Combatting Antisemitism

Advancing Columbia University’s Work to Combat Antisemitism

For many years, and especially in the wake of October 7, 2023, too many members of the Jewish community at Columbia have experienced devastating episodes of discrimination, harassment, and antisemitic acts. Columbia University’s commitment to combatting antisemitism begins with the acknowledgment that antisemitism is completely antithetical to our values and that we have zero tolerance for this behavior. While the University has worked hard to address these concerns, we recognize that Columbia must make changes. The status quo cannot continue. We can, and we must, do better.

This page sets out the work we have done so far, and what we are doing now, to rebuild the trust of the Jewish community in Columbia. To be clear: We have zero tolerance for calls for violence or harm directed at any member of the Columbia community, including Jewish and Israeli students, faculty, and staff on campus. We will not shy away from firmly and fairly enforcing our policies and Rules. There is no place for intimidation, hateful language or targeting Jews or Israelis at Columbia. Guided by our principles of academic freedom, inclusion, and respect, and the work of our Antisemitism Task Force, Columbia has enacted meaningful reforms to strengthen safety, expand support, and ensure accountability, so that all members of our community—including our Jewish and Israeli students, faculty, and staff—can learn and engage free from harassment and discrimination.

We are working continuously to fulfill our commitments and implement these reforms. We appreciate the patience and support of the Columbia community as we make these important changes. Our work is not done, and we are determined to follow through on our commitments. We welcome additional comments and suggestions on these initiatives. We will continue to update this page as this work continues.

Columbia has undertaken a multipronged approach to combat antisemitism, through increasing clarity and education around University Rules and policies, appointing a new Rules Administrator with a dedicated staff who are responsible for pursuing disciplinary actions for violations of our Rules of University Conduct, establishing a centralized Office of Institutional Equity to swiftly address reports of antisemitism, discrimination, and harassment, strengthening the capabilities and resources of the University’s Public Safety team, and acting to quickly condemn and investigate incidents of vandalism, antisemitic imagery, and classroom disruption.

Our responses include the University’s swift condemnation and investigation into the January 21, 2025, classroom disruption and January 29, 2025, incidents of vandalism; the immediate response to the use of violent imagery by an unsanctioned student group in early February; and the University’s quick actions to respond to and investigate the May 7, 2025, disruption of Butler Library. We encourage you to review each of the linked pages for further information, and a complete list of University statements is available here.

We are frequently asked why we are not more transparent about disciplinary consequences. Student privacy laws, including the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), often prohibit discussion of individual cases. We announced that the Columbia University Judicial Board issued sanctions to students ranging from multiyear suspensions, temporary degree revocations, and expulsions related to the occupation of Hamilton Hall in the spring of 2024. We are committed to publishing aggregated disciplinary statistics when doing so does not reveal the identity of individual students, and we hope to begin later this year. Even when we are legally prohibited from discussing individual student records, we will continue to condemn discrimination, harassment, and antisemitic acts publicly and forcefully, and will provide broad transparency, whenever possible and consistent with our legal obligations, concerning enforcement of our Rules and policies. We are committed to protecting the safety of the Jewish and Israeli community at Columbia.

Columbia Must Be a Place Where Everyone Feels Safe, Supported, and Respected

Columbia has initiated a comprehensive strategy to address antisemitism, grounded in the belief that the University’s mission depends on an environment free of harassment and discrimination. The University’s efforts are guided by the recommendations of faculty, students, staff, and other members of our community as well as best practices suggested by nationally recognized Jewish organizations, including the American Jewish Committee.

The University is deeply devoted to combatting antisemitism on our campus. It has also expanded student support services, increased public safety on campus, streamlined disciplinary processes to respond swiftly to violations of our Rules of University Conduct, and created opportunities for open, respectful engagement among different points of view through programs such as the Student Leadership Engagement Initiative.

Task Force on Antisemitism

The Columbia Task Force on Antisemitism was created in November 2023 to address the harmful impact of antisemitism on members of Columbia’s Jewish community and to ensure that protection, respect, and belonging extends to everyone. It released its fourth and final report in December 2025.

Formed in response to the alarming resurgence of antisemitism globally, nationally, and on our own campus, the Task Force on Antisemitism also served as a critical instrument of institutional self-examination. The task force was charged not only with responding to immediate threats, but also with addressing deeper cultural and structural dynamics that enable antisemitism to persist.

Through dialogue, research, and engagement, the task force worked to make our campus community more inclusive, informed, and resilient. While its mission began with the safety and dignity of Jewish students, faculty, and staff, its impact is broader, advancing a University environment in which all members, regardless of racial, ethnic, or religious background, feel respected and protected. The work of the task force has been vital to the health of our community and had the full support of University leadership.

