying about having a warrant. We saw this in the case of Mahassen Mahadi who was abducted by ICE at a citizenship neutralization interview uh for his role in compass protest. We saw
this in the case of Romemesa um O Tuck who was accosted in broad daylight by a group of masked and and unidentified agents after writing a critical article in her student newspaper last year. And
there have been more. Georgetown um professor Badar Khan Suri, PhD candidate Ranjani Shiri Vazan, a 21-year-old student Yunan Jen and many more
political protest, anti-war protest, pro Palestinian protest. This is all protected speech under the First Amendment regardless of citizenship status. Using immigration authorities to target, abduct and illegally detain
non-citizens for their activism is clear violation of their rights and a hallmark of an authoritarian government. As Mahmud Khalil wrote from inside the Louisiana detention center where he remained for
60 days, who has the right to have rights? And as Mossen Mah Mahawadi um wrote after being freed from detention, when they look at my case, all Americans should ask themselves what
is left of our democracy and who will be targeted next. In 1987, almost 40 years ago, eight immigrants in Los Angeles were arrested as a result of their pro Palestinian activism. in a shockingly
similar circumstances as the arrestous and abductions by ICE that we are seeing today. Professor Cole, you legally represented the LA8 for 20 years against the US government. After the charges
were dismissed, the judge called the proceedings an embarrassment to the rule of law. What similarities have you seen between that cold war era case and the cases we are seeing today? and what findings were made at the time regarding
the first amendment rights of non-citizens? Thank you for that question. Um there are many parallels. Uh the charges actually against the group of Palestinian students back then initial charges were um being advocates of world communism. So the McCarthyism
uh trope was used against them at that time. Uh we challenged that um provision of the McCarron Walter Act in court arguing that uh all people in the United States have first amendment rights whether you're a citizen or a non-citizen. The Supreme Court has said
even corporations have speech rights because the first amendment protects speech not speakers. And the court agreed and struck down that provision of the McCarron Walter Act saying all persons including foreign nationals in this country have the same first
amendment rights. Makmoud Khalil has the same first amendment rights. Badar Khanssuri has the same first amendment rights. And yet this administration is targeting them for nothing more than speaking out in ways that the administration disagrees with. That is
contrary to the core principle of the first amendment. uh in the same way that the effort to use charges of anti-semitism to target act uh universities and try to micromanage how they discipline particular incidents uh
is uh contrary to the core conception of the first amendment. Mr. Cole, it is refreshing um Professor Cole, it's refreshing to have a witness who understands the illegitimate um McCarthyike approach the majority is
taking on this committee. For them, it is easy to target people's rights to speech and to assemble when they advocate for Palestine. It is easy to dismiss the rights of those who are not yet citizens. Professor Cole, from your
decades of experience as First Amendment scholar and champion, does it does it ever stop at the easy targets? Uh, no, it doesn't stop at the easy targets. And you can again look look back at McCarthyism. Uh, it was targeted
at a problem. Uh, there were communists in this country that were spying for our enemy. Um, but that's not what the McCarthy uh uh McCarthyism was about. But it was not about identifying those spies. It ultimately reached millions of Americans who were subjected to
investigations. People lost their jobs, were blacklisted merely for their ideas. The gentle lady's times expired. Yeah. And I I I I will say those who don't learn from history repeated. So, thank you so much. I thank the gentle lady. Now, I recognize gentleman from
California, Mr. Kylie. President uh Raymond, there's a uh professor on your faculty, uh Professor Mendelson. Is that correct? Yes. He's an Israeli professor and he has posted that Haverford College's student body is led by Hamas apologists
and tainted by a anti-semitism. He said, "If I am a parent of a Jewish student, I will not send them to Haverford College." Do you think there is reality reflected in his sentiments? I'm sorry, I didn't hear you. Do I do his sentiments reflect a reality on that campus?
I think that Professor Mendelson has the right to express himself as he wishes and I do not think that that expresses the overall reality at Havford. Was he investigated by your administration? I will not talk about individual investigations. Okay? I'm not asking you
the content of the investigation. I'm saying yes or no. Was this professor investigated? I will not talk about whether an individual I think we'll take that as a yes. You have professors who are making anti-semitic comments who are inciting violence. Rather than investigate them,
you investigate the Israeli professor who is calling attention to the horrors that are taking place on the campus. There was an incident in 2024 where you had uh posters for Habad events, for other events of the Jewish community, for anti-semitism events that that disappeared. And you said this was from
benign mechanisms and you said it was the wind. Was it the wind that caused the posters to come down? We We do not tolerate any discrimination or bias. Nowhere close to my question. Was it the wind that caused these posters to come down
like you said it was? When posters are taken down intentionally, not by the wind, then that would be anti- an odd kind of wind that only goes after one particular type of poster. There was also an event on your campus that you've acknowledged by the ADL, the Anti-Defamation League,
that was disrupted at an event specifically designed to counter anti-semitism. You had anti-semites that came and disrupted it. And apparently the only thing you had them do was write a letter of apology. Is that correct? Having that disruption of that anti-semitism awareness event was not
acceptable and and an horrible moment. We so all they had to do was write a letter of apology. Uh there was also uh apparently uh donuts were going to be ordered for commencement from a Jewish bakery. Uh a group of anti-semmites on campus asked for a boycott saying say no to blood donuts. Did you uh abide by
their calls for a boycott? We purchased and enjoyed those donuts. Did the students receive the donuts? They were eaten at commencement. They were eaten. That's an odd passive voice. Pardon me. Did the students get any?
