SB 826, the Preventing Antisemitic Harassment on Campus Act of 2025, would amend Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Higher Education Act of 1965 to strengthen federal enforcement against antisemitic discrimination, especially in higher education. The bill adds religion to Title VI’s protected categories, creates an explicit non-application rule for religious organizations and student religious organizations, and defines discrimination for postsecondary institutions to include deliberate indifference to severe, pervasive, objectively offensive harassment that effectively denies equal educational access.
The bill also directs the federal government to enforce Title VI against antisemitism as vigorously as other forms of discrimination and incorporates a definition of antisemitism tied to harm directed at Jewish or non-Jewish individuals, property, and Jewish institutions or religious facilities. In addition, it creates a new Higher Education Act sanction regime for colleges and universities found by the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights to have violated Title VI with respect to antisemitic discrimination, including escalating fines for repeated violations, possible treatment of closely timed incidents as a single violation, mandatory student/faculty/staff notification, and reporting to congressional committees. It also authorizes courts to appoint monitors in certain cases and instructs agencies and courts to consider an institution’s broader anti-discrimination efforts when assessing compliance.
If enacted, the bill would significantly expand federal statutory language governing civil rights enforcement in education, particularly by making religion an express Title VI protected ground and by creating specific enforcement tools for antisemitic harassment on campuses. It would affect federally funded colleges and universities, the Department of Education, and potentially other recipients of federal financial assistance, while also preserving stated limits for religious organizations and First Amendment protections.
The available context shows the bill was introduced by Senator Scott of Florida and referred to the Senate HELP Committee, with no recorded votes or committee transcript excerpts provided. Based on the bill text, its overall thrust is strongly protective of Jewish students and institutions and aimed at tougher campus enforcement, while also attempting to cabin the measure through rules of construction that say it should not expand Education Department authority or infringe constitutional rights.
The main points of contention likely concern the bill’s expansion of Title VI to religion, the use of a federal definition of antisemitism, the mandatory sanctions and monitoring provisions, and how those provisions would interact with academic speech, campus protest activity, religious liberty, and First Amendment protections. The bill’s explicit exemption for religious organizations and its anti-inference language suggest lawmakers anticipated concerns about overreach and constitutional conflict.
The bill would amend Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to add religion as a protected category and to define certain antisemitic harassment as actionable discrimination in postsecondary education. It would also add new enforcement provisions to the Higher Education Act authorizing the Department of Education to impose escalating fines on institutions of higher education that repeatedly violate Title VI with respect to antisemitic discrimination, require notice to campus communities, and mandate reporting to Congress. The measure would affect federally funded colleges and universities, federal civil rights enforcement practices, and the legal framework governing discrimination complaints involving antisemitism.
The bill’s stated purpose and structure indicate strong support for combating antisemitism on campus and for giving federal agencies stronger enforcement tools. No vote data or transcript excerpts are provided, so there is no recorded committee or floor sentiment in the supplied context. The text itself suggests the sponsors anticipated broad concern about campus antisemitism, while also trying to reassure critics by including exemptions for religious organizations, First Amendment protections, and rules limiting any expansion of federal authority.
Likely areas of dispute include whether Title VI should be amended to cover religion, whether the bill’s antisemitism definition is sufficiently precise, and whether the proposed sanctions are too punitive or could chill protected speech and protest activity on campuses. Critics may also object to the Education Department’s expanded role, the use of private lawsuits as a trigger for federal review, and the possibility that institutions could be penalized for conduct by third parties rather than their own employees. Supporters are likely to emphasize the need for stronger protections for Jewish students and clearer enforcement against campus harassment.