The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law is happy to introduce its newest Civil Rights Legal Fellow and Communications & Development Interns for the Fall of 2018.

Rhoda Offei completed her Masters in Law at the Cornell University in May 2012 and is currently a Civil Rights Legal Fellow with the Louis D. Brandeis Center. Prior to her graduate program at Cornell University, Ms. Offei practiced law in Ghana for about 10 months after being called to the bar in September 2016. While in Ghana, she worked for the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) as a National Service Person and handled cases of human rights violations at work places, prisons, hospital, and in schools. This work stirred up an interest in her for the pursuit of justice.

Ms. Offei was intrigued by the work of the Louis Brandeis Center and the fact that the Brandeis Center’s vision is specifically geared towards the fight for the civil and human rights for the Jewish people. She believes that the fight for human rights for a specific group of people is invariably a fight and pursuit of justice for all.  Ms. Offei is grateful for the opportunity to work with the Brandeis Center and is hopeful that this opportunity will be a learning process for her.

Hilary Miller is a senior at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She is majoring in Political Science and History, and minoring in Jewish studies. Her academic interests relate to Eastern European, Jewish and Israeli History along with international law and human rights. She recently presented her research on Raphael Lemkin and the origins of the term “genocide” at the Phi Alpha Theta Biennial Convention. Additionally, she is a student editor for Sifting & Winnowing, UW’s undergraduate journal of political science, and ARCHIVE, UW’s undergraduate journal of history. She is the editor-in-chief and founder of Avukah, UW’s undergraduate journal of Jewish Studies. Ms. Miller was also the president and founder of the Student Alliance for Israel-Madison. She was a Hasbara Fellow and the first JNF fellow at UW-Madