ANTISEMITISM ON U.S. COLLEGE & UNIVERSITY CAMPUSES 2022 REPORT CARD

INTRODUCTION Antisemitism on U.S. College & University Campuses has reached a crescendo. A place where students come to learn and explore new ideas has been replaced with breeding grounds for Jew-hatred. Violence and harassment have become common place with students fearing for their safety if they are visibly Jewish or openly support the State of Israel. StopAntisemitism, a national watchdog organization dedicated to proactively exposing antisemites and holding them accountable for their antisemitic behavior, has received an influx of requests from Jewish students and their parents asking for guidance about where they can feel safe attending college. In response, StopAntisemitism created this report to gage antisemitic climates at colleges and universities. StopAntisemitism analyzed and graded 25 higher education institutions across the United States. Discrimination targeting Jewish students for their religious identity or for their support of the Jewish State of Israel is not taken as seriously as discriminatory acts against other marginalized groups. As America continues to contend with racial reckoning, many, if not all, schools have created a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) department to promote anti-racist positions and effect positive social change. But all too often, Jews, who are grossly mislabeled as a “white, model-minority,” are excluded from the DEI discussion. DEI departments have not made fighting antisemitism a priority and few adopted or are even willing to consider the IHRA working definition of antisemitism when dealing with antisemitism on campus. In a survey conducted by StopAntisemitism assessing the state of antisemitism in American higher education taken by Jewish college students across the country, 55% of respondents replied “yes” to experiencing antisemitism on campus. Half of these victims said that they didnʼt report the incidents, and about a third of those that did report it said that they were ignored by college administrators or told that there was no resolution. More alarming is that only 28% of the respondents said their school administration takes antisemitism and the protection of Jewish students seriously. It has become clear that the DEI approach on university campuses has failed to combat bigotry against their Jewish communities, often brushing it off as a freedom of speech issue. 1

INTRODUCTION Following are three examples of inexcusable antisemites on campus who were protected under the veil of free speech: Nerdeen Kiswani, the former President and VP of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and Founder of Within Our Lifetime (WOL) at CUNY Law and Hunter College, was chosen as a CUNY Law commencement speaker despite being named in a Department 1of Education Title VI complaint alleging antisemitism and threatening to set a black man on fire for wearing an Israeli Defense Force (IDF) sweatshirt. Kiswani was also named StopAntisemitismʼs Antisemite of the Year in 2020 due to her vile Jew hatred. Steven Salaita, a Professor from Washington D.C. who was fired from two teaching positions at different universities because of his long track record of antisemitic social media posts, was invited to the Virginia Tech Graduate and Professional Student Senate (GPSS) this past March to take part in its Research Symposium and Exposition. 2Students, staff, and various advocacy groups called on the university to rescind his invitation, but they refused. He was paid a $12,000 speaking fee by the Virginia Tech Student Government Association, a program thatʼs funded by dues paid by the entire student population. This means that Jewish students attending Virginia Tech unwillingly contributed to his platform at the event. Mohammed El-Kurd, a Palestinian activist with a history of antisemitic rhetoric in speeches and on social media, has experienced his fair share of controversies. El-Kurd used his book tour to spew antisemitism on campuses across the country in 2022, including Arizona State University where he received nearly $10,000 in speaking fees. These fees 3were funded by ASUʼs Undergraduate Student Government, which receives money from the student body that pays semesterly dues to the organization as part of their tuition. Yet another example of how a schoolʼs Jewish population is unwillingly paying for hateful speakers. In his speech, El-Kurd spouted antisemitic tropes such as “they (Jews) control the media” as well as joking that “if you heckle me, you will get shot.” 1 2 3 2

INTRODUCTION At a time when antisemites are emboldened to spew anti-Jewish bigotry and openly engage in protests resulting in antisemitic violence, this report is an essential resource for exposing rising antisemitism at American universities and can help Jewish parents make appropriate decisions regarding their childrenʼs education. Jewish families must now take a stand and decide if they are willing to have their hard-earned money, paid for tuition fees, be used to fund antisemitism. StopAntisemitism sent surveys to the administrations, amassed research, and collected hundreds of first-person narratives by students at these schools. This new report offers a “report card” grading system based on pre-defined baseline measures that ranks higher education institutions on how well or poorly they are responding to, and preventing, antisemitism on their respective campuses. BASELINE MEASURES When analyzing and grading each school, StopAntisemitism adhered to various baseline measures under four categories: Protection: How does the school report antisemitic incidents? Is there a willingness to work with Jewish advocacy groups? What are the reactions from college administrators after an incident occurs? Allyship: Does the school speak out against antisemitism? Are Jews included in the schoolʼs DEI policies? Identity: Do Jewish students feel safe at their school? Do Jewish students feel the need to hide their identity on campus? Do Jewish students feel like they are being held responsible for Israelʼs actions? Policy: Has the school adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Allianceʼs (IHRA) definition of antisemitism? Is there a Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) organization on campus? Have BDS resolutions been adopted? Unless specified, all schools have an SJP (or similar) chapter, allow an Israeli Apartheid Week, and have not adopted IHRA. Additionally, only the school administrations which acknowledged the survey are notated. *Schools marked with an asterisk have had multiple antisemitic incidents in recent years. 3

