On Feb. 20, during a U.S. Commission on Civil Rights public briefing on antisemitism on America’s college and university campuses, a George Washington University, student, Mara Regel, testified that when she reported an antisemitic incident, there was “not a shred of justice.”
Another witness, Sabrina Soffer (who is also my daughter), a recent GWU graduate and lead plaintiff in a federal lawsuit against the university, testified that a “pipeline of hate” linked classroom messaging, campus protests and administrative responses, reflecting what she described as a familiar DARVO pattern: deny, attack and reverse victim and offender.
These testimonies point to more than isolated campus failures. In Aug. 2025, the Department of Justice determined that GWU university had acted with deliberate indifference to antisemitism, meaning officials knew of substantial risks and failed to act. Yet antisemitic incidents persisted, and no meaningful structural reforms followed.
A similar pattern emerged in another case filed by StandWithUs on behalf of Jewish students. GWU’s internal investigation initially found no discrimination. Three years later, the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights overturned those findings, determining that the university had retaliated against Jewish students and ordering their disciplinary records expunged.
The situation at GWU, like several universities facing similar complaints, illustrates a deeper structural problem in higher education governance.
When institutions absorb penalties for civil-rights violations but officials face no personal consequences, accountability becomes optional and misconduct persists. Authority carries responsibility. When officials can abandon that responsibility without liability, impunity becomes inevitable.
As Congress examines rising discrimination complaints on college campuses, lawmakers should confront this structural gap: Civil-rights enforcement penalizes institutions but rarely holds decision-makers accountable.
Universities pay settlements. Administrators are reassigned or recycled.
This structure creates predictable incentives. Financial penalties may appear substantial, but they rarely threaten the larger funding streams that sustain major universities. Columbia University agreed to pay roughly $200 million to resolve federal civil-rights allegations while preserving access to more than $1 billion in federal funding. When penalties are smaller than the funding at stake, settlements become a cost of doing business rather than a deterrent.
Debates about campus antisemitism often focus on foreign funding, particularly money from Qatar. While such financial relationships deserve scrutiny, they do not explain the central governance failure. Foreign money cannot force university officials to ignore discrimination or retaliation against students. Those decisions are made by administrators entrusted with authority. When authority is exercised without accountability, impunity calcifies and abuse becomes normalized.
Federal prosecutors have long recognized the importance of individual accountability. In the Varsity Blues admissions scandal, wealthy parents used a nonprofit to secure privileged admissions through fraudulent records. The crime was not the donations themselves, but the corruption of a system designed to ensure fair access.
The same principle applies to civil-rights enforcement. Financial relationships and institutional partnerships may be lawful. What becomes unlawful is the misuse of authority to deny equal protection or ignore discrimination. History shows the consequences. In scandals involving Larry Nassar and Jerry Sandusky, repeated warnings were ignored for years while institutions prioritized reputation and liability management. By the time authorities intervened, the harm had multiplied in both severity and scale.
These cases reveal a pattern: an institutional culture of impunity across different forms of misconduct whether sexual abuse, antisemitism or other violations. The “too big to fail” mindset has migrated to education, where authority is shielded by institutional immunity, accountability is evaded and justice becomes discretionary.
These cases reveal a pattern: an institutional culture of impunity across different forms of misconduct whether sexual abuse, antisemitism or other violations.
Congress has confronted similar accountability failures before.
After corporate scandals exposed widespread financial fraud, lawmakers enacted the Sarbanes–Oxley Act, requiring executives to certify financial statements and imposing serious penalties for misconduct. The principle was simple: Align authority with responsibility and when responsibility is abdicated, impose liability.
Congress must meet the moment and enact a similar accountability framework for higher education. Officials responsible for civil-rights investigations should certify their findings under professional standards. Independent investigators should review complaints rather than rely solely on institution-controlled processes, and real-time systems should detect early signs of misconduct.
Such reforms would strengthen transparency and accountability. When authority in education is held to the highest level of scrutiny, the risk of exploitation of children and students is substantially reduced. Only then can educational institutions restore trust and safeguard our young generation.
Congress has already established this principle for corporate America; it must apply the same standard to education, where vulnerability and the risk of exploitation are high. Authority carries responsibility. When responsibility is abdicated, liability must follow.
Congress now faces a choice: amend liability or preserve a system of impunity. If institutional immunity remains intact, the next scandal is inevitable. The only question is when.
Lea Wolf-Soffer, MS/MBA, is co-founder of Let’s Speak Up, CAPE-Ed™, and creator of the SELF-Ex™ Method, recognized by USC, IDEO and the Nikou Foundation for innovation in education.
