April 30, 2025 — Harvard’s Antisemitism and Islamophobia Reports Are Out — Now What?

SPECIAL EDITION: Harvard's Antisemitism and Islamophobia Reports Are Out — Now What?

EVENT: On Thursday, May 1, at 8:30 p.m. ET, Harvard Hillel and 1636 Forum will host a panel on the Antisemitism Report and next steps for implementation. Speakers include Harvard Antisemitism Task Force co-chair Jared Elias, Rabbi David Wolpe, and Columbia Antisemitism Task Force co-chair and former Columbia Law dean David Schizer. Register here.

***

Harvard finally released its long-overdue reports from its Task Force on Combating Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Bias ("Antisemitism Report") and its Task Force on Combating Anti-Muslim, Anti-Arab, and Anti-Palestinian Bias ("Islamophobia Report") on Tuesday afternoon. Together, the reports total over 500 pages. We read them so you don't have to.

In this special edition, we:

— Share our key takeaways from the reports and Tuesday's announcements of University changes

— Recap key new initiatives Harvard announced Tuesday

— Highlight essential findings and recommendations from each report

— Identify critical areas to watch to gauge Harvard's commitment to internal reform

Note: We know Harvard refers to these as the "ASAIB" and "AMAAAPB" reports. We're going with "Antisemitism Report" and "Islamophobia Report" — not because we missed the nuance, but because we want to avoid an acronym word salad.

What you need to know: Harvard's "Concrete Plans for Implementation"

Last week when President Garber announced Harvard was suing the federal government, he noted that the release of the reports would "also include recommendations with concrete plans for implementation." On Tuesday, he began to outline these plans by announcing key initiatives, including:

— Requesting each Harvard school present action plans by the end of this semester

— Reviewing admissions processes at various schools within Harvard to value students' ability to engage in constructive dialogue across differences

— Updates to pre-orientation and orientations for students in Fall 2025, focused on the principles of inclusion, openness, and fairness

— A research project on antisemitism, led by a faculty expert in the field

— An initiative to review the history of Muslims, Arabs, and Palestinians at Harvard

— Accelerated efforts "exploring the creation of a major initiative to promote viewpoint diversity" at Harvard

These announcements follow several other important developments this past week:

— Centralizing cross-school disciplinary procedures under President Garber's office, a critical step to ensuring fair rule enforcement

— Renaming the University's Office of Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging to the Office of Community and Campus Life, as part of a shift toward "focusing on the unique experiences and contributions of the individual and not the broad demographic groups to which they belong"

— Releasing its 2024 campus-wide Pulse Survey, which found that only 47.5% of Jewish students and 50.8% of Muslim students feel comfortable expressing their opinions to others at Harvard

If you find our newsletter valuable, please consider donating here to support 1636 Forum's mission.

What you need to know: Antisemitism Report

— The Report outlines a campus climate where Jewish and Israeli students face exclusion, intimidation, and ideological hostility — with widespread mistrust in Harvard's response systems.

— The report cites shunning, bias in classrooms, and anonymous harassment as pervasive, with 73% of Jewish students reporting discomfort expressing their views.

— Administrative responses were often seen as dismissive — including rationalizing chants like "globalize the intifada" and downplaying students' safety concerns.

— The report recommends sweeping reforms across admissions, orientation, instruction, and governance to rebuild trust, ensure accountability, and protect pluralism.

What you need to know: Islamophobia Report

— The Report depicts a campus climate where Muslim, Arab, and Palestinian students feel harassed and marginalized — with nearly half (47%) of Muslim students reporting feeling physically unsafe.

— Students reported incidents like "doxxing trucks," online intimidation, and physical confrontations, and were frustrated by Harvard's seemingly slow or dismissive responses to their concerns.

— Community members describe a climate of fear and self-censorship, exacerbated by the adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Association (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, that has significantly curtailed open discussion about Palestine.

— The report recommends improving institutional transparency, bolstering student support, protecting free speech, expanding academic offerings on Palestinian and Middle Eastern topics, and establishing a central pluralism initiative similar to the Antisemitism Report's proposal.

Key Takeaways & FAQs: Antisemitism and Islamophobia Reports

What are the 1636 Forum's Key Takeaways of Both the Antisemitism and Islamophobia Reports?

Harvard's historic selective political signaling created unrealistic expectations — and a "trap" of its own making.