IVY LEAGUE SCHOOLS UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA Protection: Students DO trust the administration in putting their safety as a priority. Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. Identity: The majority of respondents DO feel that they can be open with their A Jewish identity and their support for Israel. Policy: NO Israeli Apartheid Week but students have previously erected anti-Israel mock walls. No BDS resolutions presented. PRINCETON UNIVERSITY Protection: Students DO NOT always feel that the administration takes their safety seriously. Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. B Identity: Students DO feel like they can be open with their Jewish identity but DO NOT feel comfortable expressing their support for Israel and feel they are being held responsible for Israelʼs actions. Policy: NO Israeli Apartheid Week but students have erected mock anti-Israel walls. A BDS resolution was presented but did not pass. HARVARD UNIVERSITY* Protection: Students DO NOT feel like the administration takes the safety of Jewish students seriously and say they have ignored antisemitic complaints. D Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. Identity: Students report that theyʼve been victims of physical threats, verbal harassment, and fear of identifying as Jewish. Policy: A BDS resolution was presented but did not pass. YALE UNIVERSITY* Protection: Students DO NOT feel that the school administration and DEI staff take antisemitism seriously enough and feel complaints of antisemitism on campus are ignored F Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. Identity: Students DO NOT feel comfortable in expressing their Jewish identity or their support for Israel and believe that they are held responsible for Israelʼs actions. Policy: A BDS resolution was presented and passed. COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY* Protection: Students overwhelmingly DO NOT believe the administration considers their safety as a priority. F Allyship: DOES include Jews in its DEI initiatives. Identity: Students report a hostile and antisemitic environment when their identity or Zionist beliefs are expressed. Policy: BDS resolutions were presented and passed. 4

LIBERAL ARTS SCHOOLS BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY Protection: Students DO feel safe on campus. Allyship: DOES include Jews in its DEI initiatives. Identity: Students DO feel safe to express their Jewish identity and their A support for Israel. Policy: NO Israeli Apartheid Week. No BDS resolutions presented. Brandeis HAS adopted IHRA. OBERLIN COLLEGE Protection: The administration ignored multiple requests to complete the survey. Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. B Identity: Students DO feel safe in expressing their Jewish identities but DO NOT feel comfortable expressing their support for Israel and feel unwelcome in various spaces for their Zionist beliefs. Policy: NO Israeli Apartheid Week. BDS resolutions were presented but did not pass. AMHERST COLLEGE Protection: Students DO NOT feel that the administration does enough to ensure the safety of its Jewish population. C Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. Identity: Students DO feel safe in expressing their Jewish identity but DO NOT feel comfortable expressing their support for Israel and often feel they are held responsi- ble for Israelʼs actions. Policy: No BDS resolutions presented. WILLIAMS COLLEGE Protection: Students DO NOT feel that the administration takes the safety of their Jewish students seriously. D Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. Identity: Students reported a hostile environment aimed at Jews masked as anti-Zionism and they DO NOT feel comfortable expressing their support for Israel. Policy: NO Israeli Apartheid Week. A BDS resolution was presented and passed. SWARTHMORE COLLEGE Protection: The administration ignored multiple requests to complete the survey. F Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. Identity: Inconclusive as no students from the school participated in the survey. Policy: BDS resolutions were presented and passed. 5

