Campus Alert Archive
Lehigh

Threat of violence, September 11, 2025

AI-generated · every claim is source-linked
PAthreat of violencetimely warninghigh confidence
Compare →

On September 11, 2025, members of the Lehigh University community received a disturbing email containing a racially targeted threat. LUPD Chief Jason Schiffer received a phone call about the email at 11:03 AM EDT, and the HawkWatch alert went out at 12:37 PM EDT. The FBI joined LUPD's investigation and determined the threat was a hoax, part of a coordinated wave of threats that hit multiple HBCUs and other institutions the same day.

Alerts
2
Response
—
Killed
0
Injured
0
Institution
Lehigh University
Private R1 · PA
All Lehigh cases →
~7,800 studentsHawkWatch
Documented Timeline

Alert Sequence

2 messages in sequence · 1 verified verbatim

Confirmed wording is transcribed character-for-character from a primary source. Use Verify this quote under each message to open that source in a new tab and compare the text yourself.

Some messages in this sequence are documented (their existence, timing, and channel are sourced) but their exact wording is not preserved in the public record. Those entries appear as placeholders; only confirmed text is displayed.

INITIAL ALERTEmail
Verified verbatim1256 chars
Earlier today, members of the Lehigh University community received a disturbing email including a racially targeted threat to campus. LUPD, in coordination with the FBI, has determined the threat is not credible and that there is no ongoing risk to our community. Multiple campuses across the country were subject to similar coordinated threats today, which have been determined to be hoaxes. Out of an abundance of caution, LUPD will be increasing its presence across campus. We recognize that this message may leave some feeling unsettled. Lehigh Counseling & Psychological Services is available to students for in-person support, and Telus Health offers 24/7 online counseling with multilingual options so students can speak with someone in their native language if desired. Faculty and staff can also seek confidential support through the Lehigh Employee Assistance Plan (EAP). Resources are available for the campus community (https://www2.lehigh.edu/news/support-resources). As always, we encourage the campus community to be vigilant and aware of your surroundings. Report any suspicious persons or behavior to LUPD at (610) 758-4200. Jason Schiffer Associate Vice President of Campus Safety & Chief of Police Lehigh University Police Department
Verify this quote
Lehigh HawkWatch / AppArmor CAP — Notification: Campus threat determined to be a hoax (Sept 11, 2025)lehigh.apparmor.comfind archived copies
Recovered verbatim from official Lehigh AppArmor CAP notification page (HawkWatch Alert Log); email-format community notice from Chief Jason Schiffer
Message covers both the receipt of the racially targeted threat email and the FBI/LUPD determination that it was a coordinated multi-campus hoax
FOLLOW-UPEmail
Wording not preserved

This message is documented at this point in the sequence, but its exact wording is not preserved in the public record. The public edition displays only confirmed alert text.

Message elements

How the first alert is built

To check this alert, Claude (an AI) read it in full 25 separate times, independently. Each read decided whether the message answers each of the six questions and gave a short reason. A final reviewer then weighed all 25 and wrote the plain-English verdict you see when you open a row. The score (for example 22/25) is how many reads agreed; the 25 individual reads are tucked underneath if you want to check them.

Earlier today, members of the Lehigh University community received a disturbing email including a racially targeted threat to campus. LUPD, in coordination with the FBI, has determined the threat is not credible and that there is no ongoing risk to our community. Multiple campuses across the country were subject to similar coordinated threats today, which have been determined to be hoaxes. Out of an abundance of caution, LUPD will be increasing its presence across campus. We recognize that this message may leave some feeling unsettled. Lehigh Counseling & Psychological Services is available to students for in-person support, and Telus Health offers 24/7 online counseling with multilingual options so students can speak with someone in their native language if desired. Faculty and staff can also seek confidential support through the Lehigh Employee Assistance Plan (EAP). Resources are available for the campus community (https://www2.lehigh.edu/news/support-resources). As always, we encourage the campus community to be vigilant and aware of your surroundings. Report any suspicious persons or behavior to LUPD at (610) 758-4200. Jason Schiffer Associate Vice President of Campus Safety & Chief of Police Lehigh University Police Department

  • Sourcepresent25/25

    Final assessment

    Unanimous agreement the message is signed by Jason Schiffer, Chief of Police, and names the Lehigh University Police Department (LUPD).

