Is the Tide Turning?
Executive Orders, Some Actions by University Admins, and More
The change of vibe is undeniable—US campuses are no longer safe havens for Jew haters. But there remains much work to be done to extirpate the toxic woke ideology from campus, according to which Jews and Israelis are “oppressors” and terrorist are victims.
Executive Order Delegitimizes Foreign Terrorists and Their Supporters
On his first day in office, President Donald Trump signed an executive order titled Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats, which begins:
Section 1. Policy and Purpose. (a) It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from aliens who intend to commit terrorist attacks, threaten our national security, espouse hateful ideology, or otherwise exploit the immigration laws for malevolent purposes.
(b) To protect Americans, the United States must be vigilant during the visa-issuance process to ensure that those aliens approved for admission into the United States do not intend to harm Americans or our national interests. More importantly, the United States must identify them before their admission or entry into the United States. And the United States must ensure that admitted aliens and aliens otherwise already present in the United States do not bear hostile attitudes toward its citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles, and do not advocate for, aid, or support designated foreign terrorists and other threats to our national security.
The implications of this E.O. for U.S. universities is that it allows the deportation of foreign students who support Hamas or other recognized terrorist organizations. The order instructs those responsible for granting student visas to ensure that applicants are not hostile toward the U.S., its citizens, principles, institutions, or culture, and do not support terrorist organizations. Members of the public can file complaints under the order at https://www.ice.gov/recognize-report-crime/ice-tip-line.
The First Amendment rights of U.S. citizens are not affected by the order—they remain free to celebrate the “martyrs” and “resistance fighters,” and call for the genocide of Jews. Unsurprisingly, the order is being widely discussed in the Jewish press. See, for example:
Trump Order Appears to Target Some Foreigners Participating in Anti-Israel Protests (Jacob Magid and TOI staff, The Times of Israel, January 21, 2025)
An executive order signed by US President Donald Trump on Monday appeared to target, among others, foreign nationals who participated in anti-Israel protests that swept throughout the country since Hamas’s October 7, 2023, onslaught, and which sometimes featured support for the Palestinian terror group.
The Executive Order Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Threats stated that the government must be “vigilant” in issuing visas to foreign nationals and ensure that those approved “do not intend to harm Americans or our national interests.” …
Trump campaigned on cracking down on the anti-Israel protests, particularly those on college campuses, but it was not yet clear how exactly he’d go about doing it, given free speech laws in the US.
“When I am president we will not allow our colleges to be taken over by violent radicals,” Trump said at a rally in May. “If you come from another country and try to bring jihadism or anti-Americanism or antisemitism to our campuses we will immediately deport you. You’ll be out of that school.”
Trump Signs Order Expelling Pro-Hamas Foreign Students (David Israel, theJewishPress.com, January 21, 2025)
President Donald Trump on Monday signed an executive order permitting the deportation of students and other foreign nationals who express support for terrorist organizations that are officially designated as such by the US government.
The executive order states that “Whenever information is identified that would support the exclusion or removal of any alien … the Secretary of Homeland Security shall take immediate steps to exclude or remove that alien unless she determines that doing so would inhibit a significant pending investigation or prosecution of the alien for a serious criminal offense or would be contrary to the national security interests of the United States.”
Executive Orders Combating Antisemitism and Additional Measures to Combat Antisemitism
On January 29, President Trump issued another executive order, Additional Measures to Combat Antisemitism. This order states:
Policy. It shall be the policy of the United States to combat anti-Semitism vigorously, using all available and appropriate legal tools, to prosecute, remove, or otherwise hold to account the perpetrators of unlawful anti-Semitic harassment and violence.
The order reinforces his 2019 Combating Antisemitism executive order (EO 13899), which applied Title VI to antisemitic harassment:
Discrimination against Jews may give rise to a Title VI violation when the discrimination is based on an individual's race, color, or national origin.
The new E.O. outlines measures using federal resources to crack down on campus antisemitism. Importantly, EO 13899 advises federal agencies to use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism in the context of Title VI violations, which is a subject of controversy (more on this below).
We will cover these important E.O.s in more detail in a subsequent post.
Crackdown on Antisemitism Begins?
At the same time, several campuses are finally taking steps towards dealing with campus antisemitism and holding brazen violators of university policies accountable. The links below document the antisemitic incidents at Harvard and Columbia that led to these actions. The parallels with incidents that occurred on the USC campus are undeniable, raising the question of whether our university will follow suit.