STATE SCHOOLS UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA, CHAPEL HILL* Protection: Many students reported the administration DOES NOT value their safety. Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. Identity: The majority of students DO feel comfortable expressing their Jewish B identity and their support for Israel, but feel they are vilified for the actions of Israel. Policy: NO Israeli Apartheid Week. No BDS resolutions presented. UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, ANN ARBOR Protection: Students DO NOT feel the administration places their safety as a serious concern. Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. C Identity: Students DO feel comfortable identifying as Jewish but DO NOT feel safe expressing their support for Israel and often feel they are held responsible for the actions of Israel. Policy: NO Israeli Apartheid Week. BDS resolutions were presented and passed. UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA Protection: Students DO NOT feel the administration places their safety as a serious concern. C Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. Identity: Students DO NOT feel safe expressing their Jewish identity or their support for Israel and feel unwelcome in certain spaces on campus. Policy: NO Israeli Apartheid Week. A BDS resolution was presented but did not pass. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES Protection: Students said the administration disregards their concerns surrounding antisemitism and safety Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. D Identity: Many students hide their Jewish identity, as well as their support for Israel, and DO NOT feel welcomed or safe in many spaces on campus. Policy: No Israeli Apartheid Week but students have erected anti-Israel mock walls. BDS resolutions were presented and passed. UCLA HAS adopted IHRA. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY* Protection: Students expressed their concern with the ambivalence from the administration when antisemitic incidents have been reported. Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. F Identity: Students DO feel comfortable expressing their Jewish identity, but they DO NOT feel safe expressing their support for Israel and often feel they are excluded from certain spaces due to their Judaism. Policy: A BDS resolution was presented and passed. 6

PUBLIC SCHOOLS WITH THE LARGEST POPULATIONS OF JEWISH STUDENTS UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND Protection: Students DO NOT feel the administration considers Jews as a persecuted minority nor takes antisemitism seriously. Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. C Identity: Some students DO NOT feel safe expressing their Jewish identity or their support for Israel. Policy: BDS resolutions were presented yet none passed. UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA* Protection: The administration acknowledged the survey yet never completed it, despite promising that they would. Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. C Identity: The majority of students DO feel safe being open about their Jewish identity and their support for Israel but at times feel that they are NOT welcome in certain spaces. Policy: NO Israeli Apartheid Week, but students have erected anti-Israel mock walls. No BDS resolutions presented. RUTGERS UNIVERSITY* Protection: Students DO feel that the administration takes their safety seriously. C Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. Identity: Many students feel extremely intimidated expressing their support for Israel and feel unwelcomed in certain spaces on campus due to their Zionist beliefs. Policy: No BDS resolutions presented. UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN, MADISON* Protection: Students DO NOT feel the administration does enough to ensure the safety of its Jewish students. Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. D Identity: The majority of students DO feel safe expressing their Jewish identity as well as their support for Israel. Policy: A BDS resolution was presented in 2017 and passed. UW-Madison HAS adopted IHRA. CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK, BROOKLYN* Protection: Students feel the administration turns a blind eye to Jew-hatred. Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. F Identity: Students DO NOT feel safe, saying they need to hide their Jewish identity as well as their support for Israel. Policy: No BDS resolutions presented. 7

PRIVATE SCHOOLS WITH THE LARGEST POPULATIONS OF JEWISH STUDENTS TULANE UNIVERSITY Protection: Students DO feel safe on campus. Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. Identity: Students DO feel comfortable about expressing their Jewish A identity and their support for Israel. Policy: NO Israeli Apartheid Week. No BDS resolutions presented. BOSTON UNIVERSITY Protection: Students DO feel safe on campus. Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. B Identity: The majority of students DO feel they can be open about their Jewish identity and their support for Israel but feel that they are often held responsible for the actions of Israel. Policy: No BDS resolutions presented. GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY Protection: Students DO NOT feel that the administration takes their safety seriously. D Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives. Identity: Students DO NOT feel safe being open with their Jewish identity or their support for Israel. Policy: BDS resolutions were presented and passed. NEW YORK UNIVERSITY* Protection: Students DO NOT feel that the administration gives antisemitism proper attention. The administration DID complete the survey. Allyship: DOES include Jews in its DEI initiatives. F Identity: Students DO feel safe being open with their Jewish identity but feel they are often vilified for the actions of Israel. Policy: BDS resolutions were presented and passed. NYU HAS adopted the IHRA working definition of antisemitism. UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA* Protection: Students DO NOT feel that the administration takes their safety seriously. Allyship: Does not include Jews in its DEI initiatives F Identity: Students DO NOT feel safe being open about their Jewish identity or their support for Israel and they feel unwelcome in certain spaces. Policy: NO Israeli Apartheid Week, but students have erected anti-Israel mock walls. A BDS resolution was presented and passed. 8

| STUDENT RESPONSES TO SURVEY SUMMARY HAVE YOU BEEN A VICTIM OF ANTISEMITISM ON CAMPUS? 55% YES 45% NO DO YOU FEEL THE NEED TO HIDE YOUR JEWISH IDENTITY ON CAMPUS? 55% 45% 27% YES 73% NO 27% 73% DOES YOUR SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION TAKE ANTISEMITISM AND YOUR SAFETY SERIOUSLY? 28% YES 72% NO DO YOU FEEL THE NEED TO HIDE 28% YOUR SUPPORT FOR ISRAEL? 55% YES 72% 45% NO 55% 45% 9