The task force identified practical ways for our safety and inclusion work to enhance support for all members of the Columbia community, with a focus on Jewish students. More information about the task force and its work can be found here:

Going forward, the University will continue to work on implementing the recommendations of the task force and addressing antisemitism on our campus, guided by the Office of the President. The University is also focusing on discrimination and hate more broadly on our campuses, which has long been a strong recommendation of the task force.

Learn more about the Task Force on Antisemitism

Understanding How We Incorporate the IHRA Definition of Antisemitism

On July 15, 2025, Columbia announced that the University would formally incorporate the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism into the work of our Office of Institutional Equity (OIE), alongside the definition of antisemitism recommended by our Antisemitism Task Force in August 2024. OIE will assess each reported incident of alleged discrimination or discriminatory harassment on a case-by-case basis, by considering the totality of the circumstances surrounding an alleged incident or course of conduct. OIE will consider both definitions as a resource. Neither is determinative.

As part of our earlier discussions with the government, in our March 21st commitments, Columbia announced we would incorporate the definition of antisemitism, as recommended by our Antisemitism Task Force in August 2024, into our policies. Our July 15 announcement about the IHRA definition reflects our own further thinking about these issues and was not part of our resolution agreement with the government. It’s also important to note that since 2019, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) has considered the IHRA definition, and has reflected that in guidance issued in 2021 and 2024.

The IHRA definition is similarly used by many universities and colleges across the country, including peers such as Harvard, Yale, Barnard, and NYU. We have carefully considered those examples, and the ability of faculty across the nation to continue to conduct coursework with all of the protections academic freedom has traditionally offered. We understand there is debate inside of our community, and more broadly, about this definition. Columbia’s consideration of this definition, as one of many factors used when considering complaints of discrimination, will strengthen our response to and our community’s understanding of modern antisemitism.

Columbia must be a place where all community members can respectfully engage with one another to discuss difficult—and sometimes uncomfortable—topics. By listening to differing perspectives, we open ourselves up to opportunities to learn and grow. Examining this definition, along with others, is another opportunity to do that.

Question: What is the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism?

IHRA adopted the following working definition of antisemitism: “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” The following are the IHRA examples accompanying the IHRA definition of antisemitism that the U.S. Department of Education identifies as relevant in considering, but not necessarily determining, discriminatory intent:

“Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government, or other societal institutions.
Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.”

Question: What role does the IHRA definition play in antidiscrimination law?

In 2019, Executive Order 13,899 instructed federal agencies to “consider” the IHRA definition, and the IHRA’s accompanying examples “to the extent that any examples might be useful as evidence of discriminatory intent,” when applying federal antidiscrimination law to Jews and Israelis as a protected class, while also directing that this definition should not be used in a way that “diminish[es] or infringe[s] upon any right protected under Federal law or under the First Amendment.” Since then, administrations from both political parties have used the IHRA definition in this way.

As a result, since 2019, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR), which enforces Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq., has considered the IHRA definition and accompanying examples where useful when evaluating complaints of antisemitic discrimination or discriminatory harassment, as reflected in guidance issued in 2021 and 2024.

Question: How does the University plan to consider the IHRA definition in its anti-discrimination policies?

Columbia’s anti-discrimination policies reflect both our values and our obligations under federal, state, and local law. In general, we are obligated to afford the same treatment to all protected classes. This means that conduct that would be found to constitute discriminatory harassment or create a hostile environment when directed against one protected class generally must be treated the same as similar conduct when directed against another protected class.

Yet when these general rules are applied to specific protected classes, the details of what gives rise to discriminatory harassment or a hostile environment can vary. The IHRA definition is meant to provide guidance on this for purposes of the Jewish and Israeli communities. And, as noted above, all educational institutions that accept federal funding, including Columbia University, have considered the IHRA definition for many years in complying with Title VI.

On July 15, Acting President Claire Shipman announced that the University would more formally consider the IHRA definition of antisemitism, among other definitions and factors, in the work of our Office of Institutional Equity (OIE), housed under the Office of the Provost. Consistent with Executive Order 13,899 and OCR guidance issued in 2021 and 2024, OIE considers the IHRA definition of antisemitism, among other resources—including the framework provided for by the Columbia Antisemitism Task Force—as part of a totality of the circumstances analysis of claims pertaining to antisemitism under the Anti-Discrimination and Discriminatory Harassment Policies & Procedures for Students and Anti-Discrimination and Discriminatory Harassment Policies & Procedures for Faculty & Staff (Anti-Discrimination Policies).

Question: Does considering the IHRA definition abridge principles of academic freedom?