They were available at commencement to students. They were Yes, they were available during the commencement. Okay. To students. We also uh had a takeover of Founders Hall take place on your campus. Uh and you said that you negotiated with
those who were involved in this, didn't you? I had conversations with those students when we brought that to a close. students who physically took over this building and in fact you said that the only punishment the only a consequences for them were restorative not punitive
action. Is that right? Restorative not punitive. When that disruption disrupted our campus activities according to our policies and our practices, we took we
closed that off and it ended. There was also an anti-semitism awareness basketball game that was organized, but the organizers were told that this might prove too antagonistic to the pro Palestinian students and the game didn't happen. Is that correct? We are committed to fighting
anti-semitism wasn't the question. Does was the game canceled? Were the students told that it would be too antagonistic to pro Palestinian students? That is not what happened. Can you look uh would you be able right now to look the parents of a prospective Jewish student in the eye and assure them that
their son or daughter would feel safe and welcome on your campus? I can assure all applicants to Havford College that we are a place that promotes inclusion and belonging for all. But you would you be able to look at parents of a prospective Jewish student and say your son or daughter
would feel safe and welcome on my campus? Yes, I would. But this is all uh Mr. Cole just McCarthyism to you, right? You've testified. You've likened our committee's anti-semitism investigation to the House unamerican activities
committee. Is that right? That's that's absolutely Have you Have you forgotten the hearing with say the Colombia president where during her testimony there was an illegal encampment that had taken over that campus? The House on American Activities Committee's problem was that it was dredging up distant
affiliations, real or imagined, in order to impugn people. Nothing could be more different than what's going on. I don't know if you've talked to the students at places like Haverford or Harvard or Northwestern or UCLA who are afraid to wear a Star of David, are afraid to wear a Yamaka, are afraid to express their
identity in any way because they'll be ostracized, they'll be subject to discrimination, to potentially acts of violence, who have to face checkpoints from anti-Semitic lunatics on the campus, not letting them even access public facilities or across the quad. Nothing could be more different. This is
a shocking problem that has engulfed much of higher education uh and had been building for many years, but in particular over the last year and a half. And I simply cannot believe that you would say that that this the Democrat witness from the ACLU would come here and liken this to McCarthyism.
We have a long way to go in the reforming higher education. I yield back. Can I respond? I thank the gentleman from Do I get to respond or No. Could the gentleman respond? Uh the gentleman can respond when he's given the opportunity. I now recognize gentleman from California, Mr. Donier.
Mr. Cole, I I want to give you a chance to respond on my time and I I I just want to agree with your sentiment and I'm taken by the comment in that point of history, have you no shame. And I'm sorry he's leaving. That's just
shameless behavior. So I'll give you a few minutes to explain. I guess he didn't want to hear the answer. apparently. Yeah. So, go ahead. If you need more time, it's all So, the answer is um of course there's a problem with anti-semitism. There's a problem with Islamophobia. There's a problem with
racism. There's a problem with sexism. This hearing, this set of hearings that this committee has engaged in is not a solution to that problem. Just as there was a problem with communist spies, we now have evidence that there were in
fact communist spies. But the McCarthy era and the HUAC hearings were not about that. They were about bringing people in, condemning them, uh, not looking into the facts, but making broad accusations. And I've heard that again
here today again and again lumping together criticism of Israel, which is protected speech with anti-semitism. Criticism of Zionism with which is protected speech with anti-semitism. no effort to discern disc
discern the difference between protected speech and discrimination. Our constitution requires that we make that distinction. This committee has not made any effort to make that distinction. That's why I draw the the comparison to
Huak and I completely agree with you and that comment to Senator McCarthy at that time I think is appropriate today. After all this, sir, do you have no shame? Because I actually think it makes a higher risk for violence on the campuses. Well, exactly. And we did
ultimately recognize that Joe McCarthy made a mistake and I think history will show that this committee followed and repeated that same mistake. Absolutely. Absolutely. I appreciate it. President Armstrong, I want to talk about what we've done in California and the University California system that some
of my colleagues are anxious to criticize. In your instance, um, as a member of the transportation committee, you're getting people out to help us spend that money that we did in the Biden administration to provide valuable resources to the economy and transportation. And you're you have one
of the highest returns on investment for students. When your graduates get out, they go out to work and make a good return on investment. So, thank you for that. And you've done really good work on on this instance. Mr. Chair, I'd like to ask unanimous consent to enter into
the record two letters from students and organizations at Calpali St. Louis Abyispo which speak positively about President Armstrong's leadership and atmosphere the school has created for Jewish uh students. I'd ask unanimous consent, Mr. Chairman, to submit those
to the record. Without objection, it'll be submitted. Uh, so can you follow up on your work with local police who have jurisdiction over this at Calpali that's been successful to protecting all of your students, particularly Jewish students?
Yes, thank you for that question. We uh work very hard to make sure all students have a safe learning environment. Uh we want to make sure they're free from harassment and discrimination, but we also balance that with free speech. So
our university police partner with uh off-campus the city police in a very positive way. First we make sure that our students who have invited the speakers or departments that uh it is done properly and everyone is safe. So
that's with our time place and manner rules and then we have a great relationship with the city that they provide aid. We also support them. So I appreciate that that question. Thanks. Uh Mr. Cole, I want to ask you a question. In the area I represent,
region 9 in San Francisco is being cut back. All the departments uh but the department of education, so its ability to defend uh vulnerable students. Could you speak to that? If you don't have the staff in the regions, what does that do
to potential violence or protections for in interest to the disabled community? Well, it it it decimates the ability the real ability of government to try to protect Jewish students. Uh and if this committee really cared about Jewish students, it would be condemning uh the
Department of Education. It would be bringing in the secretary, as I suggested earlier, and saying, "Why are you cutting in half the Office of Civil Rights? We have a problem with anti-semitism. We have a problem with racism. We have a problem with sexism. Let's deal with the problem." But
instead, the committee brings in presidents, dredges up uh allegations that have not been determined to be true or false uh and just throws them out uh as if that's somehow solving the problem. It's not solving the problem in
any way, shape, or form. What would solve the problem? The gentleman's time is expired. Calling the committee, the the secretary of education here. Thank you. This has been hard to sit through. Um, and for all the Jews that are out there, I want to apologize to you because it's been tough for me
