Antisemitic Cornell student begs for money after being booted from parents’ home

Cornell student says parents expelled him from home after he defended his antisemitic remarks.

By World Israel News Staff

A Cornell University student who refused an internship interview because the company’s founders were Jewish said his parents have ordered him to leave their Virginia home after he repeatedly defended his conduct and refused to apologize.

Austin Franco, a 19-year-old rising junior, announced the family rupture Wednesday, shortly after appearing on “Piers Morgan Uncensored,” where he reiterated that he did not want to work for Jewish employers and made broader claims about Jews.

Franco launched an online fundraiser and said he would lose his housing on Friday.

“I will be kicked out of my home on August 1st. Any support you can provide would be greatly appreciated, as would any advice,” Franco wrote.

“I have reiterated that my parents do not share my views, and it seems they no longer wish to provide me with a home to live in. I know the road ahead will be difficult, but this is the path I chose. I could have lived a more conventional life, as my parents did, and perhaps in a different time I would have. However, that is not the world we live in today, and because of that, I chose a different path than most.”

“I do not regret anything I have done. If I were to die today, I would at least know that I did so believing in myself.”

Read  UK unveils massive security package to combat antisemitism, secure Jewish communities

The appeal had collected more than $8,000 by the time of the initial report, in addition to approximately $25,000 raised through an earlier fundraiser organized on Franco’s behalf.

His parents issued a statement condemning their son’s behavior and distancing the rest of the family from his remarks.

“The rest of our family finds the views he has expressed morally repugnant,” they said, adding that they believed Franco had been influenced by extremist content online. They said they loved their son and were trying to counter those influences.

Franco rejected that explanation, arguing that his opinions were based partly on personal interactions rather than solely on material he encountered online.

“It’s not a result of just being online,” he told the New York Post.

Franco said he planned to move into an apartment near Cornell’s campus in Ithaca, New York, and expected to return to the university for the coming academic year.

The controversy began after Franco applied for an internship with VryfID, a New York startup co-founded by Jewish brothers Gabe and Aiden Einhorn. When the company invited him to interview, Franco responded through the Handshake employment platform: “Not interested in working for a jew. Thanks.”

Gabe Einhorn initially published a screenshot of the message with Franco’s identity concealed, but social-media users soon identified him.

“We had never experienced antisemitism so directly,” Einhorn said.

Franco subsequently defended the response and said his experiences with Jews had generally been negative. He said he had determined that the brothers were Jewish through their names, LinkedIn profiles and “physiognomy,” referring to their physical appearance.

Read  WATCH: French students filmed performing Nazi salutes at party

Cornell referred the episode to its Office of Civil Rights and said the message violated Handshake’s terms of service. The university has not publicly disclosed whether Franco faced disciplinary action.

Franco later claimed that Cornell officials told him there was no active action against him.

“As of now, they said there’s not anything going on on their back end,” he said in a conversation secretly recorded by Accuracy in Media.

He acknowledged that his original response “might not have been the smartest thing to say,” but maintained that the resulting backlash was excessive.

Cornell President Michael Kotlikoff condemned Franco’s comments following his appearance on Morgan’s program while emphasizing that the university must also uphold freedom of expression.

“Cornell has an obligation to fiercely defend freedom of speech,” Kotlikoff said, including speech the institution considers deeply offensive.

Kotlikoff said the remarks relied on “hateful generalizations and uninformed tropes” and described antisemitism as incompatible with Cornell’s values. He did not identify Franco by name and said federal privacy rules prevented the university from discussing any action involving an individual student.

During the television interview, Morgan repeatedly pressed Franco to clarify whether he truly meant that he would refuse to work for Jewish people.

Read  Manchester’s Jewish community faces renewed wave of antisemitic attacks

“You do mean it,” Morgan said.

“Yes. That is correct,” Franco replied.

Morgan told him that rejecting millions of potential employers or colleagues solely because they were Jewish was antisemitic and criticized his refusal to express remorse.

Franco also called Israel “a genocidal country” and accused Jewish critics of “making my life a living hell.” His remarks repeatedly shifted from criticism of Israel to generalized claims about Jewish people, despite Morgan’s attempts to distinguish political opposition to an Israeli government from prejudice against Jews.

Much of Franco’s financial support has come from far-right online circles. An earlier fundraiser was launched by British streamer Miles Routledge, who celebrated the campaign by writing, “I just raised $10k for antisemitism.”

Some donors posted explicitly antisemitic messages alongside their contributions. Einhorn said extremist figures were treating Franco as a hero and using the controversy to expand their audiences and circulate anti-Jewish content.

Franco has said he may pursue a political career after graduating. He maintained that he had the right to choose whom he associated with and said he was not worried about returning to Cornell, arguing that other students were equally free to avoid him.

The case has renewed debate over how universities should respond to discriminatory off-campus speech that may be protected by free-speech principles but conflicts with institutional rules and anti-discrimination commitments.