    Who is sending the alert and who is responding. People act faster on a message from a clearly identifiable, credible sender, such as a named department, the police, or a branded alert system, than on an anonymous notice. A branded signature counts.

    See all 25 individual reads
    1. present: Signed by 'Jason Schiffer, Associate Vice President of Campus Safety & Chief of Police, Lehigh University Police Department'.
    2. present: Signed by Jason Schiffer, 'Lehigh University Police Department', identifies authority.
    3. present: Signed by Jason Schiffer, Chief of Police, LUPD, explicitly named.
    4. present: Signed by Jason Schiffer, Chief of Police, Lehigh University Police Department.
    5. present: Signed by the 'Associate Vice President of Campus Safety & Chief of Police' and references LUPD/FBI.
    6. present: Signed by Jason Schiffer, LUPD Chief of Police.
    7. present: Signed by 'Jason Schiffer, Associate Vice President of Campus Safety & Chief of Police, LUPD'.
    8. present: Signed by Jason Schiffer, Associate VP of Campus Safety & Chief of Police, LUPD.
    9. present: 'LUPD, in coordination with the FBI' and signed by the Chief of Police.
    10. present: Signed by Jason Schiffer, Chief of Police, and names LUPD/FBI
    11. present: 'LUPD, in coordination with the FBI' and signed by Chief of Police identify sender.
    12. present: Signed by 'Jason Schiffer, Associate Vice President of Campus Safety & Chief of Police' and names LUPD/FBI.
    13. present: Signed by Jason Schiffer, LUPD Chief of Police, references FBI.
    14. present: Signed by Jason Schiffer, LUPD Chief, and names 'LUPD' throughout.
    15. present: Signed by Jason Schiffer, Chief of Police, and references LUPD/FBI.
    16. present: Signed by 'Jason Schiffer, Associate Vice President of Campus Safety & Chief of Police' and references LUPD/FBI.
    17. present: Names LUPD and is signed by the Chief of Police.
    18. present: Names 'LUPD' and signed by 'Jason Schiffer... Lehigh University Police Department'.
    19. present: Signed by 'Jason Schiffer, Chief of Police, Lehigh University Police Department'.
    20. present: Signed by 'Jason Schiffer, Associate Vice President of Campus Safety & Chief of Police, LUPD'.
    21. present: From LUPD, signed by 'Jason Schiffer, Associate Vice President of Campus Safety & Chief of Police'.
    22. present: Signed by Jason Schiffer, LUPD Chief of Police.
    23. present: Signed by Jason Schiffer, LUPD Chief of Police, and references LUPD/FBI.
    24. present: Signed by 'Jason Schiffer...Lehigh University Police Department'.
    25. present: Signed by LUPD Chief Jason Schiffer, references FBI coordination.
  • Hazardpresent25/25

    Final assessment

    Unanimous agreement the 'racially targeted threat' via email names the specific hazard.

    What the threat actually is. A complete warning names the specific danger, such as a shooter, a fire, a tornado, or a gas leak, rather than a vague emergency, because people decide what to do based on what they are facing.

    See all 25 individual reads
    1. present: Describes 'a racially targeted threat to campus' via email.
    2. present: 'racially targeted threat' via email named specifically.
    3. present: Describes 'a racially targeted threat to campus' via email.
    4. present: Names 'racially targeted threat' via email specifically.
    5. present: Describes 'a disturbing email including a racially targeted threat'.
    6. present: Names 'racially targeted threat to campus' via email.
    7. present: Names 'racially targeted threat' via email specifically.
    8. present: Names 'a disturbing email including a racially targeted threat'.
    9. present: 'racially targeted threat' names the hazard.
    10. present: Names 'racially targeted threat' email
    11. present: 'racially targeted threat' names the specific hazard/email threat.
    12. present: Names 'a disturbing email including a racially targeted threat'.
    13. present: Names 'a racially targeted threat to campus' via email.
    14. present: Describes 'a racially targeted threat to campus' via email.
    15. present: Names 'a disturbing email including a racially targeted threat'.
    16. present: Names 'a disturbing email including a racially targeted threat'.
    17. present: States a racially targeted threat email as the hazard.
    18. present: Describes 'racially targeted threat to campus' via email.
    19. present: States 'a disturbing email including a racially targeted threat'.
    20. present: Names 'a racially targeted threat to campus' via email.
    21. present: Names 'racially targeted threat' email received by the community.
    22. present: Names 'racially targeted threat' email.
    23. present: Describes 'a disturbing email including a racially targeted threat to campus'.
    24. present: 'racially targeted threat to campus' names the hazard.
    25. present: Describes 'a disturbing email including a racially targeted threat'.
  • Locationabsent8/25

    Final assessment

    Most reads found no specific campus location, only generic references to 'campus' and 'community'; a minority credited 'across campus' as a location, but the majority correctly finds nothing site-specific.