listening to a lot of the repulsive and repugnant commentary that's been made both in those asking questions and those answering them. But God puts us where he wants us to be. My 17-year-old this morning told me to wear my Keepa, which I don't do often, but that may change in honor of all of the students at these
campuses that don't feel safe to wear it themselves. And for anyone who doubts my commitment to fighting on these issues, no matter what side of the aisle they're on, they can go talk to the two chairman of the board and the one university president in Florida who no longer have their jobs because of me. So, I encourage you to keep that in mind when
you answer my questions. I think we heard a lot of lip service here and Mr. Cole talked about the importance of free speech and equal access to education. So, I'm going to start with those questions with Dr. Raymond. Dr. Raymond, and I encourage you, this may be happening right now. If a student is on your campus right now with a sign that
says no blacks on campus, what will happen to that student? Representative Fine, I first want to say I don't want I don't want to hear that. I want you to answer my question. A student if someone a student on your campus right now walking around campus saying no blacks on campus. What will
happen to that student? They're just allowed to walk around. Good job. Free speech. We love that. Is that what would happen on your campus? No. Okay, good. Would they be invited to go get an education somewhere else? Which is what I hope the answer is. It
would be the same as someone who is inappropriate. Would they be kicked out of campus if a student walked around your campus saying no blacks on campus or would we like sit around a drum circle and talk about how great it is? What would happen? Would they be kicked off a or is that free speech at Havford
College? No blacks on campus. Representative Fine, there is no room for discrimination or but there is room because at your campus in front of you at a protest students held up a sign saying no Zionists on campus. They said and and there was no consequence for that and you were at that event and it
happened on o it happened sorry it happened on September 30th 2024. You were there. My second question I'm going to go to do you believe the Jews are responsible for COVID? Is that some sort of conspiracy that we came up with to go after people? The Jewish students on
your campus and professors were responsible for COVID and it was like unleashed on people. Is that what you believe? Of course it's okay. Then why did you say when a group a a terrorist group wanted to have a presentation called CO in times of genocide? How Israel uses CO
as a tool for settler colonialism in Palestine. Your response to that name was that it was thoughtful and considerate. See, we can talk about what other people did. I'm interested in what you did. And in both of these instances, you're the one that did it. So, do you think that title CO in times of
genocide, how Israel uses CO as a tool for settler colonialism in Palestine? Was that thoughtful and considerate? Do you still believe that today? I did not say that about that title and I do not believe that today. and Zionists are
welcome on our campus and Zionists are Jews and not Jews. And to go back to your other point, we do not tolerate discrimination against Well, then let's get on to that. Since Zionists are welcome on your campus, we will now talk about a professor that is on your campus. And I may actually give some of
my time to Mr. Cole on this one because he talked about equal access to education. You have a professor named Guang Tanha, and I apologize, who said in August of 2024, "The only way to deal with Zionists is to stop talking to them and refuse to let them waste your time."
Now, I don't know what Professor Ha teaches, but I would assume there are some students in his class that are actually Zionists. So would it be would it reduce their access to education if their professor publicly says talk I should stop talking to Zionists and I should not waste my time on them. How is
that acceptable on your campus? Discrimination of any form is not acceptable. Okay. So does he still work on your campus? Does he still work there? Yes, he does. He does. And he also said something said the state of Israel must be de dismantled in society denazified. Zionism is Nazism is
fascism. Zionisms are racists and that's okay and you can continue to work on your campus when you make those statements. That's okay. Keep the job. Those statements are repugnant and I do not defend those statements. But you do
because here's the last one I'm going to do. You had a a graduate student. Let's see if I can find it here. You had a graduate student who before he was hired made a statement. H can I find it here? There's the problem with your places are so many. October 7th, 2023, you had a visiting assistant professor write,
October 7th was a beautiful site to wake up to this morning. End quote. And after this person made this statement, your school offered them another position in June of 2024. Why would you hire someone who says that October 7th was a
beautiful site to wake up to? Why would you hire that person? I am very sorry that I have someone had someone on the faculty that would espouse those kinds of views. Good. You can go back and you can fire him. I yield back the balance of my time. I
thank the gentlemen and uh I would ask to submit for the record the most recent uh ADL campus anti-semitism card uh that includes a report card that includes the three universities here as well as
others including some that have been in front of us where if it is conjecture that this committee and our activities with hearings are not having impact we'll see that there has been impact act in in in better grades that are coming
on for some, still terrible grades for others. So without objection, I submit this for the record. I now recognize a gentle lady from Michigan, Miss Stevens. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I just wanted to give the first, you know, 15 20
seconds to Mr. Cole to finish your last thought from the previous previous question if you wanted to. From which question? From Mr. Dany I I'm not even rem Okay. Well, that's good. I think I think I I think the
committee wanted to make sure you could finish your thought, but if it's I think I I think I've said um what I uh need to say about the analogies between this committee's work and Hux committee's work and I think history will reflect um
that that is exactly the analogy that uh that we should draw. Yeah. Well, I I think we can all agree that combating anti-semitism uh is a nonpartisan issue and and needs to be treated as as such. And this is
now the fourth or fifth committee hearing that we've held on this topic of anti-semitism on our college campuses. And I I don't believe it is a false obsession. I I we know in the United States of America that we have
rising anti-semitism. Um and and it's actually exploding. Uh Dr. Raymond, it was um nice to hear you say that Zionists are welcome on campus. Uh whether a Zionist is a Jewish student or a
non-Jewish student, that is important to hear. That is important to say. and and even displaying that more prominently I think for all of you uh would be certainly welcome. I am myself a Zionist and I am not Jewish and I I am proud of
that designation. Now there might be some people who are not Zionists and and and maybe you're going to say that uh non-zionists are are welcome as well. Uh anti-ionists are welcome. And one of the
challenges that those of us who have studied this issue have come across is that while it might sound good to say that non-z anti-ionism is an anti-semitism, we haven't yet really
seen that exist. And and so we we want to be very careful with, you know, embracing this modality of of thinking that is anti-Zionism that very quickly bleeds into
anti-semitism. And the other thing that we want to respect and recognize is universities as places of free thought and deep thinking. I myself have a master's in philosophy. I I did graduate