NEGATIVE FINDINGS THREE COLLEGES FACE RECENT TITLE VI COMPAINTS ALLEGING ANTISEMITISM: CUNY, USC, NYU Title VI, from the Civil Rights Act of 1964, “prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any program or activity that receives Federal funds or other Federal financial assistance.” SCHOOL: City University of New York (CUNY) Brooklyn College Title VI Complaint: In February 2022, a complaint filed by Jewish students alleged they were victims of antisemitism on campus, claiming that the school showed no efforts to act on the matter. As a result of this filing, the Department of Educationʼs Office for Civil Rights (OCR) launched an investigation into the school for a potential Title VI violation, citing the studentsʼ complaints of pervasive antisemitism from both peers and faculty. The complaint alleged how some professors spouted antisemitic tropes and made spiteful comments towards Jews – relating to Jewish power and how Jews fall under the umbrella of “white privilege.” In an incident where students were asked to rank their cultural identities, a Jewish student ranked their Jewish identity higher than their white background. The professor scolded the student, commenting that their Jewish identity made them part of a dominant culture that isnʼt oppressed. Additionally, a student stated her eagerness to strangle a Jewish student in a WhatsApp group chat, with other students supporting her. In an attempt by Jewish students to address the situation with college administrators to get involved and establish policies against this form of harassment, other students objected and designated Jews as racist oppressors. SCHOOL: City University of New York (CUNY) Title VI Complaint: In July 2022, the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) filed a Title VI complaint to the OCR against CUNY regarding a series of consistent antisemitic incidences on its campuses. Antisemitic activity such as the distribution of hate-filled flyers targeting Jews – some of which included swastikas and attacked “Zionists” – have been commonplace at the Universityʼs campuses in recent years. Despite this, CUNY has not taken any action or shown any intention of resolving the matter of what the ACLJ calls “pervasive antisemitic discrimination.” These hate-fueled incidents resulted in retracted funding of $50,000 from the New York City Council that had been set aside for the school. A hearing on the matter was set for June 8 but had to be postponed when CUNY Chancellor Felix V. Matos Rodriguez cited a scheduling conflict and couldnʼt attend. 10

NEGATIVE FINDINGS However, he also noted that he didnʼt want to attend, and when the hearing was delayed to June 30th, Rodriguez cancelled again. The hearing proceeded with Jewish students from CUNY testifying they felt their well-beings were in danger – citing multiple incidences of harassment, assaults, and antisemitic slurs. The administrators who were in attendance confessed there werenʼt any programs for training staff on responding to antisemitism at CUNY, nor do they log antisemitic incidents. They also brought up that the school has not adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism – a definition thatʼs required for universities to sign onto yearly for federal government funding to acknowledge their Title VI participation. SCHOOL: University of Southern California (USC) Title VI Complaint: In July 2022, the OCR initiated an investigation into a possible Title VI violation by the University of Southern California. The complaint detailed a harassment campaign orchestrated by USC students to target university student government (USG) Vice President Rose Ritch in an effort to impeach her over her support for Israel. After failed attempts to urge the schoolʼs administration to prevent an impeachment hearing against her and to condemn the studentʼs efforts as blatant discrimination, Ritch resigned from her position. Calls for her impeachment claimed that her pro-Israel views were “racist” and therefore made her unfit to serve in a student government role. Ritch suffered significant harassment on social media, with comments targeting her and former USG president Truman Fritz – who also resigned – including, “Tell your Zionist ass VP to resign too” and “Warms my heart to see all the Zionists from USC and USG getting relentlessly cyberbullied.” SCHOOL: New York University (NYU) Title VI Complaint: In September 2020, an NYU student filed a complaint with the OCR stating that the University was discriminatory towards Jewish students for its lack of action against antisemitic incidents on campus. The complaint highlighted many instances of antisemitic activity over a two-year period, such as an injury to a Jewish student at an event hosted by the University group Realize Israel, as well as a student-generated tweet stating, “all Zionists to die.” Due to the latter incident, the universityʼs Bronfman Center for Jewish Student Life ceased operations for two days out of safety concerns. Before the investigation was completed by the OCR, NYU administrators elected to settle on the matter, agreeing to the condition that the school would revise its Non-Discrimination and Anti-Harassment Policy to incorporate language that the University prohibits antisemitic activity on its campus. 11

