After Columbia University agreed last week to pay over $200 million to resolve federal investigations into campus antisemitism and submit to outside monitoring and policy changes, Harvard is now reportedly in settlement talks of its own, with figures as high as $500 million being discussed. This is not a blip; it’s a reckoning and if done correctly, it will mark a turning point for accountability in higher education.

Let’s be clear about what happened. Columbia’s deal with the federal government restored access to large pools of frozen federal funding, but also imposed independent oversight and reforms to hiring and campus policies. Separately, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced a $21 million resolution for Jewish employees over a hostile work environment – it’s the largest public settlement in nearly two decades – underscoring this is about civil rights, not politics.

Now all eyes are on Harvard. The university is fighting in court to restore $2.6 billion in frozen federal research funds even as press reports say it is exploring a settlement path similar to Columbia’s. Education Secretary Linda McMahon has publicly expressed hope that Harvard will ‘learn from’ Columbia’s approach. However, when this ends, it will set a national precedent for what real compliance looks like and whether elite institutions can be compelled to live up to the standards they claim to cherish.

The Trend: Rebranding Without Reform
At the same time, some institutions are not correcting course, rather their administrators are spending time and money relabeling it. Staff at two prominent universities in Tennessee were recently recorded acknowledging that their Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) programs were rebranded to skirt enforcement. On Capitol Hill, a Senate hearing focused on the growing practice of swapping “DEI” for friendlier labels like “belonging” or “inclusive excellence,” without changing the underlying policies that have produced discrimination and ideological coercion. That’s not reform – it’s evasion.

What Real Accountability Should Include
If universities want public trust and federal funds then they should demonstrate measurable change. The New Tolerance Campaign recommends the following:

1. Independent Monitoring with Teeth: Third‑party monitors must have access to records and authority to verify compliance, not just receive reports. Columbia’s model of having independent oversight and required reporting should be the floor, not the ceiling.
2. Transparent Metrics: Publish quarterly data on antisemitic incidents, outcomes of investigations, and sanctions, alongside training content and complaint-resolution timelines. After all, the Trump Administration has already signaled to at least sixty higher education institutions that they expect sustained, documented progress in order for them to fulfill their obligations under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act to protect Jewish students on campus.
3. End Compelled Speech & Political Litmus Tests: No student or employee should be forced to adopt ideological statements to enroll, be hired, or be promoted. This is where the ongoing strategy of ‘rebrand-to-evade’ must be confronted head-on.
4. Equal Protection in Policy and Practice: Apply harassment and safety rules consistently — no double standards for virtue signalers, special interests, encampments, disruption, or threats based on viewpoint. The EEOC’s action at Columbia should be a warning that civil-rights laws still hold their weight.
5. Independent Channels for Jewish Students and Faculty: Establish protected reporting lines and enforce zero-tolerance for targeted harassment, matched with due process for the accused. Recent cases show why both sides of that equation matter.

Why This Matters Beyond the Ivy League Schools
This isn’t just about Cambridge and Morningside Heights. Federal agencies have widened scrutiny across dozens of campuses, and statehouses are weighing how to protect free expression while ensuring compliance with civil rights. Universities cannot dodge responsibility through semantic games or linguistic restructuring. The status quo of performative tolerance and selective enforcement is collapsing under legal and public scrutiny alike.

What You Can Do Today

• Tell your alma mater: No rebranding without reform. Demand published metrics and independent oversight.
• Report double standards you witness on campus: Send documentation to us so that we can investigate and, when necessary, mobilize campaigns. We even have a tipline on our website should you want to submit anonymously (click here).
• Share this blog: Share with parents, alumni, and trustees who expect better from institutions that receive taxpayer funds and philanthropic support.

The New Tolerance Campaign was founded to call out hypocrisy and insist on equal standards. The Columbia agreement and the pressure on Harvard shows that accountability is possible – no matter how long it takes. Now we need to make it durable.

While we will keep tracking these cases and spotlighting institutions that choose real reform over reputation management, if you have any evidence of rebranding to evade federal compliance or have any horror stories of antisemitism being tolerated or minimized on campus, contact us confidentially. We’re listening and we’re willing to take action!