Since the war between Israel and Palestine began on Oct. 7, 2023, universities across the nation have been scrutinized for their approaches toward combating antisemitism. In February 2024, the United States Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights announced that a Title VI investigation was opened into the University in light of antisemitic incident reports. Further, in January 2025 — with the arrival of the Trump administration — the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) entered into a joint resolution agreement with the University to outline tangible steps to address antisemitism on campus. The News-Letter investigated the plan’s effects on the Jewish student experience through interviews with students and a review of administrative records.
The January joint resolution agreement provided an overview of the University’s priorities and antisemitic cases. In this agreement, the OCR deduced that the University’s documentation provided as a result of the accusation that the administration failed to address the harassment of Jewish students during the 2023-24 school year was insufficient. Consisting of 99 reports, the records consisted of student complaints of discrimination and harassment, such as protests, vandalism and social media posts that were made between October 2023 and May 2024 to the Office of Institutional Equity.
On Monday, Oct. 6 the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) sent a letter to the Office of Student Conduct to remove the interim suspension of senior Rockwell Shapiro due to his participation in a campus protest supporting Palestine. CAIR reported that the University previously indicated that a decision would be made on his status at the University before the Fall 2025 semester; however, Shapiro remains suspended from University resources.
CAIR’s Maryland Director Zainab Chaudry expressed concern over punishing a Jewish student for antisemitism for expressing pro-Palestinian sentiments in the press briefing published.
“Johns Hopkins University’s failure to resolve this matter promptly not only violates its own procedures but also undermines its commitment to fairness, inclusivity, and academic freedom. Indefinite denial of access to education is a disproportionate and punitive measure,” Chaudry wrote.
The Hopkins Justice Collective (HJC) responded to the press release by highlighting the impact of the case in an Instagram post. The organization emphasized the issues that the subject has brought to light and summarized the letter sent from CAIR to the University’s Office of Student Conduct.
“This case raises serious free speech concerns, highlighting how students — regardless of faith — should not face retaliation for engaging in nonviolent expression on campus,” the post read.
When The News-Letter asked how the University responded to the CAIR press-briefing regarding their conduct guidelines for a student, Hopkins representatives asserted students’ rights to protest peacefully in an email to The News-Letter.
“Johns Hopkins does not comment on individual student matters,” they wrote. “The university affirms the right of students to engage in peaceful protest and expression, provided such activities comply with university policies and do not disrupt university operations or infringe on the rights of others.”
While the University declined to comment on Shapiro’s case specifically, its response emphasized broader institutional efforts to balance student expression and campus safety. Administrators noted that recent months have prompted renewed attention to how Hopkins handles allegations of discrimination and disruptive conduct.
In its email, the University also pointed to initiatives intended to strengthen support systems for affected student communities and clarify expectations around conduct. These measures are part of an ongoing effort to address concerns raised throughout the past academic years to reaffirm the institution’s responsibility to foster a productive student environment.
“Our student affairs teams meet regularly with Jewish, Muslim, and Arab students and student groups to make sure they have access to the resources they need, including support for hosting Shabbat and Iftar dinners, prayer spaces, and religious accommodations,” a University spokesperson wrote. “In addition, we hired a new Title VI coordinator in the Office of Institutional Equity (OIE), and in June, we launched new mandatory Title VI training for all students and employees to ensure that our community understands how to recognize and respond to discrimination or harassment.”
The Title VI training outlined in the University’s response refers to the mandatory online training for all full- and part-time faculty, staff and students. The course was titled “Understanding Title VI: Rights and Responsibilities at JHU” with continuous email alerts sent to the entirety of the Hopkins community.
“Over the last year, our team has participated in a suite of [Campus Climate Initiative (CCI)] trainings focused on countering anti-Semitism and other topics designed to foster a strong Jewish community on campus,” the University wrote. “The latest report card from the Anti-Defamation League recognized the proactive steps that Hopkins has taken to counter anti-Semitism and promote a safe and inclusive campus environment for all members of our community.”