Washington, D.C., January 21, 2025 — Today, Plaintiffs The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law and Jewish Americans for Fairness in Education (“JAFE”) announced that they have reached an agreement to resolve their claims against Harvard University. As part of the settlement, Harvard has agreed to implement a series of steps, building on measures that Harvard has undertaken over the past year as a part of its commitment to combating anti-Semitism. Harvard and the Brandeis Center look forward to working together in these efforts.
The agreement resolves claims raised by the Brandeis Center and JAFE on behalf of Harvard students in a federal lawsuit. Under the agreement, and consistent with Harvard’s existing Non-Discrimination and Anti-Bullying Policies (“NDAB”), which prohibit discrimination on the basis of ancestry, religion, national origin, or political beliefs, Harvard will incorporate the … IHRA definition of anti-Semitism including accompanying examples applied in the manner described in guidance issued by the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (“OCR”) in 2021 and 2024. Harvard will accordingly consider in the same manner the IHRA definition and examples when evaluating NDAB complaints raising allegations of anti-Semitic discrimination or harassment.
Columbia University Says It Suspended Pro-Hamas Agitator Who Stormed Classroom (Dion J. Pierre, SPME Newsletter—reprinted from Algemeiner, January 24, 2025)
Columbia University has suspended one of several students who disrupted an active class earlier this week and proceeded to utter pro-Hamas propaganda and distribute antisemitic literature, the school announced on Thursday.
On Tuesday, the first day of classes of the new semester, the agitators stormed into Professor Avi Shilon’s course, titled “History of Modern Israel.” Clad in keffiyehs, which were wrapped on their faces to conceal their identities, they read prepared remarks which described the course as “Zionist and imperialist” and a “normalization of genocide.” As part of their performance, which they appeared to film, they dropped flyers, one of which contained an illustration of a lifted boot preparing to trample a Star of David. Next to the drawing was a message that said, “Crush Zionism.”
Another flyer proclaimed, “Burn Zionism to the ground.”
The incident set off an explosion of responses on social media. The US House Committee on Education and the Workforce — now chaired by Rep. Tim Walberg (R-MI) — warned that such behavior “will no longer be tolerated in the Trump administration,” while Columbia University professor and activist Shai Davidai demanded “strong action.” Later, Shilon wrote in an op-ed published by the Israeli publication Ynetnews that Columbia needs to “reevaluate” its safety policies, noting that students should not be able to “walk around wearing masks.”
On Thursday, the university attempted to quell concerns that it would do nothing, as it has been accused of before, and announced that it “has identified and suspended a Columbia participant” of the demonstration. The punishment, it added, will hold until the completion of a “full investigation and disciplinary process.”
The statement continued, “The investigation of the disruption, including the identification of additional participants, remains active. Disruptions to our classrooms and our academic mission and efforts to intimidate or harass our students are not acceptable, are an effort to every member of our university community, and will not be tolerated.”
International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Definition of Antisemitism
There is no consensus on the definition of antisemitism. The essence of the debate is whether anti-Zionism—for example, calling for the destruction of the State of Israel—constitutes antisemitism.
In our opinion, most “anti-Zionism” is antisemitism cloaked in the guise of criticism of Israel. Academic discussions about the precise definition of antisemitism are often used to divert attention from actual problems—such as creating hostile environments for Jewish students on campus.
Below, we highlight several discussions of the controversy.
Is Anti-Zionism Antisemitism? The Munk Debate
In a earlier newsletter, we highlighted the Munk debate of the question “Is Anti-Zionism Antisemitism?” featuring the magnificent closing remarks by Natasha Hausdorff. Although the motion “Anti-Zionism is antisemitism” carried the debate, the conclusion was foregone given the obvious woke make-up of the largely student audience. The video is behind a paywall, but Natasha’s closing remarks are freely available:
Jerry Coyne on the IHRA Definition
In his post “Harvard Resolves Claims of Creating an Anti-Semitic Atmosphere, Agrees to Make Changes” on Why Evolution Is True, Jerry—like us—cannot wrap his head around why the IHRA definition is not universally accepted.
[T]he IHRA definition of antisemitism is so tame that I don’t know why it’s even controversial. Here it is from their page of explanation:
Note that the definition doesn’t include anti-Zionism, but does state this: “Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.”
To me, that means that if you deny the right of Israel to exist, that’s anti-Semitism, for it conceives of Israel, because it’s the one Jewish state, as the one state that has no right to exist. We all known that “Zionist” has long since become a euphemism for “Jews” by pro-Palestinian or anti-Israeli demonstrators, and this ruse no longer carries water.