this century. That's nice. um but in a different time where this level of anti-semitism wasn't at its boiling point and we're having experiences from the Jewish community in particular even
pre107 where we knew it was difficult for students of of of Jewish students to be on college campuses and after 107 it became on some of the campuses is very
difficult and students we had testimony in another it was a type of hearing that we had where um a student said he's wearing his yarmaka's was raised by a single mother in Brooklyn openly Jewish
had never been to Israel and is now being attacked on his college campus. We all have to ask ourselves why that is happening and we have to do the work to make sure that doesn't happen. Now, I
also want to devote my energy and my time as a member of Congress who cares. I'm a co-chair of the anti-semitism task force. So, I I I do deeply care about this issue tremendously. and and and I'm going to reflect on another period of uh
hearing that we had where we shared the mental health resources that get made available to college campuses and we had a couple of terms ago when the Democrats were in the majority a hearing about this and we were going to allocate more
mental health resources onto college campuses and a colleague from the other side of the aisle put in an amendment that said if you're gay you can't access these mental health resources. Now, I don't know why that would happen. I don't know why that was a vote we had to
take in this committee hearing. And I found that really biased and lacking in inclusion. And so, to your point, Mr. about taking very seriously what our colleges need to combat hate, to combat
anti-semitism. We need a civil rights office and we need a functioning department of education. And so, thank you to everybody in the audience who's here as well wearing their yellow pins. I'm also the co-chair of the hostage task force. We need to bring the hostages home. We need to see this war come to an end and Hamas needs to
surrender. With that, Mr. Chair, thank you. I yield back. I thank the gentle lady. I recognize a gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Ander. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to the witnesses for coming to the committee today. Ms. H uh President uh President
uh uh uh Raymond. Um, as you mentioned in your testimony on September 30th, 2024, the Anti-Def Defamation League held a presentation on Hford Havford's campus uh entitled Anti-Semitism 101. Unfortunately, many
of your students decided to disrupt the event, for example, by chanting through a megaphone, "From Gaza to Lebanon, Israel will still be gone will soon be gone." banging pots and pans and holding signs with statements including no Zionists on campus. Uh, President
Raymond, yes or no? Do you believe that is an incident of intimidating Jewish students and an incident of anti-semitism? I do believe that is an act of intimidation. Yes. Okay. And you know, I
understand that it's not necessarily anti-semitic to condemn particular aspects of Israeli foreign policy, but in context, would you agree that you using Z the term Zionist in that
context, it's a synonym for Jew? I am committed to supporting our Jewish community. Do you think those protesters knew the foreign policy views of every Jewish student on camp on campus? I mean, in context, no Zionists on
campus, no Republicans on campus, no libertarians on campus. I I don't think they're talking about Jews. They're talking no Jews on campus is what those protesters mean. the representative before me and I said also myself that Zionists and I think
you know this too that our Zionists are Jews and not Jews and we do not accept discrimination against anyone at Havford. Were Were any students involved in that
incident disciplined? Were any expelled, expel, suspended, or otherwise subject to discipline? We did put through discipline some of the students that were involved in disrupting that
event and we learned from that event to have clearer policies, which we now have on what it means to disrupt through noise outside an event. Can you give us numbers of how many
students were disciplined and in what ways? I I will not give numbers or specifics. You were similarly evasive with Chairman Wahberg, but your your colleagues uh your colleagues gave us numbers. Uh why
are you not can you cite a federal law that doesn't allow you to do so? or are you more e ethical than they are because you're protecting students privacy better. We're not asking for names. We're not asking for social security numbers or dates of birth. We're asking
for numbers. My top priority is the safety and well-being of our students. You're not going to give us the information. We follow all of our disciplinary practices which can depending on what has happened
result in suspension or expulsion when appropriate. So President Raymond, last year when Jewish community leaders pressed have her for DEI administrator, this is Nikki Young, VP for institutional equity and access and
professor of gender studies. When they asked her about the anti-semitic climate on campus, she um is quoted as saying, "Blacks and gays have in the fa past not felt safe on campus. It is now the turn of Jewish students to experience that
feeling." Are were you were you aware of her making that statement? That is not a statement that she made. She didn't. No, she didn't. And that does not sound like the Dr. Young that I know who is
committed against anti-semitism as am I. If someone made such a statement, should they be fired? We follow. When that s any such statement that is discriminatory? If someone made such a statement, should they be suspended?
We would follow our practices to and and have as a consequence an appropriate outcome. I if if such a statement was made, should they be fired, suspended or
disciplined in some other way? Is are such statements unacceptable at have referred? statements of discrimination and harassment are un unacceptable. I suppose it's your first amendment right to be evasive, but it's
also our right to decide that such institutions are not deserving of taxpayer money. Thank you. I yield back, Mr. Chairman. I thank the gentleman. Now I rec represent lady from Pennsylvania, Miss Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Our nation
is undoubtedly at an inflection point politically, culturally, socially, and college campuses have always been the place where those tensions collide more visibly and more profoundly than almost anywhere else in our country. And it's precisely because of that role that
these institutions play in our society. Throughout history, college campuses have been the places where worldviews, politics, cultures meet. Students are introduced to ideas and thoughts. Some they accept and agree with and others they vehemently disagree with, but it's where they encounter ideas that test
their values, where they're pushed out of their comfort zones, and where they begin to define not just what they think, but who they are and who they want to be. Some of the most transformative movements for justice in this country were ignited by students on college campuses. from the sitins of the civil rights movement and the anti-war
demonstrations to campaigns against South African apartate and the many other studentled movements for racial, gender uh and economic justice. Those movements didn't just happen uh to take place on campuses. They happened because of what those campuses seek to foster
spaces for critical thinking, opportunities for students to learn, to meet with diverse people, to be empowered, and to question existing social and societal structures. students won't get everything right. And we should all unequivocally say that anti-semitism, anti-blackness,
islamophobia, homophobia, and any form of hatred or not acceptable uh ways to engage on a college campus, in movement spaces and activism or in any other existing place in our societies. Students won't get everything right. And we should also say unequivocally or
excuse me, but we should also recognize that discomfort is sometimes having your worldview questioned and it's sometimes conflated as being a threat to safety. There are differences. We all have a right to critique and disagree with the policies of and actions of government.
