Published by JNS on 08/22/2025 Many Jewish students and staff, both at K-12 schools and on university campuses, have become the targets of threats, intimidation and violence since the Hamas-led terrorist attacks in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023—leading to lawsuits, funding and donation cuts, and a host of new regulations to protect students and staff. Will this year be different? Some universities acted swiftly after the Oct. 7 massacre, setting expectations early, communicating clearly, and following through with consequences for students and staff who targeted and harassed Jews on campus. Many others did not, often allowing protests and encampments to lead the lawlessness. Dartmouth College stood out by launching its Dartmouth Dialoguesprogram to build “brave spaces” for difficult conversations while drawing a clear line between free expression and intimidation. When encampments broke campus rules, Dartmouth enforced its policies while maintaining a commitment to dialogue. This balance of dialogue and accountability has been held up nationally as a model of leadership. Notre Dame Law School’s Religious Liberty Initiative hosted an event a few weeks after the Hamas attack that connected Jewish-Catholic history to the rise in anti-Jewish hatred. The Most Rev. Robert J. McClory said: “The Church decries hatred, persecutions and displays of antisemitism directed against Jews at any time and by anyone.” The University of Florida demonstrated how a large public institution can set the tone through words and actions. Its president spoke early and unequivocally about protecting Jewish students, while also pledging that hatred would have no place on campus: “Just as we have an obligation to protect speech, we have an obligation to keep our students safe. Throwing fists, storming buildings, vandalizing property, spitting on cops and hijacking a university aren’t speech.” When students crossed the line from protest into policy violations, UF suspended participants and even withheld diplomas from graduates who engaged in misconduct. Some schools take positive steps, show ‘meaningful accountability’ Jewish leaders in Massachusettspraised the state’s new K-12 recommendations developed by the Special Commission on Combating Antisemitism. The effort comes amid concerns that a teachers’ union promoted “overtly political” anti-Israel materials and an “extreme, one-sided narrative.” The CEO of Boston’s Jewish Community Relations Council called the new plan “a roadmap for meaningful interventions with clear timelines for follow-up and accountability.” At Westfield Middle School in Massachusetts, principal Jesse McMillan responded decisively when swastikas appeared on school grounds. He immediately alerted parents and administrators, brought in the local Jewish Federation to provide educational resources, and developed a special curriculum to teach his students about antisemitism and sensitivity towards others. McMillan also made clear that displaying hate symbols would carry severe disciplinary consequences, stressing that such acts “create an unsafe learning environment” and undermine the school’s mission. Choosing action under duress: ‘Students, staff experienced pain’ Other academic institutions have taken steps to protect students only after finding themselves under intense pressure. Columbia University became a flashpoint as encampments spread and antisemitic rhetoric escalated. For weeks, administrators hesitated until images of Jewish students needing police escorts across campus and congressional scrutiny forced their hand. Only then did Columbia tighten protest rules and begin to take action against disruptive students. The university recently settled with the federal government. The university stated: “Our leaders have recognized, repeatedly, that Jewish students and faculty have experienced painful, unacceptable incidents and that reform was and is needed.” For many Jewish students, the message was clear: Protection came only after reputational risk became too great to ignore. This reactive pattern also played out elsewhere. Universities that hesitated to enforce their own rules often saw situations spiral until they faced legal consequences. In those moments, administrators scrambled to reassert control—banning masks at protests to aid accountability, pressing criminal charges against vandals or rewriting their student codes of conduct. Challenges remain: ‘Jews are baby killers’ Even as some schools take action, shocking incidents continue, especially in local K-12 schools. The Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law recently filed a civil-rights complaint against the Nysmith School in Virginia, where three Jewish siblings endured persistent bullying. Classmates told one of them, an 11-year-old girl, that Jews are “baby killers” and told her she deserved to die. When her parents pressed the school to act, administrators canceled a Holocaust-education event and ultimately expelled all three Jewish students. The case highlights how institutions sometimes punish victims rather than confront antisemitism head-on. In Massachusetts, the ADL and Brandeis Center filed a federal complaint