Congress Must End Institutional Immunity That Allows Officials to Act With Impunity
Lea Wolf-Soffer
On Feb. 20, during a U.S. Commission on Civil Rights public briefing on antisemitism on America’s college and university campuses, a George Washington University, student, Mara Regel, testified that when she reported an antisemitic incident, there was “not a shred of justice.”
Another witness, Sabrina Soffer (who is also my daughter), a recent GWU graduate and lead plaintiff in a federal lawsuit against the university, testified that a “pipeline of hate” linked classroom messaging, campus protests and administrative responses, reflecting what she described as a familiar DARVO pattern: deny, attack and reverse victim and offender.
These testimonies point to more than isolated campus failures. In Aug. 2025, the Department of Justice determined that GWU university had acted with deliberate indifference to antisemitism, meaning officials knew of substantial risks and failed to act. Yet antisemitic incidents persisted, and no meaningful structural reforms followed.
A similar pattern emerged in another case filed by StandWithUs on behalf of Jewish students. GWU’s internal investigation initially found no discrimination. Three years later, the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights overturned those findings, determining that the university had retaliated against Jewish students and ordering their disciplinary records expunged.
The situation at GWU, like several universities facing similar complaints, illustrates a deeper structural problem in higher education governance.
When institutions absorb penalties for civil-rights violations but officials face no personal consequences, accountability becomes optional and misconduct persists. Authority carries responsibility. When officials can abandon that responsibility without liability, impunity becomes inevitable.
As Congress examines rising discrimination complaints on college campuses, lawmakers should confront this structural gap: Civil-rights enforcement penalizes institutions but rarely holds decision-makers accountable.
Universities pay settlements. Administrators are reassigned or recycled.
This structure creates predictable incentives. Financial penalties may appear substantial, but they rarely threaten the larger funding streams that sustain major universities. Columbia University agreed to pay roughly $200 million to resolve federal civil-rights allegations while preserving access to more than $1 billion in federal funding. When penalties are smaller than the funding at stake, settlements become a cost of doing business rather than a deterrent.
Debates about campus antisemitism often focus on foreign funding, particularly money from Qatar. While such financial relationships deserve scrutiny, they do not explain the central governance failure. Foreign money cannot force university officials to ignore discrimination or retaliation against students. Those decisions are made by administrators entrusted with authority. When authority is exercised without accountability, impunity calcifies and abuse becomes normalized.
Federal prosecutors have long recognized the importance of individual accountability. In the Varsity Blues admissions scandal, wealthy parents used a nonprofit to secure privileged admissions through fraudulent records. The crime was not the donations themselves, but the corruption of a system designed to ensure fair access.
The same principle applies to civil-rights enforcement. Financial relationships and institutional partnerships may be lawful. What becomes unlawful is the misuse of authority to deny equal protection or ignore discrimination. History shows the consequences. In scandals involving Larry Nassar and Jerry Sandusky, repeated warnings were ignored for years while institutions prioritized reputation and liability management. By the time authorities intervened, the harm had multiplied in both severity and scale.
These cases reveal a pattern: an institutional culture of impunity across different forms of misconduct whether sexual abuse, antisemitism or other violations. The “too big to fail” mindset has migrated to education, where authority is shielded by institutional immunity, accountability is evaded and justice becomes discretionary.
Congress has confronted similar accountability failures before.
After corporate scandals exposed widespread financial fraud, lawmakers enacted the Sarbanes–Oxley Act, requiring executives to certify financial statements and imposing serious penalties for misconduct. The principle was simple: Align authority with responsibility and when responsibility is abdicated, impose liability.
Congress must meet the moment and enact a similar accountability framework for higher education. Officials responsible for civil-rights investigations should certify their findings under professional standards. Independent investigators should review complaints rather than rely solely on institution-controlled processes, and real-time systems should detect early signs of misconduct.
Such reforms would strengthen transparency and accountability. When authority in education is held to the highest level of scrutiny, the risk of exploitation of children and students is substantially reduced. Only then can educational institutions restore trust and safeguard our young generation.
Congress has already established this principle for corporate America; it must apply the same standard to education, where vulnerability and the risk of exploitation are high. Authority carries responsibility. When responsibility is abdicated, liability must follow.
Congress now faces a choice: amend liability or preserve a system of impunity. If institutional immunity remains intact, the next scandal is inevitable. The only question is when.