It is in the constitution. And students have a right to protest and advocate on behalf of Palestinian existence, rights, and self-determinations just as students have the right to protest and advocate on behalf of Israel. But now that tradition of protest, academic freedom are the in the core principle of free
speech is under attack. Not genuinely in the name of safety or student well-being, but under the guise of control used to suppress the voices of marginalized groups and criminalized descent. The colleges and universities before us today have a dual obligation to both ensure the safety of their
students from anti-semitism and all forms of hatred while allowing critical discourse to continue. Suppressing students right to protest as an entry point for the erosion of civil liberties. And that's how democracies die. And that brings us to why we're here today. The majority in this
committee convened us because they even if people who really are impacted by this, but they are further villainizing higher education while using Jewish students and anti-semitism as a scapegoat. So I have a question. It is imperative that we create a campus environment that is diverse, inclusive,
safe, equitable without compromising free speech and academic freedom. Mr. Cole, do you agree that they can that universities can and must do both? Uh absolutely they can and must do both. In some some instances where there are state universities, they are compelled
by the constitution to respect free speech and uh not treat uh every anti-semitic comment as discrimination because most of them are protected speech. Uh and on private universities that are not bound by the constitution, many and mo indeed most of them have
adopted free speech policies precisely for the reasons you suggest that it is critical to an education. And for years, conservatives complained about uh universities not being open enough, not being tolerant enough, condemning speech was which was only racist or only
sexist. And now suddenly they've switched entirely. Got it. And if I may to add to that, every student deserves to be safe and have their human humanity recognized. This administration has done nothing toward that end. if they actually cared about campus safety and protecting students, then in addition to
acknowledging the real rise in anti-semitism, we'd also be talking about the rise in Islamophobia and the persistent uh anti-blackness, the degradation of rights of trans students. Since my tenure, we've had zero hearings, resolutions, or acknowledgers of any of the many intertwined ills that plague our college campuses and larger
society. So, has anyone just a yes or no? Has anyone uh from uh on this committee from the majority uh on our committee, has anyone from the Trump administration asked you about racist, Islamophobic or homophobic incidents on your campus? Yes or no? Probably not. Just for time, I I would say they probably have not because
what has become clear is that the concern here is selective, only appearing when it can be weaponized for political gain. Instead, what we're seeing is a deliberate effort to divide marginalized people. My colleagues are weaponizing attempts to weaponize learning is transparent and pathetic. It is clear that my colleagues real issues
with free speech of education, not anti-mitism. We shouldn't fall for it. It's clear that they don't care about it because they have they they've dismantled and closed regional office for the office of civil rights where we are tasked with investigating anti-semitism. That they have uh not spoken out against the Nazi salute of Elon Musk or the great replacement
theory that led to the largest anti-semitic massacre in my district in the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting. That they have done nothing about anti-blackness. I won't hold my breath. We're hearing on that that we haven't acknowledged that our safety and our liberation is tied together. That is not actually student safety that they care about. We have to fight back against our
attempts to erode our civil liberties. We cannot allow them to use efforts to divide our marginalized communities against each other in that fight. We are the closest we have ever been ever been to losing our civil liberties. We have to fight against Pennsylvania, Mr. McKenzie.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate today's hearing on stopping the spread of anti-semitism on American campuses because we do see a very real problem that is occurring all across the country. Anti-semitism has been around
for a long time, but ever since October 7th, it has come out into the light in a much more shocking and offensive fashion, particularly on our university campuses. And when it presents itself, we appreciate that some of the
university presidents are willing to identify those situations and call them out. And when discrimination like this goes through a process that you have on your campus and a violation is determined that uh it has actually occurred, uh appropriate punishment is
being medded out. That's important that we recognize that as well. But then accountability for us as legislators is making sure that those institutions that actually go through that process recognize the discrimination that is occurring on
their campus. Hand out punishment. We want to make sure that that is actually the course of events that's playing out during the course of this testimony. Today, two of the university presidents have been very transparent with the aggregate information that they were
willing to share about the punishments that were handed out on their university campus. One was not. One has evaded that conversation a number of times, saying that she was unable to provide that information. Under pressured testimony twice, though, you have acknowledged
that punishment has occurred. So you have violated your own standard that you would not disclose or discuss any punishments that were occurring on your university campus. So my question to you to the president Dr. Raymond from Havford College is will you go back to
your college campus collect that aggregate information we don't need any personal information and share it with this committee about the punishments that have been handed out from your university to students or others who were involved in this discriminatory practice on your college campus.
Representative McKenzie, I appreciate your requesting that and I can commit to our practices around this. We do not share our results of our dis our
disciplinary processes on our campus or publicly and that's a problem. So that is a problem. You do receive federal money, do you not? in some way, either directly or indirectly through student loans or grants to your university. We do in a
wonderful partnership with the federal government. Well, that partnership may be in jeopardy because if you will not provide transparency and accountability like your other colleagues here, it calls into question your actions on your campus. And so when people are concerned about discrimination that is happening
on your college campus, which the list is pretty long at this point, it's very concerning the amount of incidents that have piled up at your college campus under your tenure. And yet you won't share any information about the punishment that has been handed out when
discrimination that you acknowledge has happened on your campus. You won't share that anybody has actually been punished for that. Representative, the effects of what have happened at Havford on our Jewish students and community are real and
deeply troubling to me. And I am in this work, committed to getting it right. We have had many policy changes since October 7th in order to do this work better than we were able to do then. And I commit to that work in an ongoing
basis with with deep empathy and care for all of our Jewish students, staff, and faculty. I I appreciate that statement, but it is lacking in transparency and accountability about the end results of punishment that are
handed out to students and faculty that are on your campus that participate in discriminatory actions. That is that should just be a baseline for receiving federal funding. You're willing to acknowledge that discriminatory actions have happened on your campus. you're
willing to say that we are going to take some kind of action when that does occur. You're going to go through a process, but then you won't actually show those of us that are responsible for providing federal funding that you have actually done anything at the end
of the day. So that is a very concerning course of action and I think it's something that Congress should probably look into saying that there needs to be transparency. There needs to be accountability and those institutions that don't want to provide that and want to be evasive in remarks before Congress
want to avoid transparency and accountability in their actually publishing of the results of in aggregate numbers the fact that they have taken action against discriminatory behavior. I think that that probably warrants a further investigation. The
Department of Education should be looking into that and ultimately they should be withholding funds from somebody who does not want to provide transparent and accurate information about how they are handling discrimination on their college campus. Thank you. And I gentleman's time is expired. I thank the gentleman. I
represent from Washington, Mr. Bombgardner. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh Dr. Dr. Raymond, how many Americans were killed on October 7th? I don't know. Dr. Raymond, how many There were some in how many how many
Americans were taken hostage on October 7th? I know that some were. I do not know the number. And do you know how many Americans are currently held hostage by Hamas? No, I do not. But you do condemn Hamas
as a terrorist group. Yes, I do. Well, do you think you don't know these numbers because these American victims were Jewish? Of course, that is not the reason. Do you think there's been sufficient sympathy for uh the Jewish Americans
who've been killed and taken hostage uh by Hamas on your campus? We are all beere beerefted around what happened on October 7th in Israel and for all that were
impacted whether to and it's a period. It is a horrific time in history. Well, we have absolutely October 7th was the greatest terrorist attack on American citizens since 9/11. And yet you don't know how
many Americans were killed. You don't know how many were taken hostage. And you have an anti-semitism problem on your campus. So it's hard to conclude. And I I appreciate that you come here today acknowledging that you yourself have personally made mistakes when it comes to anti-semitism and that Hford
College has made mistakes. But those apologies ring a little hollow if we don't even know the basics of sympathy for how many American Jews uh were killed on October 7th. Do you uh do now you didn't write a letter or make a strongly worded statement after October 7th. Is that
correct? I would like to say to your last question, my empathy and my deep sorrow is to all of the victims of that day. You asked me questions about Americans. Did you make a strongly
worded statement uh or something written after the attacks of October 7th? Yes, I did. You did. And you also made I I want to question whether you actually understand what anti-semitism is. Could you define anti-semitism? Anti-semitism is hatred of Jews. Okay.
