Worry is mounting within Columbia University’s Jewish community that the Trump administration is nearing a deal that falls short of addressing what they see as deep-rooted problems at the Ivy League school. 

The terms of the agreement, which would see Columbia regain $400 million in frozen federal grants and contracts, surfaced over the weekend in a report by the Free Beacon. The draft deal would require the university to compensate the alleged victims of unlawful discrimination, increase transparency around its admissions and hiring practices, and solidify reporting protocols for foreign donations, among other provisions. 

However, the deal excludes some of the more extraordinary concessions initially demanded by the administration. That includes enacting a consent decree that would provide for a federal judge to oversee Columbia’s adherence to the administration’s required reforms; overhauling the university’s governance structure; and requiring the presidential search committee to assemble a politically diverse pool of candidates. 

The deal is being hailed by the administration as a major success and follows President Trump’s praise of Columbia for its conciliatory approach to the government’s crackdown on antisemitism; diversity, equity, and inclusion programs; and anti-conservative bias on campus. A senior White House official told the Free Beacon that the “historic agreement” will “make massive changes throughout higher education.” 

Not everyone is so optimistic. Columbia community members and White House allies are voicing concern that the deal doesn’t get at the systemic changes they believe are needed to scrub the school of the antisemitism that was put on display in the wake of Hamas’s October 7 attack on Israel but has existed for decades. 

“What’s being floated as a ‘deal’ between Columbia University and the federal government is premature and a profound mistake,” a civil rights attorney, Gerard Filitti, warns in an op-ed for the Times of Israel. “It rewards evasion, ignores failure, and sends the message that elite schools are above accountability when it comes to civil rights and the rule of law.”

Mr. Filitti argued that the school shouldn’t be allowed to negotiate a deal until it meets several conditions, including adopting a “straightforward mask ban,” fortifying its “time, place, and manner” rules for permitted protests, and drafting a plan to hold accountable unrecognized student groups that violate university policies, among others. 

A collective of pro-Zionist faculty at Columbia and its affiliate college, Barnard, likened the reported agreement to a “sin tax” that compensates for “creating a toxic, antisemitic environment,” and predicted that the school would run into problems with Title VI compliance in the next couple of years. “It’s like Columbia is choosing to pay a carbon credit so they can keep polluting,” they added.  

Others pleaded with the administration to reverse course. “@POTUS, Jewish students have endured months of targeted harassment, ostracism, and violence,” a Barnard undergraduate, Shoshana Aufzien, wrote. “@Columbia’s administration failed to protect us. Now is not the time for appeasement.” 

The student expressed particular concern that the White House is dropping its effort to reform Columbia’s primary policy-making body, the University Senate, which has been criticized for letting off some of the school’s most disruptive anti-Israel protesters. “It’s hard to celebrate a deal that ignores the root causes of @Columbia’s antisemitism problem: namely, its dysfunctional University Senate,” Ms. Aufzien wrote.  

The university again made headlines when it unveiled on Tuesday several additional measures aimed at combating antisemitism, including adopting the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition for antisemitism, which identifies denying Jews the right to self-determination as a potentially antisemitic act.

Columbia also announced its plans to appoint Title VI and Title VII coordinators, arrange additional antisemitism training for faculty, staff, and students, and implement a “zero tolerance” policy for antisemitism. 

Although the development was welcomed by the school’s Jewish community as a step in the right direction, it did little to quell concerns. 

“While adopting IHRA is better than refusing to adopt it, by itself it is just the definition. The key is in whether and how it is applied to combat antisemitism,” an antisemitism watchdog group, Documenting Jew Hatred at Columbia University, tells the Sun. “After all, Columbia has had plenty of rules on its books governing conduct related to harassment, disruptions, hate speech, etc. The problem is that they were not enforced when it comes to Jews.” 

The group believes that “outside enforcement and monitoring” is required to ensure that Columbia brings an end to the harassment of Jews and Israelis on campus and roots out the ideological climate that encourages it, the group tells the Sun.  

The reforms were greeted similarly by a coalition of Jewish and Israeli students at Columbia who deemed them “necessary but not sufficient” to combat campus antisemitism. 

Fears that the administration has gone soft on the university come in contrast to Mr. Trump’s portrayal of Columbia as the desperate party. Last week, the 47th president said that “we’re probably going to settle with Columbia” before adding, “they want to settle very badly. There’s no rush.” 

The university has not been coy about the potentially devastating consequences of the administration’s funding cuts. Last month, Ms. Shipman lamented that the financial pressures facing the university were “increasingly acute” and warned that “we’re in danger of reaching a tipping point in terms of preserving our research excellence and the work we do for humanity.” 

It’s unclear if the reported deal has been reviewed by the president, nor is it known when Columbia’s board of trustees will vote on it. The negotiations have been headed by a Trump adviser, Stephen Miller, rather than the interagency antisemitism task force. 

Columbia is represented by two Kirklnd and Ellis attorneys, Jay Lefkowitz and Matt Owen. Mr. Lefkowitz is known for securing a favorable plea deal for Jeffrey Epstein in 2006 after he was accused of serious charges related to the trafficking and sex abuse of underage girls.

Mr. Lefkowitz negotiated an agreement with the then-U.S. attorney for Southern Florida, Alexander Acosta, a former colleague, that allowed his client to avoid federal prosecution and minimized the severity of the offenses.