University’s Investigation Into Antisemitic Remarks Exonerates Controversial Professor, Gaslights Jewish Students

In January, StandWithUs lodged a complaint against George Washington University’s (GW) psychology professor, Lara Sheehi, alleging that she repeatedly harassed and belittled Jewish students who were mandated to take her course. Furthermore, when those students reported the behaviour, the University supposedly responded by launching baseless disciplinary proceedings against them. Last week, GW released a statement purporting to absolve themselves from any blame by claiming that an investigating report carried out by Crowell & Moring LLP found no evidence to support the allegations. However, the report itself was not made available for public scrutiny. Upon reviewing the summary provided by GW’s president, it became clear that the exculpatory report was unsatisfactory for three reasons: it contained lies, was misleading, and ignored any relevant laws and standards.

In terms of inaccurate information, the summary alleges that “no student-interviewees recalled Dr. Sheehi denying that antisemitism exists or denying the students’ lived experiences”, which was refuted by interviewees who came forward to say this was incorrect. The law firm also claimed that Sheehi’s anti-Semitic tweets were only briefly visible to the public, which was incorrect according to an investigation. Thirdly, the summary also claimed that no students were aware of her tweets during the class, which was also untrue, says the student body. The summary’s carelessness calls the actual report into question, especially since the entire report has not been released.

The statement from GW misrepresented the heart of the complaint. It claims that the majority of the concerns came from a speaker at a non-compulsory ‘brown bag’ event, while the actual complaint had been focused on the behaviour of the professor. The professor had defended and repeated the previous speaker’s anti-Semitic statements inside of the classroom, while also stifling discussion and painting the students as the real aggressors.

Furthermore, the statement from GW insidiously linked the issue to freedom of speech and academic freedom, when it is about conduct. The students’ rights to learn in a safe environment supersedes the professor’s ability to express herself.

In summary, GW’s statement disregards relevant laws and standards governed by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. And furthermore, the statement disputes the standard definition of antisemitism put forth by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, ignoring its adoption by over 1,100 entities worldwide. GW is at risk of losing its federal funding if proven to be noncompliant.