Now, uh you did issue a statement uh very quickly after the protests and riots of January 6th, did you not? I did. You did. And in those you described specifically the protesters on January 6th as being anti-semitic.
And in that same statement, did you not? I can read it to you if you'd like me to. Pardon me. I'm sorry. I thought I heard January 6th. Yeah, January 6th. So, you didn't issue a very strongly worded statement after October 7th, but you did after January 6th. And you described the January 6th protesters at the nation's
capital as anti-semitic. And in that same statement, you also said that Black Lives Matter is a peaceful organization. Is that true? Do you see Black Lives Matter as a peaceful organization? I think that I am being misqued by what you said. I'll read it to
you. Says, uh, "Incited by the president's words and parading explicitly anti-semitic symbols, these writers violently attempted to add another obstruction to the presidential election." He also said many have noted the conduct of the
capital police and the contrast to the aggressive treatment of peaceful assemblies of Black Lives Matter protesters. So is Black Lives Matter uh protesters Black Lives Matter a peaceful organization? It is a non-violent organization. Was there any anti-semitism exhibited by
Black Lives Matter? I am not aware of that. So, you're not aware, the president of a university that does not know how many American Jews were killed on October 7th and a president that does not know of any anti-semitic behavior uh by Black Lives Matter. Are you aware that Black Lives
Matter uh committed over $2 billion in damage? This is the organization that uh you describe as peaceful. Representative, I may not know those facts that you have asked me about and what I do know is that as president of Havford College, I'm committed to
creating See, what I think is that your apology rings hollow. I think it's politically convenient for you now to come capan to some to when folks like Republicans are serious about anti-semitism and you have federal funding on the line, you'll come here. And yet uh in your background you have
displayed behavior failing to significantly condemn the attacks of October 7th not as a university president at a prestigious university not being aware of the suffering that American Jews have suffered because perhaps because they are Jewish and then describing an anti-semitic group like
Black Lives Matter as a peaceful group when anybody who even had turned on the television and watched the news knew that they were committing billions of dollars in in uh damage in violence across this country and that they have deep anti-semitic uh roots. I yield back. I thank the gentleman. I recognize
now the gentleman from Wisconsin, uh Mr. Cole. Um if uh somebody issues statements which are critical of Islam as a
religion, is that protected speech under the first amendment? Sure. If a Christian minister attacks the gay lifestyle, is that protected speech under the First Amendment? Yes.
Wow. But I'm sorry. I said, "Wow." Okay. Um, thank you. Now, um, by the way, you got those answers right for you. Um, I I'd like to ask our professor
something. I've had this job now for a little over 10 years. and I get around to all sorts of groups and talk to people. The number of people I talked to was just beyond belief. I have yet to heard hear and I think I would have
remembered if I heard it any what I would call anti-semitic remarks. Uh nevertheless, we seem to have a problem in all these universities in which anti-semitism seems to be somewhat prevalent. Uh, do you want to take a
crack as to why anti-semitism is I think right now tiny in the United States, but the only place it seems to be common is on university campuses. Well, I I don't I I Not you. No, we
we'll give the others. They're the e the experts. You we're done with you. So, that's Oh, I thought you said professor. I'm sorry. Yeah. Sorry. You you passed your test. Um, any of the other three want to take a crack as why we seem to have anti-semitism on Americans college campuses, but you know, we don't have
anti-semitism at from what I can tell. I talk to people all the time, not a not a, you know, a big problem in America as a whole. Nobody has a reason why that is. So, you must you must think when these
incidents happens on your campuses, why is this happening? You don't think at all. Your mind is a blank. I guess your mind is a blank. You don't like think you norally think of university uh presidents mind is a blank but apparently they are. Um it is my
belief that the reason you see more anti-semitism on campuses is because there is a lack of thought on the campuses and uh the campuses are the home to the hard left of this country
and if there's a odd campus that is the home of the odd left but you know we've got some you know presidents here big huge universities I mean the pal Calpali big
universities. Um but I think there is for example very little people who would be described as Christian conservatives or Republican. Uh, and I think that the zeist of the
more liberal element right now in this country is including anti-semitism or a bizarre obsession with protecting Hamas, I guess I'll put it that way. Um, do you feel or are you making do you say
if you had to take a shot? Um, we'll start out with the Miss Havford here or Miss Raymond, Dr. agreement. Do you have a crack at of your professors? What percent you you would think would vote for say a Donald Trump and what percent
would vote for uh a Kla Harris or even further leftwing type candidate? Representative, we do not ask. You must have an idea. You must have an idea. You talk to people. You have no idea. No. No
idea. We don't know. Maybe 80% were for Trump. You have no no idea. Not even in in the individual department. Do you have any idea? I do not. And I'm not interested in that kind of I don't believe that. But okay, you can say
that. How about Mr. Manuel? Thank you. Like Hford, we don't track. I know you don't track, but you must have an opinion. 00 faculty on campus and I can tell you that our practices have protected both conservative and protected and progressive voices in our
work. You have no idea. Okay. Um Mr. Armstrong, I mean, you must talk to people. Everybody talks about the election last October. Do do you feel you have kind of a angling to the left side big time on your on your campus there in California?
We have the majority of vast majority of our faculty and staff, they really focused on student success. We have a high STEM uh population. Nobody wants to take a crack at it. Well, okay. I think the problem that we have anti-semitism
on the campus is because odd, offbeat, hateful ideas fester in a place of extreme leftism. And I think the universities in this country have become fanatical leftwingists and I I don't know what we can do about it as a
country. We're going to have to talk and see what we can do about it because we sure funnel money into the universities and I don't thank the gentleman getting Thank you. I now recognize the ranking men me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me member, the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Scott. Thank you. Um Mr.
