HB406, titled the PROTECT Jewish Student and Faculty Act, would amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to make a campus prohibition on antisemitic conduct a condition of participation in federal Title IV student aid programs. Institutions of higher education would be required to include, in student and employee conduct documents and related resources, a definition of antisemitism and a statement that antisemitic conduct is prohibited on campus.
The bill specifies that the required definition would describe antisemitism as a certain perception of Jews that may be expressed as hatred toward Jews, and it would note that antisemitic acts can target Jewish or non-Jewish individuals, their property, Jewish community institutions, and religious facilities. It also directs schools to state that violations may lead to expulsion for students or termination for employees.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would add a new compliance condition under Section 487(a) of the Higher Education Act for institutions receiving Title IV funds, affecting colleges and universities nationwide. Schools would need to revise conduct codes, student handbooks, employee policies, and other campus conduct materials to include the bill’s antisemitism definition and disciplinary language, or risk jeopardizing federal student aid participation.
Sentiment
The available context suggests generally supportive intent, with the bill introduced by members of Congress and referred to committee without recorded opposition, votes, or amendments in the provided materials. The framing of the bill and its title indicate a focus on protecting Jewish students and faculty from antisemitic harassment and conduct on campus.
Contention
The main point of potential contention is the requirement that institutions adopt a specific definition of antisemitism and include mandatory disciplinary language in campus conduct documents. Supporters are likely to view this as a necessary anti-discrimination measure, while critics may be concerned about how the definition could be applied in practice, especially in campus speech or protest contexts, and whether it could affect academic freedom or free expression. No formal committee debate or vote record is provided here, so these concerns are inferred from the bill’s structure rather than documented discussion.
Relating to the procedure for determining whether a student's violation of a public school's or public institution of higher education's student code of conduct was motivated by antisemitism.