The commitments on antisemitism made by Columbia University under pressure from the Trump administration mark the first time in nearly 23 years that the university has come close to acknowledging the problem on its campus. Heretofore it has belittled the concerns. Only five years ago, its former president, Lee Bollinger, declared that assertions by outsiders that Columbia had become an “anti-Semitic institution” were “preposterous.”

Our own view is that in some narrow definition of “preposterous,” Mr. Bollinger’s boast was not wrong so much as inapt. It would have been one thing had he adequately addressed the problem at Columbia. For years he shrank from that, a context in which his comment was off the point. It was dismissive of the seriousness of what had begun to fester in the Middle East studies department and that was exposed by students operating as “The David Project.”

The David Project first aired in 2004 its documentary called “Columbia Unbecoming.” It captured testimony by students of antisemitism at Morningside Heights. The Sun broke the story of the film. It did so when Judith Shapiro, then president of Barnard, spoke privately at Washington of how horrified she was at what “Columbia Unbecoming” uncovered. Our Jacob Gershman* was first with the story, though many reporters pitched in.

The big mistake of Columbia’s administration — under Mr. Bollinger and those who followed — was trying to stay neutral in respect of the war against the Jewish state, instead of defending Israel and the Jewish community. That is the blunder that, 20 years later, the presidents of Harvard, MIT, and Penn made in testimony before Congress. They shocked the nation and, at Harvard and Penn, they lost their jobs. 

It was not until the accession of President Trump to a second term that America finally acted against antisemitism at Columbia. The university had to be unmasked figuratively and literally. The administration went so far as to threaten Columbia over its finances into acceding to various remedies. Even those, we suspect, will prove to be far from adequate, echoing as they do on some points promises Columbia made and failed to keep.

The university did agree to enforce a rule against the kind of masking protesters and lawbreakers use to hide their identity. Columbia also agreed to enforce its own rules, a promise that was made in the past and ignored. It agreed to improve its disciplinary process, another former vow that got nowhere. Plus, it lists as “generally not acceptable” protests in academic buildings. It will forthwith require protesters to show university IDs when asked.

“Public safety has determined that face masks or face coverings are not allowed for the purpose of concealing one’s identity in the commission of violations of University policies or state, municipal, or federal laws,” Columbia says. It has hired 36 new police officers with powers of arrest on campus. It has increased its oversight of student groups and tightened sanctions. It committed to comply with all federal and state laws covering Columbia.

Columbia will also implement anti-discrimination policies. It will require its community to train on obligations under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which bans most discrimination. Columbia also agreed to appoint a “new senior Provost” to oversee Middle East studies, which is where the bigotry dug in at Columbia. That can, in our opinion, be read as a message to the faculty that it has lost the trust of the authorities that provide so much funding.

We don’t dismiss out of hand the concerns being voiced about the government intrusion into academia. Yet it is shocking that it took threats to withhold taxpayer funding to wrest these reforms from the university. President Trump’s education secretary, Linda McMahon, marked what this is about — Columbia’s abandonment of its “obligation to Jewish students.” Secretary McMahon would some day be a fine president for Columbia.

_________

* Now with the Wall Street Journal.