— Over the years, Harvard has selectively aligned itself with certain political causes — from symbolic divestments to public gestures of solidarity — without clearly defining the limits of institutional neutrality. The Antisemitism Report notes this "foster[ed] an expectation" that the University would validate each group's concerns: "Harvard inadvertently created a trap for itself."

— Students in both reports cited past divestments — from South African apartheid (1986), tobacco (1990), Sudan (2005), and fossil fuels (2021) — as proof that Harvard governs its endowment with politics in mind. Inaction on Israel-linked companies, they argued, signaled rejection of their cause. But Harvard isn't obligated to endorse every cause, and students don't need it to. What they do need is a university focused on rigorous education, not platforming particular political causes.

Shunning and intolerance of differing viewpoints are among the most pervasive issues on campus.

— The Antisemitism Report documents how students are excluded not just for their views, but for who they are — particularly if they are Israeli or perceived as Zionist. Multiple Israeli students said peers "turned around and walked away" after learning they were from the country. In another case, a student with "pro-Palestinian politics" refused to work with an Israeli classmate, despite "no objection to the Israeli student's personality and no critique of their academic work." The instructor approved this partner change request, reasoning that "a student who supported the cause of an oppressed group should not be forced to work with a student identified as a member of an 'oppressor group.'"

— These dynamics have normalized a climate where even "friend groups broke down" and students "stopped speaking to one another on the assumption that they did not agree on important things." As one staff member put it: "[Harvard students] are militantly passionate about certain approved views and they will make anyone who disagrees with the party line regret it."

President Garber is viewed far more positively than President Claudine Gay was, by both communities.

— While both reports are critical of Harvard's handling of campus tensions, they draw a clear contrast between the leadership styles of President Claudine Gay and President Alan Garber. The Islamophobia Report documents student disillusionment on both sides with Gay's lack of engagement, which they saw undermining the University's commitment. In contrast, Garber is credited with taking "a huge step forward" by attending Ramadan iftar, launching the Building Bridges Fund, and renewing the University's focus on viewpoint diversity and consistent rule enforcement.

The rise of a "safetyist" mindset is distorting the purpose of the university.

— At times, students interviewed equated emotional discomfort with physical danger, calling on Harvard to serve as an arbiter of moral safety. For example, the Islamophobia Report notes that divestment is "directly related to student safety," with one student stating they "will not feel safe at this institution knowing it is directly or indirectly funding mass atrocities like the one in Palestine."

— This conflation of harm with disagreement reflects a broader trend. As Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt have observed, campus culture over the past decade has reflected a "rise of fragility" and increasingly prioritized "emotional reasoning" over intellectual rigor. But Harvard's responsibility is to protect students from discrimination and violence — not from disagreement.

Take the task force data for what it is: a supplement, not a full picture.

— We don't raise this to discount the serious, lived experiences documented in the reports — but to contextualize the numbers behind the findings. As the Islamophobia Report notes, the joint Task Force survey was "not administered or marketed as a University-wide survey," but intended to "incorporate more opinions from those community-members who wanted to anonymously weigh in." By design, it largely reflects a self-selecting group of those most affected.

— Across all roles — students, faculty, and staff — there were 89 Muslim and 447 Jewish respondents. Of those, only 49 Muslim and 130 Jewish students completed the survey. That means each Muslim student respondent made up roughly 2% of the student-specific results — a small base across both groups from which to draw broad conclusions.

— By contrast, Harvard's 2024 Pulse Survey had 369 Muslim and 1,398 Jewish respondents across the University. While the Pulse Survey data doesn't break down religion by role, its broader sample of over 20,000 community members (including 10,000 students) makes it a useful, if imperfect, point of comparison. For example, 47.5% of Jewish students and 50.8% of Muslim students in the Pulse Survey data reported feeling comfortable expressing their opinions — compared to 39% and 20%, respectively, in the task force data.

It wasn't always this way.

— The Antisemitism Report recalls a not-so-distant past when disagreement didn't preclude dialogue — and shared spaces weren't ideologically confined. In 2017, a co-president of the Harvard Undergraduate Palestine Solidarity Committee "occasionally attended dinners at Harvard Hillel," engaging in meaningful exchange with Zionist peers.

