One of the more odd Cornell presidential statements showed up in everyone’s email at 2:16 p.m. Eastern on Thursday, January 11, 2024:
Dear Cornell community,This morning we learned of a post on social media allegedly from a Cornell student explicitly stating that “Zionists must die.” Cornell Police and the Office of Student Conduct are investigating and if we determine that it was posted by a member of the Cornell community, they will be held fully accountable and appropriately sanctioned. This post is heinous, and I condemn it in the strongest terms.Sincerely,Martha E. PollackPresident
Someone posted something on the internet. That person “allegedly” is a Cornell student. (It does appear to be a Cornell student, the post has been circulating widely after the all-campus email blast.)
Sure, the statement was offensive, but it’s no more offensive than the chants for “Intifada” and “From the River To The Sea” that are common on campus. If anything, saying “Zionists must die” is a more honest reflection of the sentiment of the anti-Israel activists on and off campus – that student said the quiet part out loud, and now may be punished. But we all know it’s what other students mean by the other slogans, so why did THIS social media post merit a presidential statement? Presidential statements are not that common.
The social media post was not a ‘true threat’ unlike the other Cornell student last fall who threatened in a popular chat room to shoot up the Kosher dining hall and slit people’s throats. (That person now is in federal custody.) The statement “Zionists must die” probably is protected under the First Amendment when done as a generalized social media post, but Cornell like many universities invokes the First Amendment selectively. Unlike the statement by a prominent Cornell professor about feeling “exhilarated” on October 7, made before a crowd that included students and was not far from campus, it’s not clear what connection to campus this social media post had that required university administration involvement.
The whole thing struck me as odd. While I obviously disagree with the sentiment in the social media post, I’m also uncomfortable with the Cornell administration serving as internet hall monitor, at least not for things that do not directly touch campus. So WHY the presidential statement and all-campus email?
Then the timing seemed to make sense.
Someone sent me or I saw on Twitter (I don’t remember which) a tweet on January 11 afternoon from Rep. Jason Smith, Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, indicating that earlier in the week a letter was sent to the presidents of Cornell, Harvard, U. Penn, and MIT:
Earlier this week, I sent a letter to the presidents of Harvard, MIT, Cornell, and the University of Pennsylvania demanding additional information about why they failed to protect their Jewish students from antisemitic violence and harassment.My letter details how it is incumbent upon these universities – which enjoy lucrative financial benefits through the tax code – to protect their students, and their failure to do so calls into question their tax-exempt status.Read my full letter below⬇️⬇️⬇️https://gop-waysandmeans.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Chair-Smith-Letter-to-Universities-on-Antisemitism.pdf
The letter, dated January 10, 2024 (full embed at bottom of post), the day before Cornell’s presidential statement about the social media post, put the schools’ federal tax exempt status and federal funding on the line because of the weak reaction to campus antisemitism (emphasis added):
… As you know, your institutions are aided by the beneficial treatment provided to nonprofit, tax-exempt entities. Your universities also receive funding from federal grants and appropriations, support for student loan assistance, lucrative financial benefits from your taxexempt status, and the advantageous tax treatment of your institutions’ endowments.You may also be aware that there are certain standards your institutions must meet to receive this highly advantageous and preferential treatment…. Additionally, since your institutions receive federal funds from the U.S. Department of Education, you are also required to comply with relevant antidiscrimination laws.4Given the disappointing and lackluster responses by your respective universities to Hamas’ attacks and your subsequent failure to adequately protect Jewish students from discrimination and harassment, we question whether your institutions are satisfying the requirements to receive these benefits….This, however, is not the first time we have heard of concerning responses to antisemitism on college campuses. During a November 15, 2023, U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Ways and Means hearing, we heard from a student at Cornell University, Talia Dror, who shared that, “[s]tudents, professors and administrators at Cornell celebrated the massacre of innocent civilians,”8 and that while Cornell made firm statements on a variety of topics and incidents in the past, the university was silent when it came to condemning explicit antisemitism and endorsements of terrorism under the guise of free speech.9This alarming conduct is not limited to statements made during congressional hearings. Rather, it also includes behavior occurring on your campuses. Look no further than Cornell, where antisemitic threats of violence targeting Jewish students were posted on message boards, eventually leading to an Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) investigation and federal charges against the student who made the direct and violent threats.10 ….Free speech should be protected – even speech we disdain. But your universities have long practiced the protection of preferred speech rather than truly protecting all speech. In so doing, you appear to have lost the ability to recognize when speech crosses the line into conduct, especially on topics that do not fit into your preferred categories. You have also failed to exercise effective leadership to handle protected antisemitic speech in the way a leader should – with more speech. As leaders on your campuses, you set the tone. You have found your voices before on numerous other topics, but not on this one. If antisemitic speech crosses the line into unprotected conduct, it must be punished severely. If disgusting antisemitic speech remains in the protected category, it should be condemned, not coddled. Your words and actions matter. Condemning barbaric terrorism against Israel and disgusting antisemitism should not be difficult. Protecting Jewish students on campus as you protect other students, should not be a challenge. This is not that hard….These actions, inconsistencies, and lack of a substantive response raise several questions, including whether your institutions are fulfilling their educational purposes as required to receive 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status, and whether your institutions are adequately protecting Jewish students from harassment and acts of violence in compliance with antidiscrimination laws….Ultimately, as the U.S. House Committee with primary jurisdiction over tax-exempt institutions and the treatment of their endowments, we are left to wonder whether reexamining the current benefits and tax treatment afforded to your institutions is necessary.
