Former Columbia University president Katrina Armstrong somehow managed to “not recall” almost every single incident of anti-Semitism that occurred under her watch – even as her institution faced losing $400 million in federal funding over the rampant discrimination.
At a Glance
- Katrina Armstrong, Columbia University’s interim president, stepped down amid federal scrutiny of campus antisemitism and $400 million in frozen funding
- During her deposition, Armstrong repeatedly claimed she could not recall specific antisemitic incidents despite documented reports of Jewish students being harassed and spat upon
- Armstrong downplayed significant policy changes to faculty while simultaneously agreeing to federal demands to combat antisemitism
- Claire Shipman, former journalist and board co-chair, replaced Armstrong as Columbia’s third president in just one year
The President Who Couldn’t Remember
In what has to be one of the most convenient cases of selective amnesia in academic history, former Columbia University interim president Katrina Armstrong somehow couldn’t recall students advocating for Israel’s destruction or Jewish students being harassed and spat upon during her federal testimony. Even more remarkably, she couldn’t remember a faculty member making derogatory comments about Jewish donors. All this forgetfulness comes despite these incidents being thoroughly documented by Columbia’s own Task Force on Antisemitism, according to reporting from the Washington Free Beacon.
When asked directly about specific antisemitic events during her deposition with the Department of Health and Human Services, Armstrong repeatedly responded with variations of “I have no specific memory of hearing that.” This astonishing memory lapse occurred while Columbia was under civil rights investigation and had $400 million in federal funding frozen specifically because of these very incidents. Even more telling was Armstrong’s response when asked about her authority as president: she quickly deflected, claiming, “My understanding of the Charter is that the trustees have full responsibility for the University.”
Two-Faced Leadership
Armstrong’s leadership was marked by blatant double-speak. Behind closed doors with faculty members, she and Provost Angela Olinto downplayed the significant changes Columbia was implementing to satisfy federal demands. In a faculty meeting, Armstrong reassured professors that “masks are still allowed” at protests, directly contradicting the university’s written policy forbidding masks used to conceal identity during policy violations. Similarly, Olinto told concerned faculty that their department would remain “totally independent” despite agreeing to federal oversight changes.
“This is not a receivership. The provost will not be writing or controlling anything. It’s the faculty. Your department is totally independent.” said Angela Olinto.
When one administrator noticed the meeting was being transcribed, panic ensued. “I am unable to turn it off, for technical reasons, so we’re all just going to have to understand. This meeting is being transcribed. If you are the requester of this, I would ask you to turn it off,” one unnamed administrator pleaded. Olinto followed up with: “Yeah, that seems to be the default. I keep telling my people to stop this thing.” Heaven forbid there be an accurate record of what university leadership actually tells their faculty behind closed doors while they’re telling federal officials something completely different.
The $400 Million Reality Check
The Trump administration’s Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism didn’t mess around, freezing approximately $400 million in federal grants and contracts to Columbia over their handling of campus antisemitism. The university’s sudden scramble to comply with nine specific preconditions reveals just how dependent these supposedly independent institutions of higher learning are on government money. Armstrong herself described the situation to faculty as “unbearable” and “unwinnable” with the administration cutting off that sweet, sweet grant cash.
“Antisemitism is dangerous and reprehensible. It has no place at Columbia or in our society, and I’m grateful as a citizen, and as co-chair of our board for the spotlight you’re putting on this ancient hatred” said Claire Shipman.
Columbia’s new acting president, Claire Shipman, has taken a markedly different tone than her predecessor, admitting “It is unacceptable. I can tell you plainly that I am not satisfied with where Columbia is at the moment.” Shipman becomes Columbia’s third president in just one year, following the resignation of President Minouche Shafik last August over similar criticisms of her handling of pro-Palestinian protests. The revolving door of leadership perfectly illustrates the chaos that has engulfed one of America’s most prestigious universities as it grapples with rampant antisemitism while attempting to appease both radical activists and federal funding requirements.
A Lesson in Federal Leverage
The Columbia debacle demonstrates that when it comes to reining in out-of-control universities, money talks. Faculty member Larisa Geskin, who had previously sent a letter requesting action against campus antisemitism, was shocked at how the federal demands mirrored what concerned faculty had been asking for all along. “I was shocked when I saw the Trump administration letter,” Geskin said. “I was like, ‘Am I reading my letter?’ This is what I was talking about.” The difference? The federal government backed their requests with the threat of withholding $400 million, which accomplished in weeks what concerned faculty couldn’t achieve for months.
“When there is a war, somebody has to make a decision, and decisions are not being made, at least that we can see,” said Larisa Geskin.
The Task Force’s preconditions included reviewing admissions procedures, clarifying protest restrictions, enforcing anti-masking policies, adhering to immigration laws, and reviewing regional studies programs. All measures aimed at protecting Jewish students who had been harassed, intimidated, and subjected to discrimination that Armstrong apparently couldn’t recall. The situation offers a sobering reminder that our elite universities, for all their talk of independence and academic freedom, will quickly fall in line when their funding is at stake – though they’ll certainly try to tell their faculty something completely different when they think no one is transcribing the meeting.
