The opposition on the Trump administration’s campus has reached a new, disturbing milestone. On March 8, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers detained Mahmoud Khalil, a recent Columbia University alumnus and a well-known organizer of the campus Gaza Solidarity Camp. A few days later, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced that it had revoked the visa for Colombian graduate student Ranjani Srinivasan and arrested former Colombian student Leqaa Kordia.
In parallel, President Donald Trump’s administration cancelled the $400 million worth of federal grants and contracts that universities received from the Middle East, South Asia and African Studies departments based on “a minimum of five years of academic reception.”
Columbia announced that it would expel students, expel students in the April 2024 building occupation and cancel the degree of participants in the Hamilton Hall occupation.
The university bans masks, overhauls disciplinary procedures, appointment of approved academic supervision, expands police powers on campus – despite extensive criticism from academics and legal experts – despite the challenges of masks, overhauls disciplinary procedures, appointment of approved supervisors, and ultimately became troubled.
This unprecedented attack on freedom of expression and campus objections represent a new stage in the weaponization of anti-Semitism accusations. What began as voice restrictions and campus disciplinary action has now evolved into arrests, deportation, surveillance and complete interference in university matters.
The ultimate endgame is not only to curb pro-Palestinian activity, but also ideologically dominating higher education in the United States. The attack on universities is part of a broader right-wing effort to turn academia into a hub for conservative nationalism ideology.
Trump revealed it during his campaign, saying he “sought to reclaim the great educational institutions of his time from the radical left and Marxist maniacs.” The targeting of Palestinian behaviorism is merely an excuse, a major tank in the procession to dismantle academic independence and enforce ideological conformity.
It is important to remember that Trump’s now escalating attacks on US higher education began several years ago by pressured universities in the US, Canada and Europe to adopt the International Holocaust Memory Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism.
The IHRA introduced a practical definition of anti-Semitism in 2016 and provided examples. The two included criticism of Israel. Initially, this definition was intended to support law enforcement agencies and provide research tools to track anti-Semitism cases. However, over time, sustained lobbying has led to recruitment by various governments and agencies.
As attitudes towards Israel began to change, especially among young Americans, pressure on universities on universities occurred, especially among younger Americans. The change threatened longstanding bipartisan consensus in the United States about unconditional support for Israel, making Israeli supporters urgently establishing a new line of defense.
On campus, the definition of IHRA began to be used primarily for smear tactics, leading to harassment, dox and reputational damage among people who criticized Israel. Professors, students and activists were classified as anti-Semitic and exposed to campaigns designed to threaten them to silence.
However, after the attack on October 7th, the attack on Palestinian parental views and behaviorism escalated dramatically. Professors were fired, student groups were banned, speakers were kicked out, and now they’ve even been arrested and expelled.
An unprecedented campaign of oppression is scavenging the progressive Jewish community. The university has begun to halt organizations like the Jewish Voice for peace, targeting Jewish scholars critical of Israel.
For example, Maura Finkelstein, a tenured Jewish professor, was fired from Moulenburg University in Pennsylvania after being accused of anti-Semitism to support the liberation of Palestine. “If we can criticize foreign governments, bring attention to genocide and use my academic expertise as anthropologist to be fired to emphasize the behavior of power, then no one is safe,” she said in a statement after her firing last year.
The campaign to silence the voices of Israel-critical Jews has warned in a UCLA legal review article that legal frameworks, like the IHRA definition, are being used to “discipline Jewish identities” and curb Palestinian parent promotion, as Haifa University scholars Itamar Mann and Lich Jonah warn in an article in the UCLA legal review. Their analysis highlights how the definition of IHRA narrows the scope of Jewish identity and punishes Jews for rejecting Zionism or criticizing Israel. As a result, Jews, tailored to anti-Zionist traditions, including many religious and progressive voices, find themselves marginalized within their communities.
This suppression underlines the fundamental reality. The weaponization of the definition of the IHRA and the accusations of anti-Semitism made by politicians and institutions have nothing to do with protecting Jews. Rather, they serve as an excuse to advance the political agenda aimed at reconstructing higher education into an ideological hub that censors inconvenient political perspectives.
And this is more than just a Republican effort. Many Democrats have also accepted these authoritarian measures. Sen. John Fetterman openly praised Trump’s cuts in funding to Columbia, saying “Columbia will run to deal with provocates who paid anti-Semitism in response to the crazy fringes.”
Representative Josh Gottimer, Richie Torres and many others also call for stricter measures against student protesters, consistent with Trump’s wide crackdown on pro-Palestinian activities.
Even Chuck Schumer, the leader of the Senate, siege protests on pro-Palestinian campus with “anti-Semitism” while seeking the release of Mahmoud Khalil, reinforced a false narrative that equated Palestinian activity with prejudice.
Democrats’ accomplices in this attack on academic freedom must bring about their own uncertainty about the challenges of institutional authority, not just concerns about donors and influential interest groups. Many Democrats support suppressing dissent against university campuses as part of a broader strategy to maintain control over the next generation of activists and intellectuals.
This campaign against American universities reflects historical patterns of national oppression. In the 1950s, McCarthyism used its communist accusations to silence political enemies and drive leftist thinkers out of universities, Hollywood and government agencies. The era saw blacklists, pledges of loyalty, mass shootings, and even imprisonment of people suspected of being on the left.
Despite its strength, McCarthyism ultimately failed to erase leftist ideas from public spaces and universities. Over time, an excess of red fear was exposed, and its main supporters were discredited.
Similarly, Palestinian activities today and the oppression of academic freedom may succeed in threatening academic institutions and individuals in the short term, but it cannot erase ideas rooted in justice and liberation. The extent to which this new McCarthyism goes depends on the will of the Americans to fight back and protect their freedoms.
The views expressed in this article are the authors themselves and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.