As Columbia’s policies make explicit—and consistent with OCR guidance requiring us to consult the IHRA definition, but to do so in ways that do not abridge First Amendment principles—nothing in the Anti-Discrimination Policies may be construed to abridge academic freedom and inquiry, principles of free speech, or the University’s educational mission. Accordingly, expressing political views regarding a particular country’s policies standing alone would not constitute discriminatory harassment based on national origin. Members of any academic community must be able to engage in thoughtful discussion of controversial matters. The University encourages the free exchange of ideas, beliefs, and opinions, including on issues relating to armed conflict, human and civil rights, competing moral, historical, and political claims, and controversies such as the Arab-Israeli and Israeli-Palestinian conflicts.

However, academic freedom is not a license to discriminate based on someone’s membership in a protected class. If harassing speech or conduct that otherwise appears to be based on views about a country’s policies or practices is infused with discriminatory comments about persons from, or associated with, that country or another country, then it may constitute discriminatory harassment. In addition, a hostile environment also can be created when students are not free to express their views about issues that are closely connected to their identity as members of a protected class.

As it does already, OIE will assess each reported incident of alleged discrimination or discriminatory harassment on a case-by-case basis, by considering the totality of the circumstances surrounding an alleged incident or course of conduct. The offensiveness of a particular expression as perceived by a complainant, standing alone, is not a sufficient basis to create a hostile environment. As required by applicable laws and guidance, reports of policy violations will be evaluated by OIE from the perspective of the complainant and from the perspective of a reasonable person in the complainant’s position, considering all the circumstances, including whether such speech or conduct is an exercise of academic freedom and inquiry.

As long recognized by the University, faculty are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their various areas of subject matter expertise, with the corollary commitment that students are also entitled to academic freedom protections.

As has always been the case, when relevant to their courses, faculty can engage their students in discussions about issues that are contentious and emotionally charged, respond critically to students’ reasoning, and challenge them to reexamine deeply held beliefs. As the Faculty Handbook states, “Faculty should allow the free expression of opinions within the classroom that may be different from their own and should not permit any such differences to influence their evaluations of their students. This is an important part of the faculty’s responsibility to their students and the educational mission of the University, but it must be done with civility, tolerance, and respect for ideas that differ from their own.”

Columbia University Public Safety

The University added more Public Safety officers, increased staffing and training, and provided additional Public Safety coverage for events at Jewish student spaces. In addition, the University has hired special officers who will have the ability to remove individuals from campus and/or arrest them. These officers have completed their training and credentialing under New York law to work on our campus. We will continue to assess the necessary size of this force to achieve our goals. The University has a longstanding relationship with the NYPD. While we train and credential our internal security force, we will continue to rely on our relationship with the NYPD to provide additional security assistance when needed. We have also worked in close coordination with campus partners, including organizations such as Columbia/Barnard Hillel, to respond to emerging needs, strengthen communication, and ensure that Jewish students feel supported and secure. The University is committed to continuously improving the safety culture on campus.

By the Numbers

117 new full-time Public Safety officers hired in the past 16 months
24/7 vehicle and walking escort program
162-hour, New York State-approved training program for all Special Patrol Officers

Learn more about Columbia Public Safety

Office of Institutional Equity (OIE)

Columbia recognizes its responsibility to prevent and diligently address reports of discrimination and discriminatory harassment against Jewish and Israeli students, faculty, and staff, as well as its obligation to respond fairly and firmly when University policy is violated. The Office of Institutional Equity is responsible for investigating complaints of discrimination and discriminatory harassment and seeks to ensure that reports are handled efficiently, while fairly treating those accused of prohibited conduct.

The University is committed to reviewing existing policies to address implementation challenges. We are continuously seeking to improve our disciplinary processes to reduce response times and inefficiencies so that Columbia’s policies and rules may be enforced more efficiently and effectively over time. The OIE has adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, as recommended by Columbia’s Task Force on Antisemitism. It has also provided further clarity on how speech or conduct that otherwise would be in violation of our Anti-Discrimination and Discriminatory Harassment Policy and Procedures for Students cannot be shielded by using code words such as “Zionist,” that, based on the circumstances, could be deemed to target a protected class or one or more of its members.

Columbia is also appointing Title VI and Title VII Coordinators to review and respond to allegations under University policies implementing the requirements of Title VI and Title VII, ensuring compliance with the laws’ prohibition of discrimination, based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, as well as its prohibition on retaliation. The coordinators will be part of the OIE and will have both advising and enforcement responsibilities. We believe the addition of these positions will ensure swift attention and action on complaints about violations of these policies.

Additionally, these coordinators will contribute to a publicly available annual report to University leadership and the Board of Trustees, which will be part of a broader OIE annual report and will include reporting on Title VI and Title VII complaints, investigations, and outcomes. We hope this expanded annual report will give our community confidence that our systems addressing discrimination and harassment on our campuses are working.