— This anecdote reflects a different era at Harvard — one where students would "take more seriously their good fortune in being at Harvard and the opportunities this afforded them to bridge divides and engage constructively with diverse viewpoints, even across well-known and deeply felt disagreements." That spirit is worth recovering.

Find this newsletter valuable? Forward it to a Harvard friend!

What are the key findings of the Antisemitism Report?

Drawing on nearly 50 listening sessions and a university-wide survey, the report paints a stark picture of the campus climate for Jewish and Israeli students. The report found:

— Social exclusion and hostility have created a pervasive sense of isolation for Jewish students. From shunning in clubs and friend groups to feeling unwelcome in classrooms and dorms, students described a campus climate that undermines belonging and open engagement in daily life.

— A chilling effect on speech and identity pervades student life. 73% of Jewish respondents to the joint Task Force survey said they felt uncomfortable expressing their political opinions. Some students reported hiding their Jewish identity entirely to avoid being targeted. A faculty member told the Task Force they never expected to see Jewish students conceal their identity at Harvard.

— Breakdown in trust and double standards in administrative response. Students described slow, confusing, or dismissive complaint systems, particularly within the Office for Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging. Antisemitic incidents were often minimized, while others noted that speech targeting Jews is often granted leeway not afforded to other minority groups.

— Social media has been a central driver of harassment. The report cites "a veritable avalanche" of antisemitic anonymous messages on platforms like Sidechat, which made campus feel dangerous in new and disorienting ways for Jewish students.

— A lack of rigorous, balanced course offerings on Israel/Palestine contribute to ideological polarization. The report noted that while "pro-Palestinian perspectives have been frequently offered," they "rarely made room for nuanced and in-depth understanding of Israel."

— Anti-Zionist Jewish students also feel excluded from campus Jewish institutions. The report cites Hillel and Chabad in particular here, where support for Israel was seen as a baseline assumption.

What are the major recommendations of the Antisemitism Report?

The report's recommendations fell into two main categories:

1. Improving campus culture and student experience

2. Reforming academic governance and oversight

Campus Culture and Student Experience

— Admissions and Orientation should promote pluralism and dialogue from the start. Harvard should seek students open to constructive engagement and "reject candidates who have track records of antisemitism [or] bias against Israelis." Orientation should "encourage new students to engage constructively with peers who may hold differing worldviews," using a "structured pluralism framework" co-developed by Jewish and Muslim students and faculty.

— Instruction and academic life must support diverse perspectives. Instructors should avoid unrelated political advocacy in the classroom and "be adept at eliciting multiple viewpoints," and all Schools should likewise prohibit politicized instruction or unequal treatment. "Specifically Harvard College" should offer "a more comprehensive course of study" on Jewish life and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, taught by faculty with "differing views and methodologies," and supplemented by research, internships, and travel.

— Student organizations and campus life must uphold nondiscrimination. Schools should "review, revise, if necessary, implement, and enforce" policies to support pluralism, while DEI-focused student group leaders should receive "special training" to uphold the University's Values Statement. Residential life should invest in fostering "a sense of shared community" while countering "tendencies towards demonization and division."

— Harvard should anchor pluralism institutionally. The University should establish a central entity — such as a reimagined Harvard Foundation or new "Center for Pluralism" — to coordinate pluralism efforts across orientation, academics, student life, and the arts.

— Religious support must be strengthened and better integrated. Harvard should improve accommodations for religious observance, ensure chaplains are integrated into campus life, and value faith-based leadership in admissions review.

— Administrative support must be visible and accountable. Each School should create a diverse "student-faculty-administration Working Group on Campus Culture" to "[translate] University norms into student activities and programming."

— Complaint and discipline systems must be consistent and transparent.  Harvard should simplify reporting channels, apply protest and discipline rules uniformly across Schools, and publish anonymized data annually to build trust and credibility.

Governance Changes

— All academic programs should meet university-wide standards and be overseen by qualified ladder faculty. Programs must have "oversight from ladder faculty with relevant expertise" and follow clear guidelines for visiting appointments and advisory structures.

— Programs must align with University rules and values — not contradict them. This is important to prevent further "deep tension" in some units that "teach students to engage in disruptive protest," while the Schools enforcing policy prohibit the same. Schools must also ensure that staff-run programs do not "promote their activities under the Harvard name and brand" without appropriate academic oversight.

