Being Jewish on campus amid Trump's campaign against antisemitism: ‘tremendous heartache'

Protesters were chanting slogans Alyssa Wallack had never heard at USC, shouting so loudly that she thought demonstrators were inside the lecture hall where she was attending class.
'Globalize the intifada!' she recalled hearing.
'From the river to the sea...,' they yelled.
It was Oct. 17, 2023 — 10 days after Hamas launched a terrorist attack against Israel that killed about 1,200 people and took hundreds as hostages.
Wallack, who is Jewish, said she had to 'escape.'
'I freaked out, and I ran out of class and started sobbing,' said Wallack, 23, who served as student board president of USC Chabad. 'It felt like everyone was against me, which I know is not so accurate. But I just remember sitting in my class, not able to learn. ...Were some of the people who I thought were my friends part of these protests, chanting things that were not only offensive but also antisemitic?'
In the months ahead, Wallack said, she didn't feel safe on campus. She wasn't alone. Other Jewish students at the University of Southern California said that after the Hamas attack — and the war it triggered — they, too, felt unsafe amid pro-Palestinian protests. At UCLA, where a large encampment sparked a violent confrontation that led to dozens of arrests, Jewish students expressed similar sentiments.
As the academic year draws to a close — USC's commencement was last month, UCLA's is in mid-June — The Times interviewed 12 Jewish students and professors at the universities who reflected on their campus experiences since Oct. 7.
They wrestled with two questions: Did you feel safer this school year? And did Donald Trump's campaign against antisemitism have anything to do with it?
The complexity of their answers was, for some, rooted in Trump's aggressive move in a Jan. 29 executive order 'to combat the explosion of antisemitism on our campuses' and 'investigate and punish anti-Jewish racism in leftist, anti-American colleges and universities.' His actions — coming amid a surge in violence targeting American Jews, from Colorado to Washington D.C. — have included attempts to deport college students who've espoused pro-Palestinian views.
Trump's offensive — aimed at mainly elite universities, which he claims have enabled antisemitism — has roiled academia, with billions of dollars of federal funds threatened or withheld. USC and UCLA are among the schools under investigation by a Department of Justice 'task force to combat antisemitism.'
Yet, some students and professors said Trump is using antisemitism as a cudgel to achieve his political objectives and exert his influence over higher education. A few doubted the president's sincerity and questioned whether his tactics would, in the long run, leave American Jews better off.
David N. Myers, a professor of Jewish history at UCLA, said that slashing federal funding for universities because of their response to campus antisemitism points to the 'very cynical and completely misguided nature of this campaign.'
'It's not about antisemitism,' he said. 'It's about enfeebling and dismantling the university, in which Jews actually have a very huge stake. ...I think many, many, many people or groups will suffer, including Jews.'
Following the start of pro-Palestinian demonstrations last year, both USC and the University of California implemented new, stricter protest rules or began enforcing existing ones, such as their bans on encampments. At UCLA, protesters cannot wear masks or block paths, and demonstration areas are restricted. USC, a private university, has closed campus gates and requires identification to enter.
A relatively calm academic year at UCLA and USC followed.
Yet jarring recollections endure.
UCLA junior Gal Cohavy, 20, recalled two encounters last spring: One friend was physically threatened, and another struck in the head with a water bottle. Other actions were, he said, alarming: 'Walking around campus with a kippah on, I saw a swastika.'
Cohavy began carrying pepper spray.
Many Jews have taken issue with Israel's war in Gaza and the country's treatment of Palestinians, and protested the Jewish state's actions alongside like-minded activists. Some have also spoken out against Islamophobia, and pointed out that Trump has taken no action in response to reported increases in anti-Muslim harassment or discrimination.