Lea Wolf-Soffer, MS/MBA, is co-founder of Let’s Speak Up, CAPE-Ed™, and creator of the SELF-Ex™ Method, recognized by USC, IDEO and the Nikou Foundation for innovation in education.
Did you enjoy this article?
You'll love our roundtable.
Editor's Picks
Israel and the Internet Wars – A Professional Social Media Review
The Invisible Student: A Tale of Homelessness at UCLA and USC
What Ever Happened to the LA Times?
Who Are the Jews On Joe Biden’s Cabinet?
You’re Not a Bad Jewish Mom If Your Kid Wants Santa Claus to Come to Your House
No Labels: The Group Fighting for the Political Center
Latest Articles
When You Come (to dinner) — A poem for Parsha Ki Tavo
A Moment in Time: Showing Up
Erroneous: That Israel has Renewed an Eye for an Eye
A Bisl Torah — Season of Renewal
Mark Ruffalo, Meet Dolly Parton
Print Issue: Debunking the Lie of the Century | August 28, 2026
Sinai Rabbis Publish Guide to Help Clergy Navigate Unimaginable Loss
For the authors, that legacy embodies the book’s central message: that even in the face of unbearable loss, compassion, presence and community can help transform grief into an enduring act of care.
Before Auschwitz: The Forgotten Nazi Program That Paved the Way for the Holocaust
This is where the Holocaust story begins – not in the gas chambers of Auschwitz, but earlier, with the Nazi regime’s Aktion T4 program, a state-sponsored campaign to murder people with disabilities.
When Renting Beats Buying, Los Angeles Risks Losing Its Jewish Future
For the Jewish community, this threat is particularly severe because Jewish life is built around proximity, continuity and intergenerational relationships.
Rabbis of LA | Justice, Justice Rabbi Simonds Pursues
First of two parts
Birthright Israel Summer Event, New Interim Rabbi, NLP Hike
Notable people and events in the Jewish LA community.
From Balaboosta to CookUnity: Chef Einat Admony Shares Her Food Across the U.S.
Long before shakshuka became a brunch staple and Israeli restaurants multiplied across the city, Admony was introducing New Yorkers to the flavors she had grown up with in Israel.
Nature’s Candy: A Sweet Fig, Date and Nut Cake
Baking this cake brought back the memories of Friday nights and holiday gatherings at my parents’ home.
Table for Five: Ki Tavo
Jewish History
Rosner’s Domain | Has Oct. 7 Made Israelis More Religious?
Several surveys showed that there is substance to the claim that a degree of Jewish “strengthening” is evident in the Israeli public. However, all the studies so far have dealt with adult society.
The Nexus of the Ruffalo Problem
Once the target is Jews rather than Israeli policy, the Nexus Document itself takes over.
Israel Has No Shortage of Biomedical Startups, but Where Are the Global Companies?
This may be Israel’s blind spot. The system is exceptionally good at creating biomedical startups but not equally optimized for turning the strongest of them into enduring global companies.
The Legacy of Everyday Love
We may not remember every conversation or every accomplishment, but we remember how people made us feel. In the end, it is those ordinary acts of kindness that stay with us the longest.
Could Jon Ossoff Become the First Jewish President?
It is possible that a record four Jewish candidates will be on a debate stage, vying to become the Democratic nominee for the 2028 presidential election.
Intermarriage and the Conservative Movement – A Different Approach
While I understand and sympathize with the issues confronting Conservative rabbis and synagogues in the United States concerning intermarriage, allowing Conservative rabbis to officiate at intermarriages will not solve that problem.
Why I Don’t Care About Antisemitism
Maybe we are fighting the wrong battle.
America’s First, Remarkable Flag, a Reminder of Biblical Faith
The Continental Union Flag deserves to be remembered as a window into the political process of independence, as in the time of biblical Israel.
I’m So (Sorta) Sorry
The classic case of a “nonapology” apology is when the allegedly contrite offender says something to the effect of “I’m so sorry that you’re upset.” Note that the speaker doesn’t actually acknowledge doing anything wrong.
What the Return of Yehuda Katz Says About Israel’s Covenant With Its People
Most nations honor their fallen, but Israel does something more. We make a covenant with them.
Off the Hook
Without noticing it, my body has gone from a shiny new Audi to a dented rent-a-wreck. I went from “Let me get it” to “Just give me two minutes to catch my breath.”
AIPAC’s New Challenge
AIPAC’s leaders face fundamental strategic questions unlike those they have confronted in the modern era.… Their ability to adapt to these new circumstances will define not only their future, but that of the U.S.-Israel relationship in this uncertain era.
More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.