    Where the threat is. Saying whether danger is in a specific building, a part of campus, or area-wide lets people judge their own proximity and choose a safe direction. Without a where, a warning is hard to act on precisely.

    See all 25 individual reads
    1. absent: No specific location given beyond 'campus' generally referenced as the community.
    2. absent: No physical campus location given, only 'campus' generally in context of the threat's target.
    3. absent: No specific location given beyond general campus reference.
    4. present: States 'across campus' and 'Multiple campuses across the country'.
    5. absent: No specific location is stated beyond general reference to 'our community'.
    6. absent: No specific location given, only 'campus' generally implied via 'multiple campuses'.
    7. absent: No specific location given, only general 'campus'.
    8. present: References 'campus' generally.
    9. present: 'across campus' given generically.
    10. present: States 'across campus'
    11. absent: No specific location named, only 'campus' generally as email target.
    12. absent: No specific campus location given, only general community reference.
    13. absent: No specific location given, only general campus references.
    14. absent: No specific location is given beyond 'campus' generally, and even that isn't clearly stated as the threat's location.
    15. present: States 'across campus' as scope.
    16. absent: No specific location given, only general 'campus'.
    17. present: Refers to across campus as the location of increased police presence.
    18. absent: No specific campus location given beyond 'campus' generally in context of presence increase.
    19. absent: No specific campus location named beyond generic references.
    20. absent: No specific location given beyond 'campus' generally.
    21. absent: No specific location given beyond general campus.
    22. present: Says 'across campus'.
    23. absent: No specific location given, only general campus reference.
    24. present: 'across campus' and 'Multiple campuses across the country' referenced.
    25. absent: No specific location given, only general campus community reference.
  • Guidancepresent25/25

    Final assessment

    Unanimous agreement the message instructs recipients to be vigilant and report suspicious persons or behavior to LUPD.

    The protective action to take. A clear, specific instruction, such as shelter in place, evacuate, avoid the area, or run-hide-fight, drives faster and more correct protective behavior than describing the threat alone.

    See all 25 individual reads
    1. present: Encourages to 'be vigilant' and 'report any suspicious persons or behavior to LUPD.'
    2. present: 'we encourage the campus community to be vigilant' and 'Report any suspicious persons'.
    3. present: Encourages being vigilant and reporting suspicious persons to LUPD.
    4. present: Instructs to 'Report any suspicious persons or behavior to LUPD'.
    5. present: Encourages recipients to 'be vigilant' and 'report any suspicious persons or behavior'.
    6. present: Encourages vigilance and to 'Report any suspicious persons or behavior to LUPD'.
    7. present: Encourages to 'be vigilant' and 'report any suspicious persons or behavior'.
    8. present: Encourages community to 'be vigilant' and 'Report any suspicious persons or behavior'.
    9. present: 'we encourage the campus community to be vigilant...Report any suspicious persons'.
    10. present: Advises to 'be vigilant' and 'report any suspicious persons or behavior to LUPD'
    11. present: 'Report any suspicious persons or behavior to LUPD' is guidance.
    12. present: Encourages to 'be vigilant' and 'Report any suspicious persons or behavior'.
    13. present: Encourages community to 'be vigilant' and 'Report any suspicious persons'.
    14. present: Encourages vigilance and to 'Report any suspicious persons or behavior to LUPD'.
    15. present: Encourages to 'be vigilant' and 'report any suspicious persons'.
    16. present: Encourages community 'to be vigilant' and to report suspicious persons to LUPD.
    17. present: Encourages vigilance and tells recipients to report suspicious persons to LUPD.
    18. present: Encourages to 'be vigilant' and 'report any suspicious persons or behavior'.
    19. present: Encourages vigilance and to 'Report any suspicious persons or behavior to LUPD'.
    20. present: Encourages community to 'be vigilant' and 'Report any suspicious persons or behavior'.
    21. present: Advises to 'be vigilant' and 'Report any suspicious persons or behavior to LUPD'.
    22. present: Encourages to be vigilant and report suspicious persons.
    23. present: Encourages community 'to be vigilant' and 'Report any suspicious persons or behavior to LUPD'.
    24. present: 'Report any suspicious persons or behavior to LUPD'.
    25. present: Encourages community to 'be vigilant' and 'report any suspicious persons'.
  • Timepresent25/25

