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
A Moment in Time: God Laughs, We Discover
A Bisl Torah — Commuting
Ulysses’ Restraint by Homer and Ben Zoma but Not by Zionists
Print Issue: “I Stand With the Jews” | August 7, 2026
Beyond the Nebbish: New Hollywood Initiative Seeks to Transform Jewish Representation on Screen
Bringing Israeli Doctors Back
More Than Flavor: The Healing Power of Herbs and Spices
This week, Rachel and I share our column with our good friend Jill Sharfman.
Table for Five: Re’eh
Flesh And Blood
The Antizionist’s Dilemma
It’s not easy being an antizionist these days. Especially if you’re determined to live in accordance with your most important moral imperative: the denigration of the world’s only Jewish state.
A Brave Voice: Why Boy George Risked His Career to Stand With the Jews
Here was an artist with no personal stake in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, who understood the potential consequences of publicly taking a position, yet chose to publicly support Israel and what he believed was right.
Training Leadership of the Head, the Hand and the Heart
Rosner’s Domain | Are They Disarming Hamas or Netanyahu?
This war over narrative won’t just be between Israel and Hamas. It will also be an internal war over the narrative as Israel’s election is getting closer.
How the Supreme Court Adapted Parshat Shoftim
The Torah offers a better model than avenging and avoiding. It offers a safe opportunity for parties to meet and peacefully explain their perspectives, which might have been misunderstood. They can offer apologies and, where necessary, make amends for harms caused.
Can One Be a Non-Observant Orthodox Jew?
The tradition has always been bigger than any one person’s grip on it. What draws me is simple: I think these texts are a good part of why we are still here as a people. I want to know them and, in my own way, embrace them. Orthodox is where I turn.
Lies, Damned Lies and the Right Side of History
One question alone matters these days: Does this fact strengthen my tribe, or is it bad for it? If bad, it must be suppressed, denied, explained away. The higher truth is the narrative that serves the cause, the quest of the righteous and true.
Life Lessons in Old Age
Hardship and joy are present at every step. There is no time when it will be all good, so focus on the good and carry on. There are always moments to savor and appreciate.
The Forgotten Artist Who Fought Hitler with Faith
During World War II, his reach was breathtaking and he sought to stem the tide of Hitler’s march of death and settled in America for good.
How To Get Right the Woke-Right
The right was supposed to be the safe zone, and recent polling suggests that assumption is weakening.
Is Mamdani Helping Bibi?
By explicitly linking Mamdani’s efforts to rising levels of antisemitism, Netanyahu was able to frame himself as a defender of Israel against growing international hostility.
Israel’s Next Front: The Power of Attraction
Universities, hospitals, cultural and sporting institutions, technology companies and philanthropic foundations increasingly shape a country’s international influence.
Theater Near Portland Marquee Posted ‘Before There Were the Jews, There Was The Odyssey’
A Portland, Oregon theater with a reputation for controversial marquees posted one for Christopher Nolan’s “The Odyssey” that concerned many in the Jewish community.
A Boy, Busts and Bulls
When will we finally cease having hopes that Islamists will honor their commitments to ceasefires? Hasn’t the time finally arrived when we can give up any illusion that terrorists will magically be transformed into diplomats, forsaking their keffiyeh scarves for a Calvin Klein makeover?
Rabbis of LA | Rabbi Schuldenfrei’s Path to the Pulpit
Schuldenfrei wanted a rounded education, something which she said was reinforced by her “very pluralistic” upbringing.
Temple Beth Am-Pressman Academy Gala, Bubbela Party at Venice Beach
Notable people and events in the Jewish LA community.
When a Faculty Union Turns Against Its Students
California lawmakers must not pass AB 2551 in any form. At this point, no legislator can honestly treat it as neutral free-speech legislation.
“You Say Genocide, I Say War:” Dissecting the Genius of Boy George’s New Song
Why do you think the song has triggered such an uproar among the “Israel rhymes with genocide” crowd? Because it demolishes their case.
More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.