detailing “rampant antisemitic abuse” at Concord-Carlisle High School. According to the filing, administrators ignored repeated harassment, graffiti and threats, forcing at least one student to transfer. University reforms needed: ‘Students are being forced to hide’ Some universities are now under federal investigation for failing to protect Jewish students. The U.S. Department of Justice found George Washington University to be “deliberately indifferent” to antisemitic harassment during Gaza war protests. The DOJ threatened enforcement actions unless GWU responds soon. Western Washington University and George Mason University also received federal letters. The University of California system is the subject of a sweeping civil-rights probe under Title VII, investigating whether it allowed or even enabled a hostile environment for Jewish faculty and staff amid escalating demonstrations and campus tensions. UCLA is facing the possible suspension of $584 million in federal research funding because of alleged lapses. This followed a recent $6 million settlement where the university settled with Jewish students and a professor. The University of California Board of Regents chair commented on the agreement: “We have been clear about where we have fallen short of our values, and we are committed to doing better moving forward. Our critically important goal is to foster a safe, secure and inclusive environment for all members of our community and ensure that there is no room for antisemitism anywhere on campus.” A coalition of leading Jewish groups recently urged universities to pursue reforms. ADL national director and CEO Jonathan Greenblatt stated that “universities need to take steps to ensure Jewish students can learn without fear. They are being forced to hide who they are, and that’s unacceptable. We need more administrators to step up.” Points to consider: Schools that act prove safety is possible. Dartmouth and Notre Dame have shown that decisive leadership can set boundaries before hate escalates. Their example proves that antisemitism is not an inevitable part of student life. It is a choice of leadership. When schools take responsibility, Jewish students can focus on learning instead of fear. Silence invites chaos, but leadership builds trust, and every university has the ability to choose the path of safety. Investigations show failures cannot be ignored. Universities that do not seriously confront antisemitism will continue to face scrutiny from the government, the public and their own students. Frozen funds, lawsuits and public scrutiny are powerful motivators, but the real cost is borne by Jewish students and staff whose safety has been neglected. Federal action should not be the trigger for change. Schools must act because it is right, not because investigators are watching. The message is clear: Doing nothing is no longer an option. Parents deserve safe schools for their children. Jewish families should not have to ask whether their children are safe at school. At some campuses, Jewish students continue to face harassment when walking to class, vandalism of Jewish spaces and exclusion for supporting the right of Jews to have a nation in their ancestral homeland. Where leaders fail to enforce basic rules of conduct, hostile environments flourish. Every parent deserves the assurance that their child can walk into a classroom without fear. That is a basic obligation of any school in America. Acts of violence against Jewish students are not free speech. Harassing Jewish classmates is not a form of protest. Blocking doors to libraries is not advocacy. These actions have real consequences. Free speech does not include actual threats, vandalism or intimidation. Inconsistent reporting standards, unclear complaint procedures and a reluctance to hold attackers accountable leave Jewish students doubting whether their safety and access to educational opportunities are taken seriously. The gap between promises and practice remains. Students know the difference. Administrators must enforce it. The gap between words and actions must narrow. Jewish students hear promises of inclusion from many schools, but experience unchecked harassment in dorms, classrooms and social-media chats. For every example of decisive leadership, there are a host of others where negligence reigns. The result is predictable: Jewish families reconsider their options, prospective students look elsewhere and a generation of young Jews questions whether their schools value them as equal members of the community. A statement on paper does not protect students; only enforcement, accountability and real consequences can work. Schools that minimize antisemitism risk alienating Jewish students and undermining their own credibility. Protecting Jews protects all students. When antisemitism is not confronted, it signals that hate or targeting of any minority can be tolerated. Schools that protect Jewish students strengthen the safety net for everyone. Antisemitism is often the canary in the coal mine; once it is allowed, other forms of hatred soon follow. A campus that keeps its Jewish community safe is a campus where every student can thrive. Read more here