Mr. Cole, can you say what the effect on effectively addressing anti-semitism is when you ignore race, national origin, disability, gender, and other religion, uh, forms of hate? Well, you're not addressing the problem in a
neutral across the board way. Uh, and that calls into question the genuine uhness of your concern for discrimination. Thank you. Um, you talked about the hearings like this being problematic
because there's been no factual investigation. Jobs have been threatened. Um, can you say another word about why we need an actual investigation rather than hearings like this? Yeah, the the the line between uh
protected speech that is anti-semitic and discrimination that is anti-semitic is a hard line to draw, but it's a line that our Constitution compels us to draw. It's not a line that I've heard a single Republican care about on this committee. Um, but it's a line that the
Constitution requires us to draw. And how do you draw that line? you engage in close uh consideration of all the facts and circumstances around an incident. You don't just take a letter from a student. You call in the student. You
call in other people who witnessed the incident. You determine what actually happened based on competing often competing uh accounts and then you make a determination based upon those facts. That's what faculty uh um uh committees
do when they uh consider these kinds of complaints. That's what OCR did until it was decimated uh by this administration. That is not what I have seen this committee do in eight hearings. I haven't seen them do that in a single instance. And instead, all they've done
is bring in presidents and berate them based on the committee's version of the facts, which may or may not be true. Thank you. And you've um made the point that the you have complained and blame without facts to cut back on office of
civil rights. Are you familiar with the uh community relations service at Department of Justice? Absolutely. How could they be helpful? They're helpful because they are they were designed to get at to affirmatively proactively get
at discrimination uh by getting people to work together by supporting uh not by prosecuting but by going in and affirmatively supporting uh areas and communities where there is uh division. Uh that's what we need. We don't need,
you know, speechifying by Republicans. We need actual uh efforts on the ground to deal with the problem and of course that's under um attack and in the president's budget it seems to be left out. Absolutely.
Um I would ask the presidents the first question that you that was posed to you was something along the lines of in so far as each of your campuses are hotbeds of anti-semitism. Can you give us some statistics? I forget what the rest of
the question was. Uh, each of you went right to the statistics and left us to assume that you agreed with the premise that your campuses were hotbeds of anti-semitism. Anybody want to make a
quick comment on whether or not that assumption is accurate? That is not a description that I would use. Okay. Thank you, Dr. Emanuel. I would not use that description either. And I would note that our retention
rates for Jewish students are up slightly over five years as are our uh Well, I'm just talking about the question. You you let it slide by. But Dr. Armstrong, no, I would not agree with that statement. Uh and Mr. in last minute. Can you just say
a word about the tension between free speech and when it gets into speech can get into criminal law violation of title six and possible campus code violations. Again, the the reason that title six has very high
standards for when speech actually constitutes discrimination is because the constitution protects all kinds of hateful speech. We can condemn that speech. We should condemn that speech. But we can't punish people for engaging
in that speech. That's why Title Six says it's not discrimination to say something uh uh criticizing Israel at a protest. It is discrimination if you target a particular individual because of his Jewish identity for individually
targeted harassment. And it's a violation of Title Six if the university is deliberately indifferent to that. meaning they ignore the problem. I haven't heard any evidence. And what is a hostile environment? Hostile environment is only where the speech is
so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it denies equal access to education. A standard that is extraordinarily high, has rarely been met in a in any case in this country. Um and again it's because if you define
discrimination through speech too broadly you chill speech and that is precisely what this effort of this committee has done is to chill speech criticizes Israel is protected and we will move on Mr. Cole with you've
made your point pretty clear several times so I now recognize I don't agree with it but I now recognize gentleman from Ohio Mr. really. Thank you, chairman, and I want to thank all you for coming. I know it can't be easy to be on that side. Um, this is not a
persecution. This is a learning curve, and I I have to condemn the other side of the aisle, the dilute the fact that this is about October 7th and anti-semitism. I live about 38 miles away from Kent State University. We just had our uh observation of the
anniversary of the shooting. The Borman girl that was 18 that got killed shopped in my family's stores. Uh it's very personal to us in my political world and in my philosophy of life. We celebrate protesting. There is nothing wrong with
protesting. It's what our country was based on by the founders. However, there's a difference between protesting and safety. And there's a difference between protesting and um and highlighting anti-semitism. I think that you know when we were raised and we're all probably in close to the same age
bracket. When we were raised and we were in high school and we were in college, we were heard a phrase calling never again. But now the four of you are at the heights of power and never again happens to be right now. And we all saw the videos on TV on YouTube. They're there right now. I can pull them up on
my phone and Harvard Square when I went to school at Emerson. So I was in Boston. I know Harvard Square really well where literally Jewish kids were afraid to go to school that were pushed on the ground and they were harassed. Now, when I was in the Ohio Senate, I dealt with President Carter of the Ohio State University, and we had meetings
with him before the protest, which he allowed to happen, which were very safe. Nobody was threatened. Uh, the campus was cleaned up, and I think the Palestinian protesters did a great job of their protesting. However, a lot of these universities throughout this country have not performed like that.
So, my focus goes to Dr. Emanuel. And like I said, this is more of a learning curve. I don't want you to feel that we're here to persecute you, but I do want to do better. So when we look uh to Mr. Manuel and we look at your university and we look at the reflection on it, police reports have that 17day
encampment was allowed with over a thousand submitted complaints, including reports of safety concerns, harassment concerns, threat of violence to Jewish students, and even several death threats. individuals allegedly threatened to slit the throats of Jewish
students supporting Israel, allowed faculty members, if I'm saying her name right, Leela Farah, who supported the release of a terrorist that killed people in Jerusalem, and to serve as an advisory to SJB, did not clear the encampments till 5 days after negotiations with the
leaders broke down. Having said all that, what would you do different? And from the heart, how can we do better? Because I think, hey, listen, we all have concerns for everyone that goes to your school, both, you know, if they're pro Palestine, Palestine or if
they're pro-Jewish, but how do we do better? How do we make Jewish kids feel safe to go to your school in the future? Thank you for that question, and I I appreciate the time to explain. We needed to do better. In our review, we understood that the length of time of
that encampment was created dangers. The numbers that you uh referenced in the end was a website that I released to show the the community the dangers of what were happening in that space. Um, we worked with after the fact we worked
with the Jewish United Fund, with the Chicago's Metro Hell, and with many of our own Jewish faculty, staff, and and uh and students to understand how we could be better at creating a culture of compliance. This included creating a
Jewish alumni group, a Jewish faculty, staff alliance, working on time, place, and manner restrictions. um figuring out uh that we we need to do training using that data in that website to help people understand the modern
interpretation of anti-semitism. Uh I I admit thoroughly that we we could do better and I know that with our changes today the results of a future encampment would be different. I would also end if you give me the time to say since that moment we
have prevented uh overtakes of our campus by outside protesters and we have a better sense of how to manage the balance between the protest and the safety and the welcomingness of our campus. I truly re respect and
appreciate that response and with that I yield my time back to the chair. I thank the gentlemen and I thank the panel for being here today. It's not whether we agree or disagree. It's the fact you're here. We appreciate that fact. It's been long. It's been arduous.
