Investigation into Columbia Law Professor’s Comments on Israeli Students Harassment
Columbia University is currently conducting an investigation into tenured law professor Katherine Franke over comments she made during an interview with “Democracy Now!” in January. The interview focused on allegations that two students who had served in the Israeli army had sprayed a chemical at their classmates during an on-campus rally for Gaza. Franke linked this incident to a pattern of on-campus harassment that Palestinian, Arab, and Muslim students have long alleged.
However, Franke’s remarks were misconstrued by supporters of Israel, who suggested that she was calling for a ban on all Israeli students from campus. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz published an article titled “Columbia University Pushes Back Against Professor Who Vilified Israeli Students,” which cited a statement from the university affirming its support for Israeli students.
As a result of the controversy, Franke received a complaint against her filed by two law school professors who alleged violations of university discrimination policy. Supporters of Israel continued to misinterpret Franke’s statements online, while a Republican lawmaker questioned University President Minouche Shafik about Franke during an April hearing on campus antisemitism.
Columbia University has refused to answer questions about the ongoing investigation but referred to its equal opportunity and affirmative action policies and procedures. Possible disciplinary actions listed in the document include probation, administrative leave or suspension, and dismissal or restriction from employment.
Franke is not the only Columbia staff member facing investigation. Several others, many of whom have defended Palestinian rights, are also under scrutiny. The House Committee on Education and the Workforce has been pressuring the university, and three deans were recently placed on indefinite leave for exchanging text messages that touched on ancient antisemitic tropes.
Franke expressed concern about the impact of her case on peaceful protests and student engagement with public affairs. She emphasized that her criticism of the university administration’s response to student protests is not just about her career but about the lives and dignity of Palestinians.
Franke’s career has focused on gender and sexuality law, as well as human rights work related to Israel’s occupation of Palestine. In 2018, she was deported from Israel upon her arrival to participate in a human rights delegation. Franke has been vocal in defending students who speak out on behalf of Palestinians or criticize the Israeli government, as well as criticizing the university administration’s handling of student protests.
The university spokesperson stated that it is disheartening to see some members of the community spreading antisemitism, Islamophobia, and bigotry against Palestinians and Israelis. The spokesperson emphasized the importance of avoiding language that vilifies or stereotypes entire groups of people, as it goes against Columbia’s values and can lead to acts of harassment or violence.
During the April congressional hearing, Rep. Elise Stefanik falsely claimed that Franke said all Israeli students who served in the IDF are dangerous and should not be on campus. University President Minouche Shafik agreed with Stefanik’s framing, calling the comments unacceptable and discriminatory. However, Shafik seemed to misunderstand Franke’s outreach, as Franke did not make those comments.
Franke was deposed by outside investigators on June 13 as part of the investigatory process. She believes that the university has already made up its mind about her case and that there is a high chance she will be fired. Franke expressed concern about the broader implications of her case, stating that it is not just about Palestine but about the imposition of orthodoxy on contested political concepts.
The decision regarding Franke’s future at Columbia University is expected to be made soon. Franke believes that this case is about more than just Palestine and that it raises concerns about academic freedom and the stifling of dissent on various issues.