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) is a global anti-hate organization whose mission is to “stop the defamation of the Jewish people and to secure justice and fair treatment to all.” Their 2025 report card rated the overall grade as a “B” and individually rated the categories “Publicly Disclosed Administrative Actions” as “Above Expectations,” “Jewish Life on Campus” as “Excellent,” and “Campus Conduct and Climate Concerns” as “Medium.”
The report cites University actions such as the two-day College and University Presidents Summit on Campus Antisemitism that was convened by the American Jewish Committee, Hillel International and the American Council on Education as examples of the University’s commitment to combating antisemitism. The report then states that the original grade for Hopkins was a “C” and was revised to a “B” on April 4, 2025.
The report suggested that weaknesses in the University’s measures to mitigate antisemitism included the lack of a Jewish alumni group, an insufficient inclusion of antisemitism in the Code of Conduct and Policies, an advisory council to address antisemitism, and the level of hostile, severe and other antisemitic/anti-Zionist incidents. Particularly, the level of hostile anti-Zionist groups was rated negatively, indicating high concern for their presence. The purpose of these ratings from the ADL is to determine the efficacy of how Hopkins is addressing antisemitism on campus.
Some students felt as though the University’s treatment of Jewish students has been relatively positive aside from a few isolated incidents, reflecting an overall sense of improvement from when the agreement was sent. In an interview with The News-Letter, master's student Jared Moser explained that the University has managed antisemitic incidents, citing a pro-Nazi symbol at an encampment over a year ago.
“It's actually been relatively peaceful, and I do think the University did a good job. There was some symbolism at the encampment that could have been perceived and was pro-Nazi, but [...] aside from that, and it was only one or two days, it's been perfectly fine,” he said.
Moser then went on to distinguish between what is considered to be “pro-Palestinian” sentiments and antisemitic ones.
“It's one thing to talk about the plight of the Palestinian people, because Israel wasn't exactly being gentle. They did bad things, and they killed a lot of civilians. [...] It’s really bad that all this destruction is going on,” he explained. “It's another thing to advocate on behalf of Hamas, because Hamas is a terrorist organization, and that's kind of where the line is. It’s not antisemitic at all to say that it’s bad what’s happening to the Palestinian people as a whole. But when you start saying Hamas rally cries, [...] that's when the line gets blurred.”
Similarly, other students echoed Moser’s sentiment, noting that while tensions surrounding the Israel-Palestine conflict remain visible, the overall campus climate for Jewish students has improved over time.
An anonymous student using the alias Chelsea followed Moser’s view of differentiating between pro-Palestinian and antisemitic statements. In an email to The News-Letter, Chelsea detailed how she saw the differences, highlighting the implications of stereotypes in relation to the conflict.
“If it’s a statement criticizing the government or calling for a ceasefire/peace/an end to violence in the Middle East, there is obviously nothing antisemitic about these statements,” she wrote. “However, for example, when historically antisemitic tropes are used like ‘Jews control the media’ or that Jewish people somehow control large entities/[organizations,] then I would interpret this as [an] antisemitic statement.
Chelsea went on to describe that she believes the line between antisemitic and pro-Palestinian statements is unnecessarily blurred. She emphasized that many conflate political criticism with prejudice when the distinction should be more straightforward.
Another anonymous student using the pseudonym Layla described a noticeable shift in the University’s response to antisemitism and in the general culture of dialogue on campus in an email to The News-Letter.
“I definitely feel that my experience as a student has changed since January 2025. [...] I appreciate that universities are being held accountable and that Jewish students are being protected because supporting Palestinians and opposing the Israeli government should not mean hating Jews or antagonizing Jewish students on campus,” she wrote. “Yes, universities were being pressured by the government, but as a Jewish student I appreciate the feeling of someone sticking up for me and protecting me because the climate on campus for the past few semesters was pretty unbearable and I definitely felt unsafe.”
The Hopkins Justice Collective (HJC) and Jewish Student Association (JSA) did not provide a comment for this article.
Myra Saeed and Buse Koldas also contributed to the reporting of this article.