Writing for Quillette, David Benatar (Anti-Zionism and Antisemitism, July 30, 2024; archived version here) begins with a statement that, in our opinion, should end the discussion:
If you insist that the Jewish state is the only one that should not be allowed to defend itself against terrorist attacks, you are probably an antisemite.
He analyzes several definitions of antisemitism, including the IHRA and the Jerusalem declaration) and proposes his own: “Antisemitism is wrongful discrimination against Jews as Jews.” The article is worth reading for the sake of arming yourself with good arguments.
On the other hand, as we covered earlier, there is an op-ed by the NEXUS folks on the campus protests. The NEXUS group has its own definition of antisemitism, according to which not only is anti-Zionism not antisemitism, basically, nothing is!
FIRE Director Greg Lukianoff Argues Against Adopting IHRA Definition
In his post “My Letter to the Incoming President” published on The Eternally Radical Idea, Greg elaborates on the main points he made in his January 20 letter to President Trump. The letter emphasizes the importance of restoring and protecting free speech on university campuses and offers concrete steps towards this goal. In particular, Greg highlights the need to address the erosion of free speech resulting from the abuse of campus anti-harassment policies—specifically, the weaponization of Title VI and Title IX.
One of those problems was that the Department of Education had promulgated a “blueprint” for Title IX enforcement that failed to meet what the Supreme Court has determined is the minimum legal standard for peer-on-peer harassment to be punishable. That standard, from the 1999 Davis v. Monroe County board of Education decision, defines harassment as behavior that is: “so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive, and that so undermines and detracts from the victims' educational experience, that the victim-students are effectively denied equal access to an institution's resources and opportunities.”
So I call on the President to support legislation that codifies the Davis definition for all education-related antidiscrimination law, adds religion as a class explicitly protected under Title VI, and codifies the practice of applying Title VI to racial and ethnic stereotyping.
Greg then emphasizes how these changes will help to protect Jewish students and explains his opposition to the adoption of the IHRA definition:
Those changes to Title VI will go a long way to improving the campus climate for Jewish students. But I ask the President to make one more change: to rescind Executive Order 13899, which directs federal agencies to use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of anti-Semitism. As I state in the letter, “[w]hen used to enforce Title VI, the IHRA definition is vague, overbroad, and viewpoint-discriminatory in ways that pose serious threats to campus expression.” The IHRA definition was meant to measure sentiments, but you can’t punish someone for having bad sentiments alone. [Bolding ours]
This argument is worth considering. Greg does not argue against the essence of the IHRA definition, but explains its shortcoming as a legal instrument. His recommendation to the President does not intend to shield those who create a hostile environment for Jews, but to prevent too broad an interpretation that could lead to the same type of abuses we have witnessed with “sexual harassment.”
Highlights from University Campuses—And Some Good News
George Mason Freshman, 18, Busted for Plotting Attack on Israel’s NYC Consulate—as He Was Facing Possible Deportation (Allie Griffin, SPME Newsletter—originally published in New York Post, December 20, 2024)
This case illustrates why the Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists executive order is needed:
An 18-year-old freshman at George Mason University in Virginia was arrested Tuesday for allegedly plotting a mass casualty attack on Israel’s General Consulate in New York City, which he described as “a goldmine of targets,” according to a report.
Abdullah Ezzeldin Taha Mohamed Hassan, an Egyptian national, was charged with one count of demonstrating how to manufacture an explosive with intent to murder internationally protected persons after allegedly instructing an undercover FBI agent in November to target the consulate with explosives, the Washington Post reported Thursday.
“Two options: lay havoc on them with an assault rifle or detonate a TATP [suicide] vest in the midst of them,” Hassan allegedly told the agent posing as a terrorist sympathizer on Nov. 27, prosecutors alleged in court documents obtained by the outlet.
Hassan, who had been facing deportation proceedings, was arrested by the FBI in Falls Church and subsequently banned from campus, according to the report.
Columbia Professor Resigns After University Allows Anti-Israel Academic to Continue Teaching Course on Zionism (Haley Cohen, SPME Newsletter—originally published in the Jewish Insider, December 20, 2024)
Professor Joseph Massad, who praised the October 7 terror attacks, will continue to teach the class “History of the Jewish Enlightenment in 19th Century Europe” at Columbia. The case adds to our collection of exhibits of radical faculty using the classroom to indoctrinate and propagandize students. It also illustrates the failure of Columbia to ensure the rigor of its curriculum. While Massad’s expressions and opinions are fully protected by the First Amendment, as a cheerleader of Hamas, he is a perverse choice to teach a class on Zionism.