Myers said he didn't feel unsafe last year — what he felt was uncomfortable. That's because he believed it was necessary to condemn both the Oct. 7 attack and 'the excess of Israel's response in Gaza.'
'There is a distinct feeling for me of not fitting into either of the two most prominent camps,' he said. 'I felt some sense of aloneness.'
Asked if he still felt that way, Myers paused.
'Yeah, to some extent.'
Nearly all of the Jewish people interviewed for this story expressed pro-Israel views, to varying degrees. Although most said they felt safer this year, nearly every discussion was laced with caveats — a reflection, perhaps, of how personal the issue has become. And traumatic.
'It wasn't just unsafe — it was traumatizing,' said USC professor Hagit Arieli-Chai, who teaches modern Hebrew. Encountering protesters and their anti-Israel signs and slogans last spring, she said, forced her to confront 'hatred ... in unequivocal ways.' Arieli-Chai, who said one of her cousins was killed in the Oct. 7 attack, tried to avoid campus, going there only to teach.
Some said they attributed an improved sense of campus safety to tightened university protest polices, or other factors — and not Trump. Others praised the president. And yet another group said it's hard to pinpoint reasons.
'It strikes me as a false claim to knowledge for anyone other than a trained sociologist who's done a serious survey ... to say it's because of' one factor or another, said David Nimmer, a professor from practice at UCLA School of Law.
Some who credited Trump for an improved campus climate expressed a sense of discomfort, worrying about billions of dollars in potential funding cuts across higher education and an illiberal stifling of speech, among other issues.
'I am not the slightest supporter of the Trump administration,' said Nimmer. But, 'to the extent that anyone comes in and diminishes ... antisemitism, that is a step in the right direction.'
A few questioned the sincerity of Trump's support of the Jewish people.
'Now we're being used to justify, I would say, frankly, illegal actions [in] the case of the administration,' said Dylan Julia Cooper, 22, who graduated from USC in May. 'We are being used for his own goal of ... taking out anybody who disagrees with him.'
Yoav Gillath, 22, who also just graduated from USC, said he 'wanted to believe' that the president's goal was fighting antisemitism — but wasn't sure how to interpret the administration's actions.
'I wish they were more transparent with exactly why they're making the decisions that they are about various universities,' said Gillath, 22.
UCLA senior Bella Brannon said she is troubled by Trump administration funding cuts to 'life-saving research.' But she said, overall, 'Jewish students are happy to see some sort of action taken.'
'For far too long, nobody was even upholding the rules and policies that were in place — not to mention the law,' she said of universities' response to antisemitism. 'It's absolutely no surprise that the government is taking action.'
One word came up in several interviews: 'angst.'
'I have a tremendous amount of angst every day,' Nimmer said. 'I am ... someone who is devoted to democracy. And yet I feel that the duly elected leader in the United States and the duly elected leader in Israel are both tearing down the very structures on which the countries are founded. And it's causing me tremendous heartache every day.'
The mix of dread and relief reflected in some comments also appeared in the nonpartisan American Jewish Committee's recent open letter that praised a federal task force on antisemitism but warned about the effect of deep cuts at universities.
'We are concerned that ... lifesaving scientific research and other critical fields that have little connection to the areas where antisemitism has manifested may be harmed by arbitrary, across the board cuts to grants and research contracts,' the letter said.
Last spring, Westwood was suffused with rage. The encampment erected by pro-Palestinian activists became a global news story in May after a melee instigated by pro-Israel counterdemonstrators erupted. UCLA's inability to stop it sparked intense criticism.
The violence, among the university's darkest chapters, brought change.
