In a tense congressional hearing on Wednesday, Republican lawmakers clashed with Haverford College President Wendy Raymond over her refusal to disclose disciplinary actions related to recent campus protests. The hearing focused on university responses to rising reports of antisemitism following pro-Palestinian demonstrations.
Raymond testified alongside two other university presidents but stood out for declining to share how her school handled accusations of anti-Jewish bias. Repeatedly, she emphasized Haverford’s policy of confidentiality regarding internal disciplinary actions.
However, several lawmakers expressed outrage. “It is our right to question if institutions like this deserve taxpayer funding,” said Rep. Bob Onder. His comments drew attention to the recurring theme of the hearing: academic accountability under federal scrutiny.
Raymond insisted the college handles each case seriously, yet she would not confirm whether any students or faculty faced consequences. This position fueled frustration among Republicans who want public transparency from schools receiving government funds.
Joining her at the hearing were DePaul University President Robert Manuel and Cal Poly’s Jeffrey Armstrong. Unlike Raymond, both provided examples of disciplinary measures taken after antisemitism complaints. Lawmakers praised their openness while criticizing Haverford’s silence.
Although the hearing did not involve Ivy League leaders, its tone echoed past sessions with presidents from Harvard and Columbia. Those hearings, likewise focused on antisemitism, had led to high-profile resignations. This latest session broadened the scope to smaller institutions, yet again raising concerns over academic accountability under federal scrutiny.
Raymond defended Haverford’s values, saying the school promotes inclusion and does not tolerate hate. Still, critics viewed her responses as evasive. They warned that such secrecy might endanger future funding if academic accountability under federal scrutiny continues to fall short.
This growing conflict reveals how higher education leaders are increasingly caught between student privacy and public pressure. As hearings intensify, more institutions may face the same hard questions about how they uphold fairness, protect students, and ensure transparency.
For more updates, visit DC Brief