A Columbia University adjunct professor announced his resignation on Monday, citing the university’s decision to allow a longtime professor who described the Oct. 7 terrorist attacks in Israel as “astounding,” “awesome” and “incredible” to continue teaching a course on Zionism.
In his resignation letter, Lawrence “Muzzy” Rosenblatt, an adjunct professor of international and public affairs, wrote that having Joseph Massad, a professor of modern Arab politics and intellectual history, teach a course on Zionism was “akin to having a White nationalist teach about the US Civil Rights movement and the struggle for Black equality.”
“Columbia has lost not only its moral compass, but its intellectual one,” Rosenblatt wrote….
One day after Hamas’ Oct. 7 terror attack, Massad wrote, “Perhaps the major achievement of the resistance in the temporary takeover of these settler-colonies is the death blow to any confidence that Israeli colonists had in their military and its ability to protect them.”
He went on: “The sight of the Palestinian resistance fighters storming Israeli checkpoints separating Gaza from Israel was astounding, not only to the Israelis but especially to the Palestinian and Arab peoples who came out across the region to march in support of the Palestinians in their battle against their cruel colonizers,” Massad wrote of the Oct. 7 massacre. “No less awesome were the scenes witnessed by millions of jubilant Arabs who spent the day watching the news, of Palestinian fighters from Gaza breaking through Israel’s prison fence or gliding over it by air.”
He went on to say that Oct. 7 has “both shaken Israeli society and struck Palestinians and Arabs as incredible.” …
Clifford Stein, a professor of industrial engineering and computer science at Columbia, said he applauds Rosenblatt’s “courage.”
“I fully support allowing a diverse set of viewpoints, but having Professor Massad, who has called for the destruction of the state of Israel and who publicly celebrated the Oct. 7 attacks, teach the history of Zionism is insulting,” Stein told JI. “Professor Massad has a documented history of intimidating students with pro-Israel viewpoints. He does not support an objective evaluation of the material. Why have someone like that teach a course on the history of Zionism?”
An example from down-under: A screenshot from anti-racism seminar at Queensland University of Technology in Brsibane, Australia
TGIF: I Solemnly Swear (Nellie Bowles, The Free Press, January 24, 2025)
→ Yale teaching our best and brightest: Asif Rahman, a former CIA analyst who graduated from Yale in 2013, pleaded guilty to leaking classified records on Friday. What he leaked: Israeli plans for retaliatory strikes against Iran. He’ll get something like six years in prison.
Which is really a small price to pay for fulfilling his Yale-ordained duties of sabotaging the West and blowing up every institution he can get inside. Sweetheart jobs await him when he gets out. Probably an endowed chair in the Comp Lit department, definitely an honorary degree from Princeton, and if he plays his cards right, a spot on a nonprofit board.
And now a bit of good news:
→ Even Hamas is falling out of fashion: Hamas is getting very unpopular. In a shock twist: 18- to 24-year-olds went from being 50–50 Israel vs. Hamas (December 2023) to 79–21 for Israel over Hamas (January 2025), according to the most recent Harvard CAPS-Harris polling. Am I dreaming? Did all the teens become Boomers overnight?
Could this be the sign of the change of a vibe—or it is just a polling error?
Antisemitic Corruption of the United Nations and Wikipedia
Israeli Hostages Reportedly Held at United Nations “Humanitarian” Camp as well as Hospital in Northern Gaza (Jerry Coyne, Why Evolution Is True, January 24, 2025)
Do we really need the UN any more? For a long time I’ve felt that some parts of it, including UNRWA and the International Court of Justice, both with their obsession against Israel, should be deep-sixed (UNRWA is the only UN refugee agency tasked with “refugees” in one area, and several countries, including the US, have defunded it). Seriously, how much good does the UN really do?
If you need more evidence that parts of the UN are actually complicit in terrorism, have a look at the allegations of the three young Israeli women just released by Hamas. Yep, they said they were held in a UNRWA-run “humanitarian camp”. The article below also discusses claims that other hostages were held in Gazan hospitals, hospitals that were raided by the IDF to the loud objections of the rest of the world. If you think the UNRWA people who ran the camp were totally unaware of the fact that it contained Israeli hostages, well, . . . . . that’s not the way it works in Gaza.
Check out this example of bias at Wikipedia—the wicked wording in the red box implies that all 1,195 deaths of Israelis on October 7 resulted from the Israeli response to the Hamas attack, and not from the massacre executed by Hamas:
On 7 October 2023, Hamas-led militant groups launched a surprise attack on Israel, taking 251 captive, against which Israelis responded, applying the controversial Hannibal Directive, resulting in the death of 1,195 Israelis and foreign nationals, among which 815 civilians.
