ADL gives Pitt, CMU ‘C’ grades in latest campus antisemitism report

The Anti-Defamation League released its Campus Antisemitism Report Card earlier this month, again grading two Pittsburgh universities.

Both Carnegie Mellon University and the University of Pittsburgh received “C” grades on the ADL’s third annual report. For Pitt, that’s consistent with the grade it received last year, the first year it was graded. CMU dropped from a “B” to a “C,” the same grade it received in 2024.

The report card is a “jumping off point to better understand the big picture of what’s happening on campuses,” explained Kelly Fishman, the ADL’s regional director serving Ohio, Kentucky, West Virginia and western Pennsylvania.

Get The Jewish Chronicle Weekly Edition by email and never miss our top stories Free Sign Up

Several areas of concern at CMU are highlighted in the report, including: the lack of research to assess Jewish campus community experiences; lack of a Jewish studies program, Jewish alumni group, a group supporting Jewish employees or an active pro-Israel group; and, concern over the level of severe antisemitic and anti-Zionist incidents.

Pitt has some of the same issues, according to the report, including: the lack of an official position on BDS; mandatory antisemitism education for students, faculty and staff; the level of severe antisemitic and anti-Zionist incidents; the level of hostile anti-Zionist student government activity; the level of hostile anti-Zionist student groups; and, the level of hostile anti-Zionist staff and faculty activity.

While the overall grade a university earns is important, Fishman said, it is only one part of the picture. She urged people to read the full report.

“The thing people should really be drawn to is looking at what’s Jewish life on campus like,” she said. “Both Pitt and Carnegie Mellon have excellent Jewish life on campus.”

The report, she said, is influenced by things like a lawsuit filed by a former CMU student currently being litigated. That, she said, takes time, which isn’t the fault of the university.

Fishman said she has met with administrators at both universities “and they are interested in figuring out how to improve their grade.”

Both universities told the Chronicle they strive to create a space free from antisemitism.

CMU spokesperson Chuck Carney said the university was surprised by the ADL’s findings. He noted that the report is a combination of objective date and subjective impressions.

“As such, these results should be taken seriously and read cautiously,” he said.

The ADL, he noted, provides a 30-day period for universities to respond to the report and “correct the record,” something he said CMU is doing.

“Until then, we cannot comment on additional questions,” Carney said.

Pitt spokesperson Jared Stonesifer said the university is “always looking for ways to strengthen support for Jewish students, faculty, staff and alumni and to further foster a campus climate where Jewish life is visible, valued and protected.”

He noted that the ADL graded Pitt’s Jewish life on campus as “excellent.” He credited that to robust Jewish student organizations, a Jewish studies program, kosher dining options, a Jewish alumni group and partnerships with Jewish-allied organizations.

Stonesifer pointed to Pitt’s Working Group on Antisemitism, created in March 2025, as one of the ways it is addressing issues on campus.

The Working Group is charged with making recommendations to the university on ways to “prevent and respond” to antisemitism, he said, adding that the university is committed to a “deliberate rollout and implementation process” of the group’s forthcoming recommendations.

Pitt has non-discrimination polices in place and is working with groups like the American Jewish Committee and StandWithUs to offer education and training, Stonesifer added.

“These efforts engage students, faculty and staff across the university and are designed to promote understanding, empathy and respectful dialogue.”

As for BDS, he said that while the university doesn’t have an official position against it, the state does, and as a public university, Pitt complies with and honors Pennsylvania requirements.

Stonesifer said the university takes the report card seriously and is “always looking for ways to improve.”
“[T]he University can do more and we will,” he said.

Chabad House on Campus-Pitt Director Rabbi Shmuli Rothstein disagrees with the ADL’s assessment of Pitt.

The ADL, he said, didn’t speak with either Chabad or Hillel Jewish University Center, but instead asked them to complete a flyer.

“The flyer wouldn’t give them a feeling for what’s happening on campus,” he said.

The report card, Rothstein said, amounted to an “insult” against his community, friends and family, and isn’t reflective of Jewish life at Pitt. Moreover, he added, it ignores the close relationship Chabad has with Pitt administrators.

Daniel Marcus, executive director and CEO at Hillel JUC of Pittsburgh, shared Rothstein’s concerns, saying that “Jewish campus life is thriving at Pitt and CMU.”

“These grades do not reflect our perspective and daily experiences of being partners with the campuses,” Marcus said. “We appreciate the senior leadership who have been receptive and supportive when we do highlight concerns. These grades don’t indicate that.”

Released with the report card was the survey “Campus Crossroads, Non-Jewish Student Perceptions of Jews and Israel,” analyzing how non-Jewish college students perceive Jews and Israel, based on a January-February 2026 survey of 1,007 U.S. undergraduates.

“I think it really fills in a gap that we’ve had,” Fishman said. “The report card has looked at the Jewish students experiences but Jewish students are engaging predominantly with non-Jewish students.”

The survey finds that anti-Jewish bias is widely visible on campus but that students support “institutional action and inclusion.”

According to the survey’s executive summary, 48% of non-Jewish students reported witnessing or experiencing anti-Jewish behavior on campus or in digital campus-related spaces. Fifty-two percent said anti-Jewish prejudice was at least “a little prevalent.”

Despite the findings, only 5% reported receiving antisemitic training.

More shocking, nearly 48% of students surveyed “endorsed at least one anti-Jewish attitude” and almost 20% expressed more sympathy for Hamas than Israel, although 69% said Jews had the right “to an independent country,” and large majorities of students “are comfortable with Israeli academic participation.”

There is still strong support (85%) among those surveyed for universities to address anti-Jewish behavior, but the report highlights tensions within the current campus climate: Students believe peers would defend Jewish classmates but think expressing support for Israel carries risk.

“This is an important survey to understand because it really looks at the attitudes of young people,” Fishman said.

Both the Campus Antisemitism Report Card and survey are available to view on the ADL’s website.

The Chronicle reached out to Chabad of Carnegie Mellon University but was unable to reach director Rabbi Shlomo Silverman before press time. PJC

David Rullo can be reached at drullo@pittsburghjewishchronicle.org.