INCIDENTS SINCE THE START OF THE SCHOOL YEAR HARVARD UNIVERSITY Palestinian protestors shouting antisemitic falsitites during the first day school UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA The Hillel building was vandalized on the first day of school UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN, MADISON Antisemitic messages written in chalk on school sidewalks on the first day of school 12

CONCLUSION Since the onset of pro-Palestinian student organizations with anti-Jewish undertones, such as Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and Within Our Lifetime (WOL) – and the increase in emboldened white supremacy movements across the United States – Jewish students and their families are factoring in their personal safety when deciding where to attend college. This report reveals some shocking and upsetting trends pertaining to the safety and overall experience of Jewish students on college campuses across America: Jewish students say they are hesitant to disclose their identity and support of Israel, as well as harboring a feeling of responsibility for Israelʼs policies on the global stage. Respondents who reported antisemitic incidents such as verbal threats, vandalism, and physical threats and violence, have largely been ignored by campus administrators. Jewish students say they are hesitant to disclose their identity and support of Israel, as well harboring a feeling of responsibility for Israelʼs policies on the global stage. Only 28% of respondents felt their school took incidents of antisemitism seriously, ultimately jeopardizing their safety on campus. While these results are dismaying, the final point reflects the majority of responses – or lack thereof – that StopAntisemitism received from the surveys sent to the colleges themselves. Upon reaching out to 25 universities to request their cooperation with helping to safeguard their campuses for Jewish students by participating in a short survey regarding their practices concerning antisemitism, nearly all our requests were ignored or responded to with startling words such as “this isnʼt in our best interest.” Although universities have prioritized diversity, equity, and social justice for creating a safe campus environment, antisemitism remains a prevalent and growing problem in American higher education. Jewish students should not have to decide where they receive their degree based on personal safety in the face of bigotry against their identity. If colleges claim they welcome everyone and promote “safe spaces” on their campuses, why does that not include Jews? 13

CONCLUSION Most Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) departments have failed to protect Jewish students at American colleges and universities with only three schools including Jews in their DEI initiatives. To safeguard the welfare of their Jewish communities, higher education institutions must adopt and utilize the IHRA Definition of Antisemitism when responding to antisemitic incidents – at the time of publication, only four schools have adopted IHRA. They must also revise their DEI policies to prohibit any form of antisemitic discrimination on campus, create a Jewish affinity group, and include Jews in the DEI conversation. By taking these actions, college administrators will be better equipped to respond to antisemitism and take antisemitic incidents more seriously. Without support from allies in higher education, the future for Jews on college campuses remains questionable. RECOMMENDATIONS Revise DEI policies to include Jews, denounce antisemitism and anti-Israeli bias, and add Jewish affinity groups. Cultivate safe spaces for Jewish students to discuss their beliefs and celebrate their culture, as well as promote peaceful discussions surrounding Jewish identity, including Zionism. Be proactive in responding to antisemitic incidents, and release statements addressing their support of Jewish communities on campus. Adhere to the IHRA Definition of Antisemitism (a requirement to receive Title VI federal funding). This is imperative when assessing incidents that could be deemed antisemitic. Colleges should welcome and promote the establishment of Jewish student organizations like Israel Coalition on Campus (ICC), Students Supporting Israel (SSI), Hillel International, and StandWithUs. We invite all the colleges highlighted in this report to contact us and help them establish guidelines and programs to further support and protect their Jewish students. 14

ABOUT US StopAntisemitism is a grassroots watchdog organization dedicated to exposing groups and individuals that espouse incitement towards the Jewish people and State and engage in antisemitic behaviors. Founded in 2018, StopAntisemitism was born in response to increasing antisemitic violence and sentiment across the United States. StopAntisemitism has developed a strong following, reaching millions of actively engaged individuals through social media, mailers, and its website. By publicly exposing antisemites, StopAntisemitism has created an environment where those who propagate hatred against the Jewish people are met with real-world consequences including but not limited to job loss, school expulsions, awards revoked, etc. Twitter: @StopAntisemites | Facebook: @StopAntisemitismorg Instagram: stop_antisemitism | Website: stopantisemitism.org 15