— Schools should be held accountable for program integrity and supervision. The University should create mechanisms to ensure that when Harvard "receives a grant or a donation to fund a program," it does not "[take] on a life of its own." Additionally, the report recommends that "costs are assigned" to Schools that fail to supervise their programs adequately.

What are the key findings of the Islamophobia Report?

Drawing from nearly 50 listening sessions and the joint Task Force survey, the Islamophobia report highlighted many concerns from students, faculty, and staff about the campus climate for Muslim, Arab, and Palestinian students:

— Nearly half (47%) of Muslim students reported feeling physically unsafe on campus, significantly higher than other groups. Students described targeted harassment including 'doxxing trucks' displaying students' faces, social media intimidation, and verbal or physical assaults — much of which was perpetrated by actors outside the University community.

— Students and faculty expressed deep dissatisfaction with Harvard's institutional response to their concerns, often describing encounters with administrators as dismissive or indifferent. They also noted that the University's decision not to divest its endowment from Israel negatively impacted their sense of safety on campus.

— Many community members felt there were stark disparities in Harvard's communications, with what they saw as swift condemnation of antisemitism and its comparatively muted responses to anti-Muslim and anti-Palestinian incidents.

— Students and faculty reported a widespread climate of fear and self-censorship around issues related to Palestine. The adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Association (IHRA) definition of antisemitism was cited as exacerbating these fears, leading to reduced open dialogue and critical scholarship.

— Students and faculty expressed frustration with perceived limited curricular options around Palestine and the Middle East, noting the satisfactory representation of Palestinian perspectives in courses, and emphasized the need for broader academic coverage and faculty expertise on these topics.

— Students and faculty raised concerns about the influence of external funding and political pressures affecting campus dialogue and programming. Specific incidents cited included public pressure campaigns that reportedly resulted in canceled events focused on Palestine and the "disparity in support for Palestine-related initiatives compared to well-funded Israel-focused programs, like the prestigious Wexner Fellowship" at HKS.

What are the recommendations of the Islamophobia Report?

The report's recommendations fell into three main categories:

1. Institutional Transparency and Student Support

2. Academic Freedom and Free Expression

3. Representation, Recognition, and Pluralism

Institutional Transparency and Student Support

— Expand tailored support for mental health, visas, academics, and campus life for Muslim and Arab students.

— Offer more resources to address doxxing, including complimentary internet deletion tools and legal services.

— Revamp the Non-Discrimination and Anti-Bullying complaint process to make it more user-friendly, transparent, empathetic, and speedy.

— Clarify the policies for protests and counter-protests and ensure they are administered fairly.

— Perhaps continue community discussions on divestment, although the task force did not reach a consensus on this issue.

Academic Freedom and Free Expression

— Create free speech zones like a "Speaker's Corner" in Harvard Yard.

— Support dedicated programming on issues salient in the community, including on Palestine and with Palestinian speakers.

— Safeguard academic freedom of programs focused on Palestine, such as the Center for Middle Eastern Studies (FAS), Religion and Public Life Program (HDS), Carr Center for Human Rights (HKS), and the FXB Center for Health and Human Rights (HSPH).

Representation, Recognition, and Pluralism

— Undertake a history initiative to understand the history of Muslims, Arabs, and Palestnians at Harvard.

— Expand academic programs and faculty hires specializing in Palestinian Studies, Middle Eastern Studies, and Islamic Studies.

— Establish a standing advisory committee of experts to guide university policies and actions related to Middle Eastern issues.

— Anchor pluralism institutionally. Like the Antisemitism Report recommended, the Islamophobia Report said the University should establish a central entity — such as a reimagined Harvard Foundation or new "Center for Pluralism" — to coordinate pluralism efforts across orientation, academics, student life, and the arts.

What to watch for next:

This report marks an important moment, but is far from the end of the story. In the coming weeks and months, we'll be keeping an eye on:

— How Harvard defines and rolls out its proposed viewpoint diversity initiative

— The school-specific action plans due at the end of the semester — especially how they handle admissions, discipline, and orientation

— How Harvard's internal disciplinary process addresses the case involving HDS and HLS students charged with assaulting an Israeli HBS student, following a judge's decision requiring them to complete anger management training and 80 hours of community service instead of facing trial

— The release of the HBS Antisemitism and Islamophobia Reports, which the government has requested by May 5

— Whether upcoming announcements around academic excellence, academic freedom, and student safety clarify Harvard's institutional priorities going forward