Rising Campus Antisemitism Debate Intensifies After The New School Student Senate Targets Hillel Funding
Colleges Ranking Index by Rebellion Research
A growing national debate over antisemitism on American college campuses intensified this week after student leaders at The New School voted to remove funding recognition from the university’s Hillel chapter, triggering backlash from Jewish organizations, elected officials, alumni, and university administrators.
The move marked one of the most controversial escalations yet in the broader wave of campus tensions tied to the Israel-Hamas conflict and the political fallout that has spread across universities nationwide since the October 7, 2023 attacks.
The 22-member student senate voted to classify Hillel as “not in good standing,” arguing that the organization’s connections to programs involving Israel and Israeli military-related volunteer opportunities conflicted with what the student government described as international law principles.
Hillel International operates chapters at hundreds of universities across the United States and serves as one of the largest Jewish campus organizations in the country, providing religious, cultural, and social programming for Jewish students.
The student senate’s report alleged that university student fees supporting Hillel indirectly connected students to activities involving Israel, including educational and volunteer programs such as Birthright Israel trips. The report criticized visits to disputed territories and programs involving volunteer work connected to Israeli military facilities.
However, university officials quickly stated that the student senate lacked authority to revoke recognition or funding eligibility for officially registered student organizations. A spokesperson for The New School said final authority over recognition and funding decisions remains with university administration and confirmed that the Hillel chapter continues to remain fully recognized and eligible for funding.
The incident immediately sparked criticism from Jewish advocacy groups and political leaders who argued the action crossed the line from political activism into discrimination against Jewish student life.
Mark Treyger condemned the vote, arguing that targeting Hillel effectively targets Jewish identity and belonging on campus. He warned that efforts to isolate Jewish organizations contribute to a climate of fear and exclusion during a period of rising concern over antisemitism nationwide.
Eric Dinowitz also criticized the student senate’s decision, calling it a direct attack on Jewish students and warning against the use of campus political bodies to marginalize religious communities.
Jewish alumni of the university expressed outrage online, with some accusing the school of failing to protect Jewish student organizations equally alongside other campus communities.
Meanwhile, Adam Lehman defended the organization and rejected accusations against Hillel, stating that Jewish students should not face exclusion or demonization because of their religious or cultural affiliations.
The controversy reflects a broader national trend emerging across American higher education institutions. Since the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war, universities throughout the United States have experienced growing polarization over Israel, Gaza, free speech, campus activism, and antisemitism.
Several universities, including Baruch College, Hunter College, University of Pittsburgh, Drexel University, and University of California, Santa Cruz, have also seen protests or demands aimed at boycotting or defunding Hillel chapters and other Jewish-affiliated organizations.
Critics argue these movements increasingly blur distinctions between criticism of Israeli government policies and hostility toward Jewish students or Jewish institutional life on campus. Supporters of the protests, meanwhile, frame their actions as political opposition to Israeli military policies and international conflict issues.
The debate has become one of the defining flashpoints in modern American higher education, raising difficult questions surrounding freedom of expression, religious identity, political activism, institutional neutrality, and campus safety.
As universities continue navigating these tensions, many administrators now face growing pressure from students, donors, alumni, elected officials, and advocacy groups on all sides of the issue.