    Final assessment

    Unanimous agreement the message states 'Earlier today' as a recency marker.

    When the message applies. A timestamp, the word now or immediately, or a phrase like until further notice tells the reader whether the danger is current and how quickly to act.

    See all 25 individual reads
    1. present: States 'Earlier today' as recency marker.
    2. present: 'Earlier today' and 'today' referenced.
    3. present: States 'Earlier today'.
    4. present: States 'Earlier today'.
    5. present: States 'Earlier today'.
    6. present: States 'Earlier today'.
    7. present: States 'Earlier today' and 'multiple campuses across the country ... today'.
    8. present: States 'Earlier today'.
    9. present: 'Earlier today' given.
    10. present: States 'Earlier today'
    11. present: 'Earlier today' gives temporal reference.
    12. present: States 'Earlier today'.
    13. present: States 'Earlier today' and 'today'.
    14. present: States 'Earlier today' indicating recency.
    15. present: States 'Earlier today'.
    16. present: States 'Earlier today'.
    17. present: Uses Earlier today to convey recency.
    18. present: States 'Earlier today'.
    19. present: States 'Earlier today'.
    20. present: States 'Earlier today'.
    21. present: States 'Earlier today' and 'today' regarding coordinated hoaxes.
    22. present: Says 'Earlier today' and 'today'.
    23. present: States 'Earlier today' the email was received.
    24. present: 'Earlier today' given.
    25. present: States 'Earlier today'.
  • Impactabsent0/25

    Final assessment

    Unanimous agreement the statement of 'no ongoing risk to our community' negates rather than conveys impact.

    What the hazard could do to the people in its path. Beyond naming the threat, a complete warning conveys its potential consequences or severity, such as that a tornado can level buildings or that a leak could be explosive, so recipients grasp how much danger they are in. Research on warning message content finds that a concrete impact statement helps people personalize their risk and act sooner.

    See all 25 individual reads
    1. absent: States 'no ongoing risk to our community,' negating rather than stating potential harm.
    2. absent: Determined 'not credible' with 'no ongoing risk', so no stated impact.
    3. absent: States threat determined 'not credible' and 'no ongoing risk', negating rather than conveying impact.
    4. absent: States 'determined the threat is not credible', explicitly negating impact.
    5. absent: States the threat 'is not credible' with 'no ongoing risk', no stated consequence.
    6. absent: States threat determined 'not credible' with 'no ongoing risk'.
    7. absent: States threat 'is not credible' and 'no ongoing risk', no stated potential harm.
    8. absent: States threat 'is not credible' and 'no ongoing risk', no consequence conveyed.
    9. absent: States 'no ongoing risk', no explicit harm described.
    10. absent: States determined not credible with 'no ongoing risk', no stated harm
    11. absent: States 'no ongoing risk to our community', no severity conveyed.
    12. absent: States 'no ongoing risk to our community', no stated potential harm.
    13. absent: States threat 'is not credible' with 'no ongoing risk', no consequence stated.
    14. absent: States the threat 'is not credible' and there is 'no ongoing risk', negating rather than stating impact.
    15. absent: States the threat 'is not credible' and 'no ongoing risk', negating impact.
    16. absent: States threat 'determined to be not credible' and 'no ongoing risk', negating impact.
    17. absent: States the threat is not credible with no ongoing risk, so no harm is conveyed.
    18. absent: States 'no ongoing risk to our community', no severity conveyed.
    19. absent: States 'no ongoing risk to our community', negating rather than stating danger.
    20. absent: States 'no ongoing risk to our community', no stated potential harm.
    21. absent: States threat 'determined to be hoaxes' with 'no ongoing risk', negating impact rather than conveying it.
    22. absent: States threat determined not credible, no severity conveyed.
    23. absent: States threat determined 'not credible' and 'no ongoing risk', negating rather than conveying severity.
    24. absent: States 'no ongoing risk to our community', no stated potential harm.
    25. absent: No stated consequence, explicitly says 'no ongoing risk'.

