UCLA Attempts a Sudden U-Turn on Anti-Semitism After Seeing What Happened to Columbia

UCLA has announced a new initiative to combat anti-Semitism after watching the Trump administration pull $400 million in federal funding from Columbia University for failing to protect Jewish students. But is this a sincere commitment, or just damage control?

Key Facts:

The Trump administration canceled $400 million in federal funding to Columbia University for allowing anti-Semitic harassment.
The Department of Education warned that more funding cuts to other universities may follow.
UCLA Chancellor Julio Frenk announced an anti-Semitism initiative on Monday, calling it an “inflection point” for the school.
A federal court previously issued an injunction against UCLA for aiding anti-Semitic activists who blocked Jewish students from accessing parts of campus.
UCLA reportedly provided barriers and failed to protect Jewish students from discrimination, according to legal filings.

The Rest of The Story:

For years, UCLA has faced criticism for allowing anti-Israel activists to create hostile environments for Jewish students.

Last year, a federal court ruled against the school for enabling protestors to set up encampments that physically blocked Jewish students from entering key campus areas.

UCLA even provided metal barriers and let activists decide who could pass, according to legal documents.

With Columbia University now facing severe financial consequences for its inaction, UCLA’s leadership is suddenly pledging to fight anti-Semitism.

Chancellor Frenk said in a statement, ““UCLA is at an inflection point. Building on past efforts and lessons, we must now push ourselves to extinguish antisemitism, completely and definitively.”

The message paints the move as part of the university’s ongoing commitment to equality, but given UCLA’s past complicity, many see it as an attempt to avoid Columbia’s fate.

Commentary:

Let’s be clear—UCLA isn’t acting out of principle; it’s acting out of fear.

The moment Columbia lost hundreds of millions in federal funding, UCLA’s administration scrambled to do damage control.

If they truly cared about Jewish students, they wouldn’t have waited until now to take action.

UCLA didn’t just fail to stop anti-Semitism—it actively facilitated it.

The university let activists enforce a “Jew Exclusion Zone” on campus, denying students access to classes and the library.

This wasn’t a case of a few rogue protestors.

This was a university-sanctioned violation of students’ rights.

Now, faced with the possibility of federal funding cuts, UCLA wants to pretend it’s turning over a new leaf.

But words are cheap.

Columbia’s punishment should serve as just the beginning.

Any university that enabled this kind of discrimination should pay a steep price—whether in funding, lawsuits, or leadership resignations.

If UCLA truly wants to make amends, it should go beyond press releases and pledges.

It must hold those responsible accountable, implement real protections for Jewish students, and ensure that nothing like this happens again.

Until then, this sudden shift is nothing more than an act of self-preservation.

The Bottom Line:

UCLA’s new anti-Semitism initiative comes only after Columbia University suffered massive financial penalties for similar failures.

While the administration claims this is a principled move, history suggests otherwise.

Universities that allowed discrimination against Jewish students must face real consequences—not just issue empty statements when money is on the line.