For her final assignment before receiving her sociology degree at the University of Leeds, Danielle Greyman decided to write about Hamas’s abusive rule in Gaza. Her research taught her something that was indeed worth knowing:

Despite my assignment not being about Israel, the feedback I received from my grader was almost entirely attacking me for not blaming Israel. I was given a failing grade of 35. I know students who have written their essays drunk, at 2 am the night before they were due, and who still received a 50. The grader and university were saying my essay had absolutely no academic merit whatsoever.

I was shocked, and decided to research the grader, Claudia Radiven. I had never spoken to her, never had a class with her, and never interacted with her. Yet, I found I was blocked by her on Twitter. This is enough for me to believe the anonymity of marking was breached. I quickly created a new Twitter [account] to research her. I found tweets showing her support for Hamas, condemning Israel for actions that never happened, and just outright anti-Semitism.

To date, the University of Leeds has still not apologized or even acknowledged the discrimination that took place. Claudia Radiven is now the head of the module that this assignment was for, despite her irregular marking.

I did not get to continue into postgraduate study. I didn’t attend my graduation ceremony. . . . And I have been told by numerous Jewish sociologists that the field is so tainted by anti-Semitism that I should avoid it.

While it is commendable that administrators of several universities finally called upon police to crack down on violent and disruptive anti-Israel protests, the actions they have taken may be insufficient. At Columbia, demonstrators reestablished their encampment on the main quad after it had been cleared by the police, and the university seems reluctant to use force again. The school also decided to hold classes remotely until the end of the semester. Such moves, whatever their merits, do nothing to fix the factors that allowed campuses to become hotbeds of pro-Hamas activism in the first place. The editors of National Review examine how things go to this point:

Since the 10/7 massacre, Columbia’s Jewish students have been forced to endure routine calls for their execution. It shouldn’t have taken the slaughter, rape, and brutalization of Israeli Jews to expose chants like “Globalize the intifada” and “Death to the Zionist state” as calls for violence, but the university refused to intervene on behalf of its besieged students. When an Israeli student was beaten with a stick outside Columbia’s library, it occasioned little soul-searching from faculty. Indeed, it served only as the impetus to establish an “Anti-Semitism Task Force,” which subsequently expressed “serious concerns” about the university’s commitment to enforcing its codes of conduct against anti-Semitic violators.

But little was done. Indeed, as late as last month the school served as host to speakers who praised the 10/7 attacks and even “hijacking airplanes” as “important tactics that the Palestinian resistance have engaged in.”

The school’s lackadaisical approach created a permission structure to menace and harass Jewish students, and that’s what happened. . . . Now is the time finally to do something about this kind of harassment and associated acts of trespass and disorder. Yale did the right thing when police cleared out an encampment [on Monday]. But Columbia remains a daily reminder of what happens when freaks and haters are allowed to impose their will on campus.