Northwestern president grilled by Republicans about deal with pro-Palestinian protesters

House Republicans attacked Northwestern University President Michael Schill during a Congressional hearing on Thursday about the agreement he made with pro-Palestinian student organizers to end an encampment on his campus, blasting the deal as a capitulation to what they allege are anti-semitic activists.

Schill, who is Jewish, defended the agreement as part of his commitment to protecting students’ safety and fostering dialogue across different perspectives.

“We made the decision to talk to our students to model the behavior that we want to be engaged in: dialogue rather than force,” Schill said during the Washington hearing. “And we had a de-escalation. The tents came down right after the agreement was struck. The entire protest is now in conformity with the university rules.”

“My number one obligation is public safety and is [student] safety. Because if you don’t feel safe, you cannot learn.”

Schill was one of three university leaders called before a Congressional committee on Thursday, the latest in a round of hearings organized by the GOP dedicated to “stopping antisemitic college chaos.” Much of the questioning concerned the university leaders’ responses to pro-Palestinian encampments, with the toughest questions aimed at Schill.

Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik from New York yelled at Schill, saying he had given in to ‘pro-terrorist, pro-Hamas’ protestors.

Student organizers of Northwestern’s encampment say such accusations are a distraction from their goals. They want to raise awareness of the deaths in Gaza, more than 34,000 Palestinians killed, according to the United Nations, and push for the university to divest from companies supporting Israeli military action there.

“We were fortunate to have students who were willing to negotiate, and were willing to give up their demands [for divestment],” Schill said in response to questioning. “We said, ‘Absolutely not.’ We said, ‘Nothing that singles out Israel.’ And then we said, ‘Let’s think about what will make the university stronger, what will be important for your community.’”

The hearing, which started around 9:15 central time, was still going as of 11:30 a.m.

Schill began his testimony before Congress by reiterating his commitment to fighting antisemitism on campus. He said university leaders will work through the summer to update their code of conduct to address what he says has been an accelerated rise in intimidation and harassment of Jewish students since October 7.

Several Democrats criticized their Republican colleagues for calling the hearing instead of taking action to address the rise of antisemitic incidents on college campuses, including increasing the budget for the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights.

“No work is being done to find a meaningful solution to address animus on college campuses,” said Rep. Bobby Scott, a Virginia Democrat. “Complaining about a problem is not a solution. Certainly, it certainly riles people up, generates a lot of media coverage, but it doesn’t solve anything.”

Scott’s criticism of his Republican colleagues also carried with it a reminder of just how high the stakes were for Schill and other administrators during the hearing.

“To the best of my knowledge, the only changes that have resulted from these hearings is that a handful of individuals have lost their jobs.”

The presidents of the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard University both resigned after testifying before Congress regarding campus protests.

Academic leaders worry the hearings are an attempt to undermine public trust in higher education.

“The message is that these politicians are entitled to have authority over what happens on a college campus,” said Irene Mulvey, president of the American Association of University Professors. “And that's just unacceptable in a free society. It's really … political repression.”

Mulvey condemned antisemitism but said it is being weaponized by bad actors to delegitimize higher education as a pillar of democracy.

“The only thing to do as a college president in this situation is to stand on principle and give a robust, full-throated defense of academic freedom for faculty, and free speech and freedom of the press and freedom of association for their students,” she said.

Lisa Kurian Philip covers higher education for WBEZ, in partnership with Open Campus. Follow her on Twitter @LAPhilip.