Ending Subsidies for Pro-Terrorist Activities on Campus Act would ban federal aid for colleges that support Hamas or terrorist groups
About 14% of higher education revenue in the U.S. comes from the federal government.
Context
Since the war between Israel and Hamas began in October, some colleges and universities have experienced rises in antisemitic or anti-Israel activity.
Perhaps most prominent was an open statement signed by dozens of Harvard student organizations labeling the Israeli government a “regime” and falsely holding it “entirely responsible” for the war. (The war was actually sparked by Hamas’s coordinated October 7 attacks which killed more than 1,300 Israelis.)
Many criticized university leadership, particularly President Claudine Gay, for her initial silence and waiting too long to distance the institution from the student groups’ statement.
“In nearly 50 years of Harvard affiliation, I have never been as disillusioned and alienated as I am today,” former President Larry Summers wrote on X, formerly Twitter. “The silence from Harvard’s leadership, so far, coupled with a vocal and widely reported student groups’ statement blaming Israel solely, has allowed Harvard to appear at best neutral towards acts of terror against the Jewish state of Israel.”
In November, the Education Department opened civil rights investigations into six prominent universities for antisemitic incidents, including threats and harassment towards Jewish students: Columbia, Cooper Union, Cornell, Lafayette, University of Pennsylvania, and Wellesley.
What the legislation does
The Ending Subsidies for Pro-Terrorist Activities on Campus Act would ban federal funds for any higher education institution that “urges support for, endorses, espouses, encourages, organizes for, or promotes a foreign terrorist organization or its terrorist activities.”
The State Department maintains the government’s official list of foreign terrorist organizations; Hamas was added in 1997. Among the other most prominent such groups include Al Qaeda added in 1999, Hezbollah added in 1997, and ISIS added in 2004.
The Senate version of the legislation was introduced as S. 3184 on November 1, by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL). The House version was introduced two weeks later on November 15 as H.R. 6419, by Rep. Aaron Bean (R-FL4).
What supporters say
Supporters argue that public money shouldn’t be directed towards institutions that promote America’s enemies.
“Today, we are seeing the full force of Jewish hatred on our college and university campuses. It’s unthinkable that students are unable to walk between classes to their dorms or the dining hall. But it’s the reality for Jewish students on campus today,” Rep. Bean said in a press release. “Under no circumstance should taxpayers be funding toxic, hatred dogma anywhere on college campuses.”
“The last thing that students should be worried about is a threat to their safety. Shamefully, some students and faculty members are supporting an organization that has pledged to commit violence until Israel no longer exists,” Sen. Rubio said in a separate press release. “Our tax dollars should not be funding antisemitic, pro-terrorist activities on college campuses.”
What opponents say
Opponents counter that the First Amendment prohibits government action to curb speech, barring a very small number of exceptions — and that even as bad as “supporting terrorism” is, it likely wouldn’t qualify as such an exception because of its vagueness.
For example, a UC Davis faculty member was not charged with a crime after posting on X (formerly Twitter) that “Zionist journalists” should be afraid, then referencing their children alongside knife and blood drop emojis.
By contrast, a Cornell University junior was charged for posting a more specific antisemitic threat: threatening on an internet discussion forum to “shoot up” the campus’s kosher dining hall.
Even some supporters of Judaism and Israel could criticize the legislation for being too open to interpretation or easy to evade.
For example, the phrase “From the river to the sea, Palestine shall be free” has become an increasingly frequent chant at pro-Palestinian rallies and marches, including on campuses. None of the individual words literally support terrorism, but many interpret it as a coded message for violent Jewish extermination.
Indeed, the U.K.’s Labour Party suspended Member of Parliament Andy McDonald for using the phrase at a rally. So would students or professors chanting it constitute “supporting terrorism” under this bill? It’s unclear.
Odds of passage
The House version has attracted one Republican cosponsor: Rep. Troy Nehls (R-TX22). The bill awaits a potential vote in either the House Education and the Workforce or House Judiciary Committee.
The Senate version has not yet attracted any cosponsors. It awaits a potential vote in the Senate HELP (Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions) Committee.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
This article was written by GovTrack Insider staff writer Jesse Rifkin.
Want more? Follow GovTrack by email, on Mastodon, or on Threads.
And for our “A Bill a Minute” video series — on TikTok, on Instagram, or on YouTube.
Like our analyses? Support our work on Patreon
