Columbia University's $21 million settlement with the Trump administration was framed as compensation for Jewish employees facing a hostile workplace due to pro-Palestinian protests. But as the deadline to file claims closed this week, Jewish faculty members weaponized the fund's own language to accuse the university of the opposite: silencing dissent and turning Jews into scapegoats.
The settlement, described by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission as the largest public settlement in nearly two decades, followed months of campus upheaval after Hamas's October 2023 attack on Israel. The administration tied the payout to alleged antisemitism on campus, but several Jewish professors argued that Columbia created hostility not against Jews in general, but specifically against Jews who dared to support Palestinian rights.
In their EEOC filings, faculty alleged they were harassed, doxed, followed, spat on, and subjected to death threats. One classics professor, Joseph Howley, wrote that the university had turned Jews into political tools. "This singling Jews out for special treatment is dangerous and encourages antisemitism," he claimed, arguing that Muslim and Arab colleagues were denied the same protections.
The complaint filings reveal a fundamental tension in how the university and the administration approached the settlement. The EEOC notice cited discrimination based on "religion (Jewish), race (Jewish) and/or national origin (Israeli)." But the faculty filers rejected the premise that disagreeing with Israeli policy constitutes antisemitism, calling it "textbook antisemitism" to assume all Jews support the state of Israel.
Marianne Hirsch, a scholar of antisemitism and daughter of Holocaust survivors, wrote that her Jewish identity compelled her to oppose war and injustice. "When the only acceptable way to be Jewish is to support Israel unconditionally, there is no longer a way for me to be Jewish on Columbia's campus," she stated in her claim.
EY Zipris, an adjunct professor raised in an ultra-Orthodox family, noted that her Israeli mother and observant parents opposed Zionism on religious grounds. Had they voiced such views at Columbia today, she wrote, they would face the same pillorying she has endured.
Some faculty members reported being branded "kapos," "Nazis," and "self-hating Jews" by those opposing their stance. Yet they also documented what they called Columbia's misuse of its antisemitism taskforce. After two dozen Jewish professors signed a letter in April 2024 criticizing the university's protest response, the taskforce falsely claimed in a report that they had called "for an end to the state of Israel," listing their names and triggering harassment. The taskforce edited the report later but issued no apology.
Film professor James Schamus took a more sardonic approach to the fund. Last year he wrote a piece titled "Where is my antisemitism money?" and pledged in his EEOC filing to donate any settlement to efforts for peace in Israel and Palestine.
The claimants expressed skepticism that the EEOC would recognize their interpretation of the fund's purpose. Several said they viewed the claim process as a way to make a statement rather than expect compensation. The EEOC declined to detail what criteria it would use to evaluate complaints, only saying the response had been "robust."
Columbia did not respond to requests for comment on the filings. The university faced widespread criticism for what many saw as capitulating to the administration when it agreed to the settlement, which included a $200 million fine and other measures.
Author James Rodriguez: "This is a political Trojan horse that's backfiring spectacularly, and the EEOC will have to decide whether it's serious about civil rights or just rubber-stamping a culture war agenda."
Comments