PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 5, 2025
College Oversight and Legal Updates Mandating Bias Investigations and Accountability Act of 2025 or the COLUMBIA Act of 2025
This bill requires the Department of Education (ED) to establish a program to appoint third-party anti-Semitism monitors at certain institutions of higher education (IHEs). Specifically, ED must establish this program to appoint a monitor at an IHE that (1) has a high incidence of anti-Semitic activity (based on data received from ED's Office for Civil Rights), and (2) receives federal funds for higher education.
ED must develop an anti-Semitism monitorship agreement that (1) designates the terms and conditions of the monitorship, and (2) requires the IHE to provide for the monitor's reasonable expenses.
The bill requires the monitor to
operate under the monitorship agreement developed by ED and entered into with the IHE;
provide publicly available quarterly reports that evaluate the IHE's progress in combating anti-Semitism on campus; and
provide annual reports to Congress, ED, state and local governments (as needed), and the IHE that include recommendations for actions, policies, and sanctions to prevent and reduce anti-Semitism at the IHE.
People & committees
Rep. Torres, Ritchie [D-NY-15] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jul 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1033 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1033 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1033 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1033 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-02-05 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
This bill would require independent monitors at colleges and universities that receive funding under the Higher Education Act and that the Education Secretary determines have a high incidence of antisemitic activity, based on federal civil-rights data. Those institutions would pay the monitors’ reasonable expenses. Monitors would publicly report on progress and recommend responses to antisemitism. These are proposed requirements; the supplied record does not establish enactment.
the Secretary of Education shall establish a program to appoint independent, third-party, antisemitism monitors to monitor institutions of higher education that the Secretary has determined, based on data received from the Office for Civil Rights of the Department of Education, have a high incidence of antisemitic activity and that receive funds under the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.).
requires the institution of higher education to provide for the reasonable expenses of the antisemitism monitor.
provide quarterly reports, which shall be made publicly available
includes recommendations of actions, policies, and sanctions, as appropriate, to prevent and reduce antisemitism at the institution.
Source snapshot updated 2025-07-21T19:44:15Z. 2025-02-05: Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce. 2025-02-05: Introduced in House
Section 1 would name the legislation the COLUMBIA Act of 2025.
This Act may be cited as the College Oversight and Legal Updates Mandating Bias Investigations and Accountability Act of 2025 or the COLUMBIA Act of 2025.
The Education Secretary would have to establish the monitoring program within 180 days after enactment. The program would cover institutions receiving Higher Education Act funds that the Secretary determines have a high incidence of antisemitic activity, using data from the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights.
Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Education shall establish a program to appoint independent, third-party, antisemitism monitors to monitor institutions of higher education that the Secretary has determined, based on data received from the Office for Civil Rights of the Department of Education, have a high incidence of antisemitic activity and that receive funds under the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.).
The Secretary would develop an agreement setting the monitoring terms and requiring the institution to pay the monitor’s reasonable expenses. Each monitor would operate under that agreement with the institution.
The Secretary shall develop an antisemitism monitorship agreement, to be entered into by an antisemitism monitor and an institution of higher education, that designates the terms and conditions of the monitorship and that requires the institution of higher education to provide for the reasonable expenses of the antisemitism monitor.
operate under the antisemitism monitorship agreement developed by the Secretary and entered into with the institution of higher education
Monitors would issue quarterly reports evaluating the institution’s progress against campus antisemitism. The reports would be public and posted on both the institution’s and the Education Department’s websites.
provide quarterly reports, which shall be made publicly available and posted on the website of the institution of higher education and the Department of Education, evaluating the progress that the institution has made toward combating antisemitism on campus
Monitors would also submit annual reports to Congress, the Education Secretary, the institution, and state and local governments as needed. These reports would recommend actions, policies, and sanctions as appropriate to prevent and reduce antisemitism; this reporting duty calls for recommendations, rather than imposing sanctions itself.
provide an annual report to Congress, the Secretary of Education, State and local governments, as needed, and the institution of higher education, that includes recommendations of actions, policies, and sanctions, as appropriate, to prevent and reduce antisemitism at the institution.
The bill would use the definition of an institution of higher education in section 102 of the Higher Education Act. That referenced definition is not reproduced in the supplied text.
In this section, the term institution of higher education has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002).
The supplied action snapshot, updated July 21, 2025, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Education and Workforce on February 5, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2025-07-21T19:44:15Z. 2025-02-05: Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce. 2025-02-05: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-05. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy rider was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential treatment was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Jul 21, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI