Columbia University's acting President Shipman is one to watch

Columbia University named Claire Shipman, Board of Trustees co-chair, as acting President effective immediately on March 28, 2025. After a year of turmoil and following one of the most aggressive political attacks on any university in U.S. history, President Shipman is stepping into a very challenging role. Her education and experience are impressive - one of the first female graduates of Columbia College in Russian Studies, a masters graduate from Columbia's School of International Policy and Administration, and a journalist with a distinguished career. It's hard to imagine anyone better prepared for the Columbia Presidency.

What President Shipman's appointment signals is unclear and may never be understood. The third in a line of Columbia's female Presidents who voiced concerns about anti-Semitism at House of Representatives hearings last year, she may be better informed and credentialed to restore Columbia's reputation than anyone on the planet. Republicans said that removing former acting President Armstrong would improve negotiation and change. However, instead of backing off, Trump officials came back with another $250 million on top of the $400 million they were initially threatened to lose.

The House anti-Semitism Task Force attempted to place Columbia under a consent agreement to force accountability for promises the institution has made. By April 14, 2025, President Shipman appeared to reject the consent decree and joined Harvard in asserting that it would not yield its constitutional rights and independence. By May, 2025, Columbia laid off 180 employees due to "intense financial stain." The next move was the Education Department's assertion that Columbia's accreditation should be withdrawn.

The Israel v. Hamas war was the spark that ignited discontent at Columbia. As one of the most prominent Ivy League institutions in the U.S., Columbia's protests were notable in the early days after the Hamas attack "not just because of the scale or visibility of the demonstrations, but because the issues at stake - academic freedom, institutional neutrality, moral responsibility - converged so powerfully there." (quote from Steven Mintz of Inside Higher Education) Adding activism versus administration, stakeholder advocacy, and the tension between ideals and action derived or contrasted with them, results in a mix that made Columbia vulnerable to attack. Unfortunately, President Shipman's frustrations over accusations of anti-semitism in 2023 when she was on the Columbia Board made it into the hands of the House Committee.

The expanding attacks across higher education may eventually result in a new mantra "We are all Columbia" among higher education supporters. Countering the possibility of any support, faculty at other institutions are considering a boycott of Columbia, citing the "university's active participation 'in an authoritarian assault on universities aimed at destroying their role as sites of teaching, research, learning, and activism essential to building a free and fair world.'" The dilemma is whether Columbia's treatment should evoke others rallying to its defense or if its acquiescence should be condemned by its presumed peers.

Mintz continued, "To understand the depth of this conflict on campus is to confront not only Middle East politics, but also the shifting terrain of higher education itself: how students find meaning, how universities manage pluralism and whether institutions can still be trusted to hold space for hard, honest conversations - without breaking." Shipman's appointment as acting President is significant for Columbia and for broader higher education in the U.S. Columbia will be a place to watch!

By July 2025 it appeared Columbia's settlement with the Trump Administration included millions in payments for alleged violations of civil rights, adopting the IHRA definition of anti-semitism, changes in DEI initiatives, modification of admission policies, and increasing campus safety for Jewish students. Later in July 2025, synchronous with additional reports of an emerging "deal" between Columbia and the Trump administration, multiple Palestinian protestors were expelled or suspended. The settlement with Trump officials affirmed, rather than challenged, the narrative of antisemitism and served to erase the concerns of pro-Palestinine protestors. The final result cost Columbia $221 million in a settlement that allowed the restoration of billions in research funding.  The settlement is a painful reminder of the power of money over principle and represents a threat to all U.S. higher education. The tension between the values of holding strong in defense versus the impact of abandoned research that can save lives is all too clear.