Those interviewed noted a turning point: Julio Frenk — whose German Jewish father fled Nazi Germany in the 1930s — becoming chancellor on Jan. 1. The university has also overhauled security and hired LAPD veteran Steve Lurie to lead the new Office of Campus Safety.
Noting the 'pain and fear' that antisemitism had brought on campus, Frenk said, 'UCLA is unwavering in its commitment to building a campus community in which Jewish students — and all members of our community — feel safe, respected and welcome.'
Senior Mia Toubian, 20, who is news editor of Ha'Am, UCLA's student-run Jewish newsmagazine, praised Frenk for banning Students for Justice in Palestine as a campus organization in March following a protest the group held in front of a UC regent's house that was vandalized. 'It's gotten a little bit better,' said Toubian, 20, who added that she feels 'relatively' safer now, but 'objectively still not completely safe.'
Brannon, the magazine's editor in chief, recalled how she was followed home after covering a protest last spring. 'I got really, really scared,' she said.
Once, she was spat at while walking to class. But Brannon, 22, feels less safe now. That's partly because, she said, the 'fringe of the fringe' have continued to demonstrate with few repercussions.
She noted a recent incident that illustrated how — even with UCLA's tighter rules — ruptures still occur. In March, pro-Palestinian demonstrators blocked access to a campus building, draping it with a banner that equated UCLA police and the Israeli military with the Ku Klux Klan. They evaded law enforcement.
'I'm worried that without sanction, it is getting more unsafe for Jewish students,' Brannon said.
Lurie said that when police approached the building to arrest those blocking the entrance, they 'ran and kind of scattered.' The protesters' faces were covered, he said, making it impossible to identify them via recordings.
But some at UCLA said the changes have been dramatic — for the better.
Sharon Nazarian, founder of the Younes & Soraya Nazarian Center for Israel Studies at UCLA, noted a peaceful UCLA Hillel vigil and walk through campus to mark the first anniversary of the Hamas attack would have been 'unfathomable the previous academic year.'
'That,' she said, 'is a sea change for me.'
A few USC students praised university leadership for protecting Jewish students.
Ben Sheyman, 22, grew up in San Francisco, but his life as a Jew was partly shaped by his immigrant parents' experience in their home countries: Ukraine and Belarus — places where Jews were persecuted. When his family came to the U.S., it was supposed to be different.
'Here, you are as American as anybody else,' said Sheyman, who graduated this spring. But walking to class in the 2023-24 school year, Sheyman would see signs with slogans like 'End Zionism.' It was, he said, 'really unsettling.'
Still, Sheyman felt unsafe just once, when a crowd of masked protesters held items emblazoned with 'Nazi symbols,' he said. The tighter security changed things for the better, he said.
Cooper also felt safer in recent months, but related an upsetting run-in. She wears a Star of David necklace, and once, in the months after the Oct. 7 attack, a passerby hurled an extremely offensive Jewish slur at her as she walked near campus.
She praised administrators' decision to close the campus gates, even if she has some reservations. 'Whether it's politically correct or not, I do feel safer,' she said.
USC said in a statement that it 'continues to publicly and unequivocally denounce antisemitism in all its forms and has taken strong actions to protect all of our students ... from illegal discrimination of any kind.' It also touted the 'enhanced security protocols' and the launch of new mandatory seminars 'devoted specifically to free expression and civic discourse.'
For some at USC, though, the fractures in their lives — the loss of friendships, the alienation from peers or professors — linger. People like Wallack.
Her time at USC after the Oct. 7 attack was discombobulating. She left her sorority because she felt it did not voice sufficient support for Israel, and moved home.
'I don't really feel like I found my people at USC as a result of Oct. 7,' she said.
Sitting in the shade at the USC Village in early May, Wallack touched her Star of David necklace and explained that she would not attend graduation ceremonies.
Instead, Wallack departed for Israel. A business fellowship awaited.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Politico