We recognize that we have more work to do and appreciate receiving feedback from members of our community.

By the Numbers

“One-click” method to file a complaint from all Columbia websites
Staffed by full-time professional investigators
2x increase in staff dedicated to handling complaints
35,727 faculty, staff, contractors, and other affiliates have completed the mandatory Title VI training
33,347 students (over 95% of our student body) have completed the mandatory Title VI training

Learn more about the Office of Institutional Equity

Additional Training on Antisemitism

In addition to the existing Title VI antidiscrimination training—which specifically addresses antisemitism and is required of all students, faculty, and staff—we believe that supporting a deeper education on antisemitism is critical. To begin, we are initiating programming and training partnerships with several national Jewish organizations including Project Shema, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the Foundation to Combat Antisemitism, and Kalaniyot; we are also exploring a cooperation with Yad Vashem. We hope to engage our community, in many ways, in an ongoing dialogue on the roots of antisemitism and its modern forms. These partnerships are intended to bring our community together and foster a greater understanding of these issues using tools we value at Columbia—education and respectful conversation.

We are also collaborating with Interfaith America, the Constructive Dialogue Institute, and StoryCorps' One Small Step program to build programs that will go beyond traditional trainings, and the focus on antisemitism, to build bridges more broadly, to create constructive dialogue, and to deepen our understanding of each other.

Anti-Doxing and Online Harassment Policy

In March 2025, the University announced a new Anti-Doxing and Online Harassment Policy. This policy applies to all members of the Columbia University community, including students, faculty, staff, and participants in University-affiliated groups, programs or activities, regardless of location. Under this policy, intimidating, threatening, targeting, or otherwise causing harm to any member of our community, including Jewish and Israeli students, faculty and staff, on social media are strictly prohibited. This includes harassing messages, threats, or insults; impersonation for malicious purposes; publicly sharing personal or private information; and encouraging harassment of others.

Clarifications of Rules on Demonstrations

The Rules of University Conduct balance the exercise of rights to free expression and the rights pertaining to the achievement of Columbia’s academic mission—to learn, teach, study, and engage in research. We are committed to providing clear and fair time, place, and manner parameters that will avoid disruption of academic activities. The University has clarified that protests in academic buildings, and other places necessary for the conduct of University activities, are not acceptable under the Rules of University Conduct because of the likelihood of disrupting academic activities. The Rules Administrator webpage is updated regularly with information and guidance regarding the implementation of University rules.

Effective Identification Processes

Columbia recognizes that to implement our policies and rules, we must have the ability to identify individuals alleged to have violated them. The inability to identify such individuals threatens the integrity of our policies and rules and the safety of the Columbia community. To improve the University’s ability to ensure non-affiliates do not disrupt academic activities and implement our policies and rules, the University has implemented new identification processes during demonstrations and protests. All individuals who engage in protests or demonstrations, including those who wear face masks or face coverings, must, when asked, present their University identification to the satisfaction of a University Delegate or Public Safety officer. Individuals who fail to comply with these policies will be subject to discipline, being escorted off campus, and detention for trespass where appropriate.

We have already applied these new identification processes in connection with the Butler Library disruption on May 7, 2025. Individuals participating in the Reading Room 301 disruption were repeatedly asked for identification and to leave, and were repeatedly told that failure to comply would result in violations of our rules and policies and possible arrest for trespassing. We have been clear from the outset about applying our protocols and advising participants of the potential consequences of not complying. Disruptions to our academic activities will not be tolerated and are violations of our rules and policies.

Affirmation of Zero Tolerance

The University has zero tolerance for discrimination and harassment based on protected traits, including Jewish and Israeli identity. And while our University Rules and Policies are well-defined on this matter, beginning this 2025-26 academic year, Columbia will make clear our “Zero Tolerance for Antisemitism and Hate” in regular community messages.

As part of this initiative, Columbia has not, and will not, recognize or meet with the group that calls itself “Columbia University Apartheid Divest” (CUAD), its representatives, or any of its affiliated organizations. Organizations that promote violence or encourage disruptions of our academic mission are not welcome on our campuses, and the University will not engage with them.

Advancing Our Work to Secure Our Future

We have worked hard to address the legitimate concerns raised both from within and outside our Columbia community, including by our regulators, with respect to discrimination, harassment, and antisemitic acts our Jewish community has faced since October 7, 2023.

In response to a letter from the General Services Administration, Department of Education, and Health and Human Services, on March 21, 2025, Columbia announced several additional actions.

Acting President Claire Shipman and her team have focused on grounding all actions in our mission, principles, and values. These include academic freedom and free expression, open inquiry, and respect for all.

Resolution with the Federal Government

Columbia’s Response – Advancing Our Work

Advancing Columbia University’s Work to Combat Antisemitism