Three university presidents appeared before Congress on Thursday to defend their management—or mismanagement—of the anti-Semitism that has been allowed to fester on their campuses before and after Oct. 7. Among the participants, there was bad and there was worse.
Worse was Northwestern University president Michael Schill, whose responses to the panel indicated he is hellbent on institutionalizing that anti-Semitism rather than on taking steps to combat it.
Northwestern made national news last month when it became the first school in the country to strike an agreement with the student protesters who had pitched tents on campus in violation of university policy. Students will be rewarded for their transgressions with the formation of an "advisory committee" on university investments and the university's agreement to bring Palestinian students and faculty to Northwestern.
Schill admitted on Thursday that precisely zero students have been suspended or expelled for their anti-Semitic behavior and downplayed assaults of Jewish students as "allegations" to be investigated.
He misled Congress several times. Asked what student groups were behind the encampments, Schill responded, "I don't know," though he negotiated with student representatives of those groups. He asserted that "the police solution was not … going to be available to us" to clear the encampment, though the nearby University of Chicago did so with the help of the Cook County sheriff. Under questioning from Rep. Elise Stefanik (R., N.Y.), he flip-flopped on whether he had consulted the university's general counsel before striking an agreement with students. And he conceded he had consulted with supporters of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement before inking that deal.
The message was clear: Anti-Semitism at Northwestern is protected by the university. There will be no change so long as Schill and his board chairman, Peter Barris, remain at the helm.
That is why Northwestern was the first to give in to outrageous demands, and it is an indication that the senior-most administrators at the university are not committed to ensuring a safe learning environment for Jewish students. Moral and decent people acknowledge they are entitled to that sort of environment, and so, as it happens, does federal law. A strong board, and a strong leader, will be required to change course.