25 minutes ago

• Politico

Israel presses ahead with strikes as Trump's 2-week deadline looms

Israeli officials insisted Friday that they will keep up their bombing campaign against Iran, even as President Donald Trump has given Tehran a two-week deadline to come to some sort of diplomatic deal that reins in its nuclear program. Israel's ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, laid out his country's case at the U.N. Security Council, facing off Friday with Iranian representatives who urged the world to stop the Israeli strikes. 'Israel will not stop. Not until Iran's nuclear threat is dismantled, not until its war machine is disarmed, not until our people and yours are safe,' Danon declared. The Israeli assertions highlight how Trump's statement that he'll decide 'in the next two weeks' whether to strike Iranian nuclear sites provides an opportunity to Israel as much as it puts pressure on Iran. For Iran, it's two weeks to come to some sort of diplomatic deal with the U.S. that constrains its nuclear, and possibly other, programs. For Israel, it's a focused timeframe to do as much damage as it can to Iran's nuclear and broader military infrastructure before the U.S. may pressure it to accept a diplomatic solution. The more damage Israel does, the more it could weaken an enemy and improve the odds that Iran will capitulate to U.S. demands in the diplomatic process. The strikes themselves couldthreaten the survival of Iran's Islamist regime. Trump told reporters on Friday that he wasn't about to push Israel to halt its assault in Iran while he weighs what the U.S. should do. 'It's very hard to make that request right now,' Trump said. 'If somebody is winning, it's a little bit harder to do than if somebody is losing, but we're ready, willing and able, and we've been speaking to Iran, and we'll see what happens.' A senior administration official, granted anonymity to speak about the president's thinking, said 'everything is still on the table.' 'This is about giving this a little time and seeing if things look any different in a couple weeks,' the official said. Trump's 'two-week' window was delivered Thursday by press secretary Karoline Leavitt, who said, quoting Trump, that his delay in determining whether to join Israel's attack on Iran was 'based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future.' Trump often says he'll make decisions in two weeks, only to extend his deadline again or never follow through. Still, Israel and Iran appear to believe the next two weeks will be a crucial phase. Iranian officials showed up for nuclear talks with European officials on Friday in Geneva; Israel pressed ahead with its bombing campaign against Iran, which is responding with missiles. Iranian officials met Friday with European envoys in Geneva in an attempt to revitalize the diplomatic process. The talks ended on an ambiguous note. Iranian officials have said their participation in future talks would hinge on Israel stopping its attacks. Some European representatives said talks should continue regardless, even as they urged both sides to avoid escalation. 'We invited the Iranian minister to consider negotiations with all sides, including the United States, without awaiting the cessation of strikes, which we also hope for,' French foreign minister Jean-Noel Barrot said. For Israel, the most critical, but perhaps toughest, official objective is eliminating Iran's nuclear facility at Fordo. That facility is buried deep underground, and Israel has been hoping Trump will enter the fight and use special, massive U.S. bombs to destroy it. There are concerns, however, including among Republicans, that Iran could retaliate against U.S. assets if America enters the conflict on any level, dragging America into another Middle Eastern war. Trump campaigned on avoiding such wars. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has hinted that Israel has means to destroy Fordo on its own. It's not clear what those methods could involve, but Israel has significant intelligence operations inside Iran and it has often surprised even Washington with its capabilities. Either way, current and former Israeli officials said they saw no reason for Israel to back off its strikes now, despite calls for deescalation from some world capitals. The more Israel degrades Iran's capabilities, the less able Tehran will be to mount retaliatory attacks on Israel or the United States, should the latter choose to enter the war. From the beginning, 'the Israeli planning was based on the assumption that we have to do it alone,' said a former Israeli diplomat familiar with the situation. The person, like others, was granted anonymity to discuss highly sensitive issues. It's unclear whether there is any deal with Iran that Israel would deem strong enough. There is tremendous distrust of Iran's Islamist regime within Israel's security establishment, leading to a sense that Iran would cheat on any deal. Another unsettled question is whether a deal with Iran will cover only its nuclear program or also curb its ballistic missile initiative and support for proxy militias in the region. Some analysts have argued that Netanyahu decided to begin attacking Iran last week because he was worried earlier nuclear talks between Iran and the Trump administration would yield too weak a deal. If new efforts at diplomacy yield fruit, Trump could pressure Netanyahu to accept whatever deal emerges, potentially even by threatening to withhold weapons and other equipment Israel needs to defend itself against Iran. The war is costly for Israel, which has been fighting on multiple fronts — in particular against Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip — since October 2023. As one Israeli official said, Iranian missile attacks feel like 'Russian roulette' to Israeli citizens.