It's been emotional, but it has been purposeful. And I'll get to that in my closing statement. But now I recognize the ranking member, my friend from Virginia, Mr. Scott, for his closing remarks. Thank you, Mr. Ch Mr. Chairman.
Comments have been made about whether or not this is just happening on campus. I'd like to enter into the record a press release from the ADL entitled US anti-Semitic incidents incidents skyrocketed 360% in the aftermath of the attack on
Israel according to the latest ADL data. The release makes it clear that the majority of incidents at the ADL tracked over 75% happened in places other than college campuses. And also I'd like to enter into the record an NBC news
article quote January 6th rier in quote camp Awitz unquote hoodie sentenced to 70 75 days in prison. Um without objection the articles beh
thank you Mr. Thank you Mr. Chairman and I again thank our witnesses for being here today. Today marks the eighth time the committee has held a hearing on anti-semitism since October 7th. Yet in all that time, there's been no concrete action to actually protect any students
from discrimination. Despite my multiple requests, in that time, we've held no hearings on other forms of hate and discrimination such as racism, Islamophobia, sexism, and violation of Title N, homophobia, or challenges of students with disabilities. All of which
also pose major problems for students. So here we are again complaining about the problem without offering real solutions. All the while uh the administration ignores due process and takes a chainsaw to the office of civil rights, the very office responsible for
investigating and addressing anti-semitism and uh putting uh the community relations service at department of justice also on the chopping block. that that could be very helpful under these circumstances. Our priorities must lie with the students.
The Trump administration's dismantling of the Office of Civil Rights and relentless attacks on institutions of higher learning will not make students lives better and students will pay the price of these cuts. The schools struggle to function without federal
funding. Just like I the last seven hearings, I'll I'll reiterate physical violence or verbal harassment directed towards students should not be tolerated. And that said, college campuses have always been venues where individuals can debate difficult topics
or you might hear opinions which you disagree. It is vitally important to protect the sanctity of free speech and ensure that students do not suffer from discrimination and that's a difficult balance to achieve and that's why dedicated investigators are a key to
keeping uh campuses both free and safe. As Professor Cole said in his written testimony, we must tolerate offensive speech even when listeners experience it as deeply harm deeply harmful because giving government officials to determine whose views can be heard and whose
should be silenced is a greater danger. No one should be discriminated against for who they are or how they worship, but ignoring due process and undermining the future of higher education will only make things worse. and it does not make Jewish students or anyone else on campus
safer. So, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. I thank the gentleman. Let me state for the record, and I wish some of my Democrat colleagues were still here to hear me say
this. I oppose discrimination of all kinds. anti-semitism, racism, sexism, discrimination of all kinds. I believe this committee will stand in that same
light. But we're here today talking about anti-semitism that has wrapped up multiple college and university campuses. And it's not just speech. I support free speech and always will. But free speech sometimes leads to the
results of actions. And that is why we're here today and the eight preceding times when Jewish students cannot feel safe or have the ability to experience all that they expect on their
university or college campus because of anti-semitism, anti-Zionism that blocks them, including faculty members that will block them from having the meaningful experience that they paid for at the very least on to their college campuses or even
worse being beat upon and injured as a result of what? Being a Jew. That's what we're talking about. That's what these hearings are for. They're not for free speech. We believe in
that. But it's not to hard to tell when someone is injured and has a surgery because of that. that it's actions that are impacting freedom of
education. I would suggest as well that the entities that have been responsible for civil rights issues on campus have failed. This has been developing. OCR and others have not done their
job. And I hope in the process of what this administration is doing and we will be asking questions, we will have an entity that will actually function for all students, all faculty on campuses. Remember this happened before
this administration took office. We want it to end. So any suggestion that this is McCarthy like is radically false.
We are going to come to a solution and thankfully I can say as a result of these we are seeing campuses around around the United States taking action and I thank the two campuses here today depal and Calpali for being able to
demonstrate at least in words and of course we looking for the policy and the outcomes but you were able to tell us of mistakes and now what you're doing to remedy that. We wish you all well. For the good of this country, we need
academic institutions that allow freedom of speech, but opportunity to experience it equally like all other students on campus, regardless of who you are, where you come from, your nationality, your
gender, your faith. Sadly, we've seen the education of college students hindered far too often. In this case, the hearing was on anti-semitic disruptions, the blocking of access to buildings, interruption of lectures, hateful, violent slogans that
were put in place to incite violence, not just free speech. We've heard today of some modest changes made in recent months. We want them to be meaningful, but meaningful accountability means taking the risk of being unpopular and
asking hard questions. Yes, it was passionate today. Sometimes it was emotional. I get that. But at least on this side of the idea aisle, we're taking it in a
significant, meaningful, and purposeful way. And I would expect that a majority of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle take it purposeful as well. Hard decisions have to take place. We're wishing you success. will
be watching and I hope we'll be watching other universities and colleges around this country also saying I don't want to be part of the problem. I'm going to take the the example of what's gone on in our eight eight
hearings and we'll work for change as well. So that all students, those who come on a visa or those who have been blessed who have been blessed beyond measure to be born here as part of this great American
experiment that will all experience academic freedom and greater opportunity in the future. And so I thank you. I thank you for being here today, I thank you to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle
and uh being that there is no further action to be taken, the hearing is adjourned.