Consultant Elise Stefanik leaned into the microphone and volleyed a sequence of questions on the college president sitting in entrance of her. It was about three hours right into a congressional listening to inspecting antisemitism at Columbia College, and the president, Nemat Shafik, paused, sighed and gave a nervous snicker.
Ms. Stefanik had requested whether or not the college would take away a professor who praised the Oct. 7 Hamas assault from a job as chair of the college’s tutorial assessment committee.
After a number of seconds, Dr. Shafik responded. “I believe that may be — I believe, I might, sure. Let me come again with sure,” she mentioned.
Republican lawmakers on the Home Committee on Training and the Work Pressure had come able to pounce. They examined for weaknesses and prodded vulnerabilities, whereas their witnesses, a bunch of Columbia leaders, appeared conciliatory.
And but, by the tip, it appeared Dr. Shafik and different campus leaders had efficiently subtle Republican strains of assault, repeatedly and vigorously agreeing that antisemitism was a significant issue on their campus and vowing that they’d do extra to combat it.
However as Dr. Shafik spoke, the tempest that she had been introduced in to account for appeared to accentuate. Again on campus in Manhattan, pro-Palestinian college students erected an encampment with dozens of tents on a central campus garden, vowing to not transfer till Columbia divested from corporations with ties to Israel and met different calls for. A whole bunch of different college students joined them to rally all through the day.
The split-screen second provided a glimpse of the precarious panorama and dangerous selections Dr. Shafik nonetheless faces as she comes residence from the antisemitism listening to. The protesting college students, and the a whole lot of others who’ve chanted and marched at pro-Palestinian rallies, together with dozens of supportive college members, have repeatedly rejected some extent their leaders largely conceded on Wednesday in Washington — that their activism was antisemitic and ought to be punished.
“I believe that antisemitism is horrible, however I don’t suppose that utilizing the conflation of antisemitism and anti-Zionism as an excuse to crack down on pro-Palestine advocacy is justifiable or associated in any sense,” mentioned Maryam Alwan, a senior and pro-Palestinian organizer on campus, talking from the tent encampment.
“And I believe the truth that we’re doing this on the day of the listening to,” she added, “I believe it’s a testomony to the truth that we really will solely rise stronger each time they crack down.”
How Dr. Shafik navigates this rigidity could nicely outline her early presidency, even when the preliminary fallout from her look seems to be far lower than what confronted her Ivy League colleagues at an earlier listening to in December. After that listening to, the presidents of Harvard College and the College of Pennsylvania have been pushed out of their positions, having given lawyerly solutions to the query of whether or not calling for the genocide of Jews would violate campus guidelines.
In an opinion piece revealed this week, Dr. Shafik acknowledged the dilemma confronting faculty leaders making an attempt to remain true to values of educational freedom whereas additionally making an attempt to maintain college students protected and stopping discrimination.
“Attempting to reconcile the speech rights of 1 a part of our neighborhood with the rights of one other a part of our neighborhood to reside in a supportive setting or no less than an setting freed from worry, harassment and discrimination, has been the central problem at our college and on campuses throughout the nation,” she wrote.
Ms. Shafik appeared on the listening to with the chairs of her board of trustees, Claire Shipman and David Greenwald, and with a senior regulation professor, David Schizer, who’s a co-chair of the college’s antisemitism activity drive. From the start, the witnesses made clear that they weren’t going to take an oppositional stance.
“I’m grateful,” Ms. Shipman mentioned in her opening remarks, “for the highlight that you’re placing on this historical hatred, and the essential function you play holding our most essential establishments to account.”
The viewers was pleasant. Some scholar activists who help Palestinian rights had traveled from New York to attend, however they have been excluded from the listening to room, which had very restricted seats for the general public. They shouted periodically from exterior, “Let the scholars in.”
Contained in the room, a row of about 20 Jewish college students who’ve expressed concern about antisemitism at Columbia got seats by association with the committee. A few of them mentioned afterward that what they heard from Dr. Shafik was a superb begin. Others needed Columbia to go additional.
Xavier Westergaard, a Ph.D. scholar in biology, mentioned that he was upset when Dr. Shafik didn’t clearly state that a few of Columbia college have been antisemitic, though the president did concede, beneath questioning, that some had mentioned antisemitic issues.
“The individuals who say antisemitic issues are antisemitic,” he mentioned. “It’s a really, very straightforward line to attract.” He mentioned such professors ought to be fired.
However again in New York, the place the listening to was taking part in on an enormous display screen at a scholar heart, the response was typically a lot completely different.
Debbie Becher, one among greater than 20 Jewish professors at Columbia and Barnard who’ve objected to what they name the weaponization of antisemitism by the congressional committee, was deeply upset.
“In immediately’s listening to, members of Congress tried to exert management over the college, and college management largely gave into their stress,” she mentioned. “President Shafik’s concessions to the committee set harmful new precedents for college coverage.”
The listening to room was stuffed with lawmakers for the primary a number of hours, however towards the tip, some members trickled out of the room. Ms. Stefanik, who had so successfully acted as chief prosecutor for the Republicans within the December listening to, was as aggressive in her questioning as ever. She managed to catch Dr. Shafik off guard a number of occasions, significantly when she was questioned at size about why professors whose statements she conceded have been abhorrent have been nonetheless instructing on campus.
However this time, a number of of her fellow celebration members additionally praised Columbia’s officers for doing higher within the listening to than their Ivy League friends.
After the listening to ended, extra protesters gathered on Broadway, exterior the campus gates in Manhattan. They hoisted indicators studying “Israel is ravenous Palestinians” and “Stop Genocide.” A number of had verbal confrontations with cops, who had begun boxing the protesters in with a maze of barricades. Others, delayed in attending to class, shook their heads in frustration.
Jin Hokkee, 23, a pre-med scholar at Columbia, waved a Palestinian flag. He mentioned that the demonstration was influenced by the Washington testimony. “Lots of people don’t perceive what we’re about, we’re not towards Jewish folks, we’re exhibiting help for folks in Gaza,” he mentioned.
Behind him, in call-and-response model, the demonstrators shouted among the refrains that lawmakers had condemned earlier within the day.
“From the river to the ocean, Palestine can be free!”
“Intifada, intifada, lengthy reside the intifada!”
A Columbia graduate scholar, Kim Silberman, 22, standing beside a person with a photograph of an Israeli hostage, mentioned that her dad and mom moved from Israel to America after an assault had killed a number of of their neighbors.
“It’s actually exhausting being a Jewish scholar right here proper now,” she mentioned. “I might by no means have come right here if I had recognized this was the case.”
Anusha Bayya and Nate Schweber contributed reporting.