Associated Press

25 minutes ago

• Associated Press

Trump says Gabbard was 'wrong' about Iran and Israeli strikes could be 'very hard to stop'

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump said Friday that his director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, was 'wrong' when she previously said that the U.S. believed Iran wasn't building a nuclear weapon, and he suggested that it would be 'very hard to stop' Israel's strikes on Iran in order to negotiate a possible ceasefire. Trump has recently taken a more aggressive public stance toward Tehran as he's sought more time to weigh whether to attack Iran by striking its well-defended Fordo uranium enrichment facility. Buried under a mountain, the facility is believed to be out of the reach of all but America's 'bunker-buster' bombs. After landing in New Jersey for an evening fundraiser for his super political action committee, Trump was asked about Gabbard's comments to Congress in March that U.S. spy agencies believed that Iran wasn't working on nuclear warheads. The president responded, 'Well then, my intelligence community is wrong. Who in the intelligence community said that?' Informed that it had been Gabbard, Trump said, 'She's wrong.' In a subsequent post on X, Gabbard said her testimony was taken out of context 'as a way to manufacture division.' 'America has intelligence that Iran is at the point that it can produce a nuclear weapon within weeks to months, if they decide to finalize the assembly,' she wrote. 'President Trump has been clear that can't happen, and I agree.' Still, disavowing Gabbard's previous assessment came a day after the White House said Trump would decide within two weeks whether the U.S. military would get directly involved in the conflict between Israel and Iran. It said seeking additional time was 'based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future.' But on Friday, Trump himself seemed to cast doubts on the possibility of talks leading to a pause in fighting between Israel and Iran. He said that, while he might support a ceasefire, Israel's strikes on Iran could be 'very hard to stop.' Asked about Iran suggesting that, if the U.S. was serious about furthering negotiations, it could call on Israel to stop its strikes, Trump responded, 'I think it's very hard to make that request right now.' 'If somebody is winning, it's a little bit harder to do than if somebody is losing,' Trump said. 'But we're ready, willing and able, and we've been speaking to Iran, and we'll see what happens.' The president later added, 'It's very hard to stop when you look at it.' 'Israel's doing well in terms of war. And, I think, you would say that Iran is doing less well. It's a little bit hard to get somebody to stop,' Trump said. Trump campaigned on decrying 'endless wars' and has vowed to be an international peacemaker. That's led some, even among conservatives, to point to Trump's past criticism of the U.S. invasion of Iraq beginning in 2003 as being at odds with his more aggressive stance toward Iran now. Trump suggested the two situations were very different, though. 'There were no weapons of mass destruction. I never thought there were. And that was somewhat pre-nuclear. You know, it was, it was a nuclear age, but nothing like it is today,' Trump said of his past criticism of the administration of President George W. Bush. He added of Iran's current nuclear program, 'It looked like I'm right about the material that they've gathered already. It's a tremendous amount of material.' Trump also cast doubts on Iran's developing nuclear capabilities for civilian pursuits, like power generation. 'You're sitting on one of the largest oil piles anywhere in the world,' he said. 'It's a little bit hard to see why you'd need that.' ____

The Hill

25 minutes ago

• The Hill

Trump: ‘Maybe I'll have to change my mind' about firing Powell

President Trump on Friday floated the possibility of firing Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell as part of his latest round of intense criticism of the leader of the central bank over its decision not to lower interest rates. Trump, in a lengthy post on Truth Social, railed against Powell, labeling him a 'numbskull,' 'a dumb guy,' 'and an obvious Trump Hater.' Trump appointed Powell to the post in 2017. 'I fully understand that my strong criticism of him makes it more difficult for him to do what he should be doing, lowering Rates, but I've tried it all different ways,' Trump posted. 'I've been nice, I've been neutral, and I've been nasty, and nice and neutral didn't work!' The post included a graphic showing how the United States' central bank rate compared to other nations. 'I don't know why the Board doesn't override this Total and Complete Moron!' Trump added 'Maybe, just maybe, I'll have to change my mind about firing him? But regardless, his Term ends shortly!' Powell's term ends in 2026. He said last November he would not step down if Trump asked, and that it is 'not permitted under the law' for the president to fire or demote him or any of the other Fed governors with leadership positions. Trump in April said he had no intention of firing Powell, though he has in recent days ratcheted up his criticism amid frustration over the Fed's handling of interest rates. Fed officials kicked off the year expecting to continue cutting interest rates as inflation drifted back toward its ideal annual level of 2 percent. But the bank has held off through the first half of 2025 amid the uncertainty driven by Trump's tariff plans. Powell reiterated his call for patience Wednesday, after the Fed kept rates steady once again.