Freedom of Speech or Campus “Pogroms?”

One of my mother’s favorite expressions, rendered in Yiddish with a dollop of wary cynicism, was, “Don’t do me any favors.”  Essentially, this is an expression of ambivalence. “I know you’re trying to help me, but…” As our government leaps into the fray to defend us against antisemitism, I think many American Jews would echo my mother’s words. Maybe with an added, “Oy!”

I don’t mean to be ungrateful. After all, we were terrified. First, there was Hamas’s infiltration and medieval massacre of Israelis on October 7, 2023. Then, on October 8, before we even had begun to grasp those dreadful events, we were assailed with shocking eruptions of antisemitism here! It seemed that America’s first reactions to the horrors, sympathy and compassion, quickly waned and were replaced by outraged, in-your-face, supposedly spontaneous “pro-Palestinian” anti-Israeli, antisemitic hatred.

Or at least, that’s how it was portrayed by the media…Ordinary Americans, those not interesting enough to capture video attention, most likely did not share these opinions, at least not enough to storm the barricades.

It is important to note that these “pro-Palestinian” protests began on October 8, 2023, because that is before the Israeli army, caught shamefully unaware, had even formulated a plan for Israel’s defense. While mobs on American campuses were screaming for “Intifada!” and telling Jews to “go back to Poland!,” Gazan terrorists were still rampaging within Israeli villages, raping women, burning families alive in their own homes, and abducting anyone they could carry off to their hellish tunnel lairs.

Jews throughout the world feared for Israel. And let’s face it, we also feared for ourselves.

Those “grass roots protests” looked a lot like pogroms.[1] Suddenly, well-organized, intimidating hordes appeared out of nowhere. Coordinated, well-funded encampments with identical tents, posters, and pamphlets sprang up on multiple campuses. Angry people masked in keffiyehs—some posing as students but later revealed to be paid outsiders—used megaphones to incite crowds to block “Zionists,” Jewish students and faculty, from moving freely. They destroyed property, occupied buildings, and engaged in bullying, threats, and physical violence.

For the “protestors,” (aka terrorists), this was “free speech.”  But what about their targets’ rights to a safe school environment?

One of the most significant hallmarks of a pogrom is the blind eye of authorities, the cowardly indifference of college administrators who failed to intervene on behalf of those under assault.  Actions that would be considered criminal in any other setting were allowed to persist on campus, with few consequences. In some cases, individuals were arrested only to be swiftly released, free to return to campus and continue their reign of terror.

This began to subside when police were finally invited onto campus and universities negotiated settlements. As final exam time approached, more encampments were removed and then the media began to lose interest. (At the time of this writing, another “occupation” is underway at Columbia University. No further news is yet available.)

An in-depth investigation by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), long respected for its defense of marginalized groups, found that: “schools failed to forcefully condemn antisemitism; universities neglected to enforce their own anti-discrimination and conduct policies [emphasis mine] and campus leaders made significant concessions to encampment protestors rather than upholding institutional integrity.”

And so, since the schools weren’t doing their job–schools that accept millions of federal dollars for research and other programs–the federal government, wielding Article VI of the Civil Rights Act-some may say like a chainsaw- jumped to our defense.

These federal dollars, a consequence of President Johnson’s Civil Rights act (1964), provided a powerful new tool. Instead of depending on the military to enforce compliance with the law, as it had in the past, Title VI of the Civil Rights act permitted the federal government to withhold funding from schools. Specifically, it prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin in programs and activities that receive federal financial assistance. Jews were omitted from the original legislation but in 1971, Zionist Organization of America attorney, Susan Tuchman, successfully argued for their inclusion.

The Biden administration made some attempts to use this law to stop Jews from being discriminated against by colleges, but they were ineffective. Without penalties for evasion, rampant antisemitism continued, unassuaged.

During Trump’s last presidential campaign, he promised American Jews, “With your vote, I will be your defender, your protector, [and] best friend…” Many, if not most, American Jews found these words more chilling than reassuring. Some are saying of Trump’s embrace, “It will make them hate us even more.”

Whoever ‘they’ are, maybe they will hate us even more. I doubt anything will convince “them” otherwise. No matter. Whether they love us or hate us, they are not permitted to harm us. Just as presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy protected Black students from discrimination, this government must protect Jewish students. As we should have learned by now, the only way to protect all students is to protect those most vulnerable.

We also should have learned by now that bigotry will never be resolved by authoritarianism.

One of the fundamental elements of democracy is the rule of law.   Colleges receiving federal funds are obligated to obey the law. Allowing antisemitic mobs to terrorize students in the name of “free speech” makes a mockery of the law.

A 2024 ADL report found that 83% of Jewish college students experienced or witnessed antisemitism since the October 7 Hamas attacks. It emphasized that responses, including potential cuts to federal funding, must be “grounded in clear evidence,” comply with Title VI and other laws, and be proportionate. [emphasis mine] Withholding funds should be a rare, last-resort measure for institutions that fail to address serious issues.

While I prefer well directed fiscal sanctions to federal troops, I recognize there will be many disagreements about what qualifies as “well directed.” These disputes will likely be decided on a case-by-case basis.

To liberate democracy, we need to return our schools to the free exchange of ideas, diverse ideas, not what Michael S. Roth, president of Wesleyan University, referred to in a recent article as the “ideological monoculture that exists” in some universities. He warns that although “Left-wing orthodoxy has stifled campus debate,…replacing it with right-wing litmus tests wouldn’t be an improvement.”[2]

And, just to remind us, this is how democracy is supposed to work: There are laws, there are disagreements, they are adjudicated in the courts, not by angry mobs on campus, nor by retaliative executive orders withholding funds. Used judiciously, fiscal sanctions can be an effective instrument for restoring real freedom of speech on campus.

1]  “A pogrom is a violent attack, often organized or condoned by authorities, against a particular ethnic, religious, or racial group-especially Jews-Pogroms typically involve destruction of property, looting, and killings.” www.britannica.com/event/pogrom

2] Roth, Michael S, (May, 3-4, 2025) Our Universities Need Diverse Ideas, Not Ideological Auditors, Wall Street Journal, p.C5