I bet that letter got attention.
Only the Cornell administration knows its internal deliberations, but the presidential statement about the student’s social media post sure seems to be following the congressional directive the day before to “condemn” protected “disgusting antisemitic speech.” It looks like window dressing to satisfy congressional investigators that Cornell is doing ‘something’ so as to protect it’s tax-exempt status and federal funding from being challenged.
Yet as I have pointed out many times in the past, this same administration has doubled down on the racialist group identity Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) obsession that contributes to the antisemitism and anti-Israel vitriol on campus. See, My Call To Action For The Cornell Board of Trustees. How about trying to change the culture the administration helped create of which this student is a symptom?
The congressional letter raised the issue of DEI as well:
This alarming approach to protecting free speech while not simultaneously protecting students on campuses comes at a time when diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DEI”) activity is surging across the country.23 Despite the burgeoning growth of this sector and purported support for all people regardless of background across the country, Jewish students are facing antisemitism more than ever,24 and reports suggest that campus DEI staff “are unwelcoming toward Jewish students.”25 The lack of support for Jewish students from the DEI community does not only place Jewish students at risk, contrary to the DEI framework, but also highlights the issues with embracing divisive DEI bureaucracies that stifle dissent, shun different or opposing perspectives, and raise questions about moral clarity. As part of your campuses’ educational missions, all students should be protected and supported regardless of background. Specialized, divisive, and ideologically driven DEI bureaucracies are not the answer.
Condeming some student for something on the internet is easy. Dismantling DEI, which has been a signature agenda-item for this Cornell administration since the announcement of a presidential ‘anti-racism’ initiative in July 2020 (in reaction to George Floyd), would take much more self-reflection and courage to admit failure and correct course.
Fox News digital (additional link) wrote about the presidential statement and my criticisms, in an article that spent multiple days on the home page:
A prominent Cornell University professor has called the Ivy League president’s recent statement on continued antisemitism on campus mere “window dressing” as the school faces threats of the removal of federal funding.“Coming a day after a congressional letter putting Cornell’s federal funding at risk, the Cornell administration’s reaction seems like window dressing, to make it seem they are doing something,” William Jacobson, a clinical professor at Cornell Law School who joined the faculty in 2007, said in a statement to Fox News Digital….Following Pollack’s statement and Smith’s letter, Jacobson pointed to the university’s DEI culture as the root cause of continued antisemitism.“The problem is not what some student put on his or her personal social media, as hateful as the statements may be, but the campus DEI culture that enables and encourages such hatred based on false oppressor-oppressed and decolonization narratives that leave Israel and Jews dehumanized,” Jacobson said.The Cornell professor said that the administration appears to be “doubling down on DEI” rather than eliminating it altogether.“The administration is doubling down on DEI rather than eliminating it,” Jacobson said. “I once again call on the Cornell administration and Board of Trustees to begin the process of eliminating the group-identity balkanization of the campus, and to return us to the focus on academics and the rights and dignity of the individual.”Rep. Jason Smith and Cornell University did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.
I’m awaiting the Cornell presidential statement and Board of Trustees announcement admitting that the DEI initiative focused on identity groups was a failure and mistake, that DEI is being dismantled, and that a new course is being charted centered around the rights and dignity of every individual without regard to race or ethnicity.
—————
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY