College students across the country have done the public a favor by exposing just how radical and incompetent many of them really are.

Hundreds at schools such as Harvard University , George Washington University, Stanford University, and the University of Virginia have not only signed onto statements that blame Israel for the murderous acts committed against Israelis, but have emphatically endorsed the terrorist organization behind these atrocities. For example, at a pro-Palestinian protest at the University of Wisconsin last week, students were heard chanting, “Glory to the murders!” and “We will liberate the land by any means necessary!”

The students involved in this moral failure should be held responsible individually. They are not children — they are adults, legally able to vote and participate in our system of government, and they are surely mentally developed enough to understand that kidnapping children and attacking civilians is evil. That they are arguing the opposite is a glaring indication that they are incapable of functioning in a society that depends on civil discourse and basic ethical norms.

That’s why a few activist organizations have started collecting the names of students who have had a hand in these statements and protests and outing them. They argue future employers should know exactly who it is they’re hiring.

The point is a fair one, but it fails to address this problem in its entirety. It is the universities, not future employers, who are tasked with forming the character of their students and disciplining them when they fail to abide by the schools’ standards. Unfortunately, America’s colleges have all but abandoned this responsibility. Harvard President Claudine Gay, for example, released a statement after 30 student groups defended the attacks by Hamas, saying the school is committed to “free expression” and that it would not “punish or sanction” anyone who expressed views that “many of us find objectionable, even outrageous.”

The problem, of course, is that Harvard does punish people who express controversial views by allowing its students to mob and intimidate them into submission . That the school is now suddenly committed to free speech has nothing to do with regret over the toxic culture on campus. Rather, it’s driven by the fear that the monster it created might now turn on the student-activists it has spent four years training.

The fact is that the students responsible for this gross display of moral ineptitude are merely acting on the principles that schools such as Harvard have encouraged. Keep in mind: More than 25% of college students think it is acceptable to use violence to stop a controversial speaker from lecturing on campus. Former NCAA swimmer Riley Gaines learned this the hard way when she was assaulted at San Francisco State University and barricaded in a classroom by a mob of students. Judge Kyle Duncan did as well when students at Stanford Law School told him they hoped his daughters were raped. Are we really surprised, then, that so many would endorse the use of unprecedented violence in service of a cause they support?

Employers who truly care about sorting out the bad apples and preventing them from holding influential roles in our institutions need to recognize that the radicalism we’ve seen over the past week is not isolated or limited. It is just a symptom of the widespread institutional rot within higher education, which is especially pervasive in some of the elite schools.

That’s why employers would be better off blacklisting entire schools, as several federal judges have done with law schools that have demonstrated an outright disdain for free speech and civility. Exceptions can and should be made for students who are able to prove they are not a part of the ideological army these universities are producing. But the general rule of thumb should be to avoid hiring students from institutions that have proved themselves to be morally bankrupt. This would force universities to embrace reform or lose some of the distinctions that make them elite, and it would also force future applicants to seriously consider tying themselves to these schools.

Otherwise, the radicalization of the next generation will continue apace.