And a Bit of Humor from the Babylon Bee
Liberals Briefly Pause Chanting ‘Death To Israel’ To Call Elon Musk A Nazi (January 22, 2024)
U.S. — With the uproar over President Donald Trump returning to the White House with a flurry of sweeping actions, the nation’s liberals took a brief pause in their standard daily routine of chanting “Death to Israel” so they could call Elon Musk a Nazi.
Outrage spread across the country as liberals expressed shock and disgust after Musk motioned with his hands while saying his heart went out to everyone at Trump’s inauguration rally. The egregious act caused the liberals to call a temporary halt to their quest to see Israel destroyed.
“Elon Musk is a total Nazi!” Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib shouted to the media. “I’ve never seen such a blatant display of antisemitism from a prominent figure in the United States. It’s sickening and has no place in this country. Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have a ‘The Jews Must Be Annihilated’ rally I’m scheduled to speak at this afternoon. But Elon Musk is a Nazi!”
Fellow Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez seconded the sentiment. “Musk is who we thought he was,” she said in a video posted on TikTok. “I was just speaking to all of my friends at a ‘Death to Israel’ march, and they thought the same thing. I haven’t been this upset about an incident since Israel started bombing Hamas terrorist hideouts like the dirty Jews they are. It would serve them right to be exterminated. But Elon Musk? Antisemitism cannot be tolerated.”
At publishing time, congressional Democrats said they were calling for an investigation into reports that Elon Musk was secretly a Jew and therefore part of a global conspiracy to take over the world.
Addendum: Did Elon Give a Nazi Salute?
We don’t think so. For a level-headed discussion, see this essay by Helen Pluckrose.
Finally, a glimmer of light in the overwhelming darkness. Justice is beginning to take its course, and the vile antisemites are facing the consequences of their hatred. No longer can such bigotry go unchecked—accountability is here. Let this be a turning point, a moment that reaffirms our commitment to standing against hate and ensuring that those who spread venomous ideologies are held responsible. The fight is far from over, but today, there is hope.
There is some very important information in this post but a couple points require comment.
1. Trump's executive order allowing the vetting and deportation of foreign students who support terrorist groups and activities is a good start on addressing this issue, but does not go nearly far enough. The truth is that academic institutions with their desire for foreign tuition dollars and in support of "diversity" (in this case affluent students possessing anti-Western, antisemitic ideology) are not just a threat to their own campuses but to the larger communities in which they are based. Any university that has a foreign student deported for their antisemitic or pro-terrorism activities needs to be held accountable for their actions, or they will just admit the next protester as soon as the semester ends. Since these institutions are effectively acting as sponsors for international students visas, admission of any student who so misbehaves that the student must be deported demonstrates that the institution is not capable of exercising the PRIVILEGE of sponsoring foreign students responsibly. Part of the deportation of the antisemitic/pro-terrorist foreign student should include a hefty fine for the institution (adjusted to fit the affluence of the institution)....and the loss of the right to admit ANY foreign student for a period of 5 years. Such a penalty would force universities to exercise appropriate caution before admitting and enabling foreign students.
2. Greg Lukianoff and FIRE's criticism of the definition of antisemitism is misplaced. Stating that the definition is vague and would create problems similar to those observed with the overzealous use of the definition of sexual harassment in Title IX endorsement misses a key point. The problem with Title IX is that it uses a demonstrably FALSE definition of sexual harassment to criminalize protected speech and behavior and denies due process to the accused. Simply following the constitution on issues related to sexual harassment that apply to the rest of society resolves that problem. The IHRA definition of antisemitism's greatest strength in avoiding its being too vague and being applied to otherwise protected speech lies in its requirement that criticism directed solely at Israel or Zionists but not similar conduct by non-Jewish states be seen as antisemitism. That is hardly vague and forces intellectual consistency on the part of those who seek to criticize Israel or Zionism. The fact that almost no supporters of the Palestinians can meet that standards is not a problem of the IHRA definition...it arises from their inherent antisemitism. FIRE does not do the cause of free speech or itself any favors when it fails to distinguish blatantly antisemitic speech from protected criticism of any particular member state. One has to wonder why FIRE chooses to focus so much of its limited resources defending the "free speech" rights of antisemites while other cases of free speech violations that have nothing to do with such hateful ideology remain unsupported. Apparently some perspectives are more deserving of "free" speech protections than others.
Fortunately, President Trump is one to learn from mistakes and we can expect more Executive Orders to address these issues soon enough. Just my thoughts.