Two Years After October 7 Massacre, Campuses Are Worse Under The Surface

Two Years After October 7 Massacre, Campuses Are Worse Under The Surface

I was interviewed by Fox News regarding the status of antisemitism on campuses two years after the October 7, 2023 Massacre, particularly comparing it to a year ago.

The article received nice placement on the home page much of the day, Antisemitic ‘venom’ infecting campuses gets worse as universities play ‘rope-a-dope’ with Trump admin: expert.

Here’s an excerpt:

Two years after Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel, antisemitic “venom” infecting America’s colleges hasn’t faded – it’s evolved, a professor said.

The protests may have quieted, but “venomous” hatred has gone underground, and it’s spreading through classrooms, faculty lounges, and student groups, William Jacobson, a Clinical Professor of Law at Cornell Law School, said.

He says universities have learned to mask the problem, cracking down on encampments and visible disruptions while the ideology driving the hate has only hardened.

“There has been a gross campaign at the international level to demonize Israel,” he told Fox News Digital. “False accusations of genocide. These are all percolating under the surface on the campuses. In some ways, the situation’s worse underneath.”

He argues that the same ideas that fueled the pro-Hamas protests of 2023 have now been absorbed into campus culture, where they are “more organized, more coordinated, and more dangerous” than before.

“People should not be complacent that these issues were brewing before October 7th,” he warned. “They’ve been pushed now back below the surface, but it’s still brewing on campuses and nobody should kid themselves.”

He also accused elite universities of stalling the federal crackdown on campus antisemitism, saying they are “playing hide-and-seek” with the Department of Education’s investigations, and are betting they can simply outlast them.

“I think the schools think they can outlast the Trump administration,” said Jacobson. “That they can rope-a-dope it for two to three more years. And then perhaps they’ll be rescued by a new administration.”

He said many top universities care less about donor backlash and more about protecting the billions in federal funding that keep them afloat.

“They take a longer-term view. They think this is going to blow over,” he said. “For every alum who withholds a contribution because of anti-Israelism on campus, there’s probably another, probably a foreign donor, who makes up for it.”

“What they do care about is federal funding, because federal funding is on a scale that so far surpasses private donations that it’s something they can’t ignore,” he continued. “If Trump ends up prevailing in a lot of these lawsuits, and I believe he will, that’s going to put certain schools in a very bad situation.” …

He likened far-left universities to “people clinging to a lifeboat after their ship was just sunk,” waiting for a change in political tides.

“They’re hanging on to the lifeboat waiting for help to arrive,” he said. “They will probably think we’ve been here before, and we’ll ride this one out.”

The professor said the roots of today’s prevailing hostility toward Jewish students go back to the immediate aftermath of Hamas’ massacre in Israel.

“People were marching, calling for an Intifada. People were marching, celebrating October 7th,” he said. “Let’s not forget, in many ways, the most important day for campuses was not October 7th – it was October 8th.”

That next day, he said, some faculty members began openly excusing Hamas’ actions as part of “decolonization.”

“That’s when [the] faculty started to make excuses for what Hamas and the Palestinians had done,” he said. “There was open sympathy for it. There was talk about, well, what did you think decolonization really means? It’s not just class papers — it’s a revolution.”

He pointed to examples at Harvard University and Cornell University, where one professor admitted he felt “exhilarated” after the attack before later walking the comment back.

“That nastiness that was there on October 7th and 8th is still there,” he said. “But it’s in some ways even worse because there are organized attempts to spread that sort of venom throughout the campuses.”

He dismissed claims that universities are punishing students for their political views, saying the real issue is uneven enforcement of conduct rules.

“A lot of people say Palestinian students are being suspended for their speech. No, they’re not,” Jacobson said. “They’re being suspended because they take over the library. They disrupt people. They intimidate people. It’s conduct that they’re engaged in.”

He said campuses tolerated disruptive tactics for months, creating what he called a “Palestinian exception to the rules.”

“All I have ever called for is to enforce the rules evenly,” he said. “You don’t get to set up checkpoints like they did at UCLA and weed out Zionist students. You don’t get to declare Zionist-free zones on a campus because you’re denying other students their right to education.”

The professor said that despite public statements, few universities have truly reckoned with how antisemitism became normalized in their classrooms and administrative culture.

“I don’t believe the schools have changed their world outlook at all,” he said. “They’re just waiting it out. They’re playing hide-and-seek with the administration.”

The video mostly covered the portion of the interview addressing free speech, enforcement of campus rules, and donor fallout:

Transcript auto-generated, may contain transcription errors – lightly edited for transcript clarity (video previously edited)

Well, I think that the issue with free speech has been a little bit overblown because what we’re really talking about are enforcing the rules evenly.

And a lot of people say, well, you know, Palestinian students are being, or pro-Palestinian students are being suspended for their speech. No, they’re not. They’re being suspended because they take over the library. They disrupt people, they intimidate people, it’s conduct that they’re engaged in. And the colleges for a long time tolerated that. But now are enforcing the rules.

All I have ever called for is the rules evenly,

Do not create the Palestinian exception to the rules everybody has to abide by, the rules not to disrupt the library, except if you’re pro-Palestinian. And that’s unfortunately what happened.

And so when the rules are applied evenly to them, they scream, well, you’re violating my free speech. No, you, we are entitled to enforce conduct rules. We also have a legal obligation on campuses to protect the rights of all students. You don’t get to set up checkpoints like they did at UCLA and weed out Zionist students. You don’t get to declare Zionist free zones on a campus because you’re denying other students of their right to education.

And so these are, for the most part, not free speech issues. They’re simply enforcing the rules evenly against people who think they should have an exception.

There’s no question that the universities where this was the worst post October 7th have suffered reputational damage. We can think of Harvard, to a certain extent Cornell, Columbia more than perhaps any other. So there is that reputational damage. I’m not sure how much they actually care.

As somebody who works and lives on a campus, I think they take a longer term view. I think they think this is going to blow over. I think they think that the alumni who are withholding contributions, while certainly they would rather get the money, don’t get me wrong, I think they think it’s going to blow over. And that for every alum who withholds a contribution because of the anti-Israelism on campus, there’s probably another, probably a foreign donor who makes up for it. So I think it’s been overblown the notion of donations being withheld. Again, the schools would rather get the money than not get the money, but I think ultimately they don’t care.

What they do care about is federal funding because federal funding is on a scale that so far sur surpasses private donations that it’s something they can’t ignore. And we’re seeing Columbia paid, I think it was over $200 million. The Trump administrations talking about larger sums for UCLA and for Harvard. I don’t know what they’re demanding from Cornell, but it’s been reported – whether it’s accurate or not – that it’s a hundred million dollars. That’s actually real money to them that they care about. And that’s not just real money. Now that’s long-term funding.

So I think the schools care very deeply about federal funding. I don’t think they care that much about the private funding because I think that they believe that the donors will always be there for them. There’s a really unique attraction that schools have from donors. It becomes part of their lives, part of who they are. And they keep on donating. I think it was 2023, or maybe it was 2024,  Cornell had its biggest fundraising year ever.

So I don’t think that on a gross scale the withdrawal of some donations by some major donors has had much of an impact.
I don’t think the schools are particularly worried about it. I think they will probably think we’ve been here before and we’ll ride this one out and they’re always going to come back to their alma mater and we’re always gonna have a building they can put their name on. We’re always gonna have a program they can put their name on and they’ll be there. But I do think the federal funding is very important to them.

And if Trump ends up prevailing in a lot of these lawsuits, and I believe he will on most of them, that I think that’s going to put certain schools in a very bad situation and then we’ll see what they do.

I don’t believe the schools have changed their world outlook at all. I think they are like people clinging to a lifeboat after their ship was just sunk. They’re hanging onto the lifeboat waiting for help to arrive.

I think the schools think they can outlast the Trump administration, that they can rope-aodope it for two to three more years and then perhaps they’ll be rescued by a new administration, a Democrat administration, which will be more favorable to them and will allow them to come roaring back with all the underlying DEI programming, all the programming that frankly gave rise to this problem on campuses.

I’ve not seen any schools so far that I think have had a change of heart. Some of them have changed the names of DEI departments. At Cornell it’s now called Belonging or something or other, instead of DEI. But it’s all name games. They’re just waiting it out. They’re playing hide and seek with the administration. And so I don’t think there’s been a change in the attitude on campuses.

I don’t think there’s been a change in the administrations. There’s certainly been no change in the faculty. The faculty are still mostly anti-Israel, at least the ones who are active on the issue. That’s not necessarily a majority of the faculty, but most faculty don’t get involved in these issues. But of the ones who do, there’s a strong strain of anti-Israel. The American Association of University professors is now run by an anti-Zionist professor. Uh, they withdrew their long-term opposition to systematic academic boycotts under pressure from the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement. So there’s a lot that’s really negative that’s going on. And so people should not be complacent that these issues were brewing before October 7th. They percolated up to the surface to a certain extent. They’ve been pushed now down back below the surface, but it’s still brewing on campuses and nobody should kid themselves.

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.