By: Fern Sidman

In a dramatic escalation of federal scrutiny into campus activism surrounding the Israel-Gaza conflict, a Senate committee led by Republican lawmakers has formally demanded extensive records from Columbia University related to Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), the student group at the center of intensifying protests and political controversy. As reported by The New York Times, the demand has ignited legal battles, triggered privacy concerns, and intensified a growing standoff between the Trump administration, higher education institutions, and student advocates for Palestinian rights.

At the heart of the conflict is a letter sent by Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, requesting that Columbia provide “all records in the university’s possession related to SJP and its on-campus activities,” according to The New York Times report. The request, which imposed a deadline of Wednesday, has fueled accusations of federal overreach into student speech and academic freedom.

In its most striking language, the Senate letter states that AMP — a group that has publicly supported SJP — includes “personnel” with “reported ties” to Hamas, the Iranian-backed terrorist group responsible for the October 7th attacks in Israel and a wide range of violent actions against civilians, according to the New York Times report. While AMP has not responded to requests for comment, the inclusion of such language in an official congressional inquiry signals a serious effort by lawmakers to connect domestic activist groups to foreign-designated terrorist networks.

The Senate committee is now asking Columbia to provide a detailed account of all on-campus incidents involving SJP, to explain how it has investigated the February Barnard sit-in and the reported assault and to disclose any information the university may have linking SJP, AMP, and Hamas, along with “all related records.”

This level of inquiry, as The New York Times report noted, could mark a significant expansion of federal power into the governance of higher education institutions, especially those receiving federal funds.

“The committee is investigating the activities of Hamas-linked groups on college campuses,” the letter states explicitly, setting a tone that aligns with the broader effort by the Trump administration to hold universities accountable for alleged failures to protect Jewish students.

Late Wednesday, a federal judge ordered Columbia University to disclose what specific materials it intended to provide to the Senate, and to delay any production of documents until at least Friday. In response, Columbia stated it would share university “policies and guidance” related to SJP, but refused to identify individual students affiliated with the organization.

This development comes amid a broader legal dispute, as seven anonymous students from Columbia and its affiliate Barnard College, along with former student Mahmoud Khalil, filed a lawsuit seeking to block the university from handing over confidential disciplinary records or identifying information to lawmakers, the  New York Times report said. Khalil is separately facing deportation proceedings by the Trump administration in a highly publicized case also tied to his political activism.

As The New York Times reported, the suit accuses the university and the federal government of engaging in a coordinated campaign to suppress pro-Hamas speech and punish political dissent under the guise of combating antisemitism.

In legal filings, attorneys for the student plaintiffs charged that the government’s demands were part of a strategy to “chill speech and association” and “punish students for their Palestine advocacy.”

Republican lawmakers have described their campaign as a necessary response to an epidemic of antisemitism on American college campuses. In this framing, the Senate committee’s investigation into Columbia is positioned as a civil rights inquiry, designed to expose institutions allegedly failing to protect Jewish students from harassment and discrimination.

But critics, including civil liberties advocates and legal scholars, see the government’s actions differently. As The New York Times report noted, they argue that this is not a narrow investigation into civil rights abuses but a broader crackdown on political expression, particularly that which is critical of Israel or sympathetic to Palestinians.

The controversy strikes at the core of current debates over free speech, academic freedom, and the limits of federal power in regulating campus life, The New York Times reported. It also shines a proverbial spotlight on the Trump administration’s increasingly aggressive posture toward elite universities, which it accuses of being both ideologically hostile and institutionally negligent.

The Senate committee’s letter was initially addressed to Katrina Armstrong, who was Columbia University’s president when negotiations began. However, Armstrong stepped down on March 28 after months of intensifying pressure and a series of high-profile concessions to federal demands. Her departure further signals how fluid and volatile the situation remains at Columbia — a school now caught in the crossfire between student-led activism and federal intervention.

Columbia has walked a narrow line throughout the ordeal. While it has promised to comply with federal inquiries, the university has also stated in court that it intends to protect the privacy of its students. The New York Times reported that in a letter to the court on Tuesday, Columbia’s attorneys argued that the materials being turned over to Congress did not include student names or disciplinary records, and therefore did not require pre-disclosure notification under a previous court order.

But lawyers for the student plaintiffs pushed back the very next day, arguing that the university’s interpretation was misleading and asking Judge Arun Subramanian to intervene. Last week, Subramanian had ordered Columbia to give the court and the plaintiffs 30 days’ notice before sharing any student records or identities with Congress.

The legal resistance to federal demands is not confined to New York. The report in the New York Times indicated that in a parallel development, two clinical professors of law at Northwestern University in Illinois filed a similar lawsuit to block their university from complying with similar congressional inquiries. This signals that the Columbia case may be the first of many such battles as universities across the country become the next front lines in the political war over the Israel-Gaza conflict.

Columbia University remains in a precarious legal and political position. In fall 2023, the university suspended its chapters of SJP and Jewish Voice for Peace, citing concerns over campus safety and alleged violations of university policy, The New York Times reported. While those suspensions remain in effect, many student activists have continued their work under a new, unrecognized umbrella group known as Columbia University Apartheid Divest.

The Senate’s demands are the latest front in a broader federal campaign targeting Columbia, which has also been entangled in a legal challenge filed by students seeking to prevent the university from sharing disciplinary records or personal data with Congress. The university has so far pledged to cooperate with oversight efforts, while attempting to avoid disclosing information that could violate student privacy rights.

The battle over campus speech and congressional oversight is not confined to Columbia. As per The New York Times report, at Northwestern University, two professors — Sheila Bedi and Lynn Cohn — have filed suit in federal court seeking to block the university from complying with congressional requests for documents.  In their lawsuit, the professors argue that the committee’s “goal is to shut down speech and advocacy with which it disagrees,” and that its actions amount to a clear violation of their First Amendment rights.

In response, Northwestern University issued a statement acknowledging the importance of congressional oversight but also affirming that it will “adhere to the court’s decision” regarding disclosure, The New York Times report said.

This coordinated series of federal actions — from Senate investigations to House subpoenas and agency pressure — reflects a new phase of government involvement in campus affairs, one that has drawn both praise and alarm. Supporters argue that universities must be held accountable for antisemitic environments that make Jewish students feel unsafe. Critics warn that the approach is veering into politically motivated censorship, threatening the core values of academic freedom.

In the eyes of many, Columbia has become the national test case — a prestigious Ivy League university now at the center of overlapping legal, cultural, and constitutional battles.

And yet, as The New York Times report noted, this is far from an isolated moment. As similar inquiries expand to schools such as Northwestern, Harvard, and the University of Pennsylvania, the United States may be entering a new era of congressional engagement with — or intrusion into — higher education, with the Israel-Palestine debate serving as the crucible.

At its core, this emerging conflict is not simply about one protest, one sit-in, or one university. It is a high-stakes battle over the future of campus politics, federal power, and civil liberties, with implications that will shape how students and faculty alike navigate the intersection of speech, security, and sovereignty in American academia.