Systematic AI judgments with visible reasoning, not human-validated codings.

About this analysis
Context

Background

On September 11, 2025, Lehigh University community members received an emailed threat that explicitly targeted racial-minority students. Lehigh Police Chief Jason Schiffer received a phone call about the email at 11:03 AM EDT. After confirming the email was real and assessing credibility, Lehigh's senior administration directed LUPD to issue a HawkWatch alert at 12:37 PM EDT. The FBI joined LUPD's investigation, and within hours the email was determined to be a hoax. The day was a difficult one nationally: multiple historically Black colleges and universities locked down on September 11, 2025 in what was characterized by the Security Management trade press as a coordinated terroristic-threat campaign. Lehigh's inclusion in the wave (as a predominantly white institution but one with a meaningful Black and minority student population) was significant; the FBI's nationwide investigation linked the day's threats but had not, as of early 2026, publicly identified suspects. The incident was Lehigh's third major HawkWatch alert of 2025, following the January 30 active-shooter swatting and the April 17 BB-gun projectile incident.
Analysis

Key Findings

The 94-minute gap between the 11:03 AM chief's phone call and the 12:37 PM HawkWatch alert reflects deliberate verification — Lehigh chose accuracy over speed because the threat was an email, not a 911 call, and could be cross-referenced
Lehigh's explicit acknowledgment of 'racially targeted' language in the alert text (rather than euphemistic 'concerning content' phrasing) was a transparency choice many peer institutions did not make on the same day
September 11, 2025 marked one of the most coordinated single-day campus-threat campaigns in US history, and Lehigh was among the few predominantly white private institutions targeted alongside HBCUs
Three major HawkWatch alerts in 2025 (January swatting, April projectiles, September racial threat) represent an unusual concentration for a single Patriot League / R1 private institution
Outcome
No threat was found; the email was confirmed as a hoax by LUPD working with the FBI. The incident occurred on the same day as a wave of similar threats against historically Black colleges and universities — [multiple HBCUs locked down](https://www.axios.com/2025/09/11/hbcu-lockdown-campus-terrorist-threats) on September 11, 2025 in what was characterized as a coordinated terroristic-threat campaign.
Provenance

Sources

Every claim on this page is meant to be checkable. Open the links below (and the Verify this quote control under each confirmed alert) to read the original university, news, or archive page yourself. Hostnames are shown so you can see where you are going; archived copies survive when live pages move or disappear. See also our methodology.

  1. Student Paper
    Email with racially targeted threat proven to be a hoax (The Brown and White)
    thebrownandwhite.com
    archived copy
  2. national media
    Multiple HBCUs locked down after 'terroristic threats' disrupt campus (Axios)
    axios.com
    archived copy
  3. industry publication
    Hoax Threats Target HBCUs, Causing Disruption on Campuses Across United States (ASIS Security Management)
    asisonline.org
    archived copy
  4. industry publication
    HBCUs on High Alert Following a Series of Threats (Campus Safety Magazine)
    campussafetymagazine.com
    archived copy
  5. Official
    HawkWatch Alert Log (Lehigh University Police Department)
    police.lehigh.edu
    archived copy
  6. Official
    HawkWatch CAP: Notification — Campus threat determined to be a hoax (Lehigh AppArmor)
    lehigh.apparmor.com
    archived copy
Cite this case

Campus Alert Archive. "Lehigh University: Threat of violence, September 11, 2025." Incident of September 11, 2025. Added May 2026; last updated July 2026. https://campusalertarchive.com/case/lehigh-university-racially-targeted-email-hoax-2025-09-11/

Download case JSON

Alert text quoted on this page remains the work of the issuing institution; the archive is a secondary source.

Tags
racially-targeted-threatemail-threathoaxhbcu-solidarity-wavepatriot-leagueprivate-r1pennsylvaniabethlehemhawkwatchfbi-investigation
Added May 2026Updated July 2026Via ingestion