INTRODUCTION StopAntisemitismʼs inaugural report in 2022 laid bare how some of Americaʼs most esteemed institutions handle antisemitism on their campuses – or donʼt. Parents, students, faculty, and the public praised the report as the definitive guide for Jewish students choosing colleges; no other such resource exists. Amid record antisemitism, this information has never been more important to rising freshmen, and the response to this yearʼs survey confirms that. Seven out of the 25 schools completed the administration survey, compared to three out of 25 last year. More than 1,400 Jewish students completed StopAntisemitismʼs questionnaire, a massive increase from last yearʼs inaugural report. The responses were shocking. 79% of student respondents reported that they had experienced antisemitism on campus, of which 32% did not report the incident. 61% feel the need to hide their Jewish identity on campus, 72% said they feel unwelcome as a Jewish person in all spaces at their school, and 68% feel that their schoolʼs administration does not take acts of antisemitism seriously. Multiple students said they didnʼt report an incident because they feared retaliation from the school and/or the antisemitic abuser. One respondent from Cornell University mentioned that their offender was granted a medical leave of absence and that they were forced to continue taking seminars with faculty who supported the antisemite. As America focuses more on racial issues, virtually all educational institutions have established a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) office in an effort to prevent bigotry and generate constructive solutions in response to hate. Too often, DEI resources exclude Jews, and discrimination aimed at Jewish students because of their religious identity or their endorsement of the State of Israel is frequently downplayed relative to discrimination against other marginalized communities on campus. Thankfully, that situation is improving. Out of the seven schools that completed the survey, each replied “yes” when asked if antisemitism was included in its DEI training, “yes” when asked if there were formal procedures to address antisemitism on campus, and “yes” if Jewish affinity groups were present at the school. However, each school replied “no” when asked if they had adopted IHRA — the internationally accepted definition of antisemitism – even though adopting IHRA is a requirement for schools that receive Federal Title VI funding. This definition is a powerful tool for accountability, providing clear guidelines for what counts as antisemitism; without an independent standard, victims of antisemitism are at the mercy of their respective collegeʼs subjective judgment. 2