PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 10, 2024
College Oversight and Legal Updates Mandating Bias Investigations and Accountability Act of 2024 or the COLUMBIA Act of 2024
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 the Workforce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 5, 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.9530 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.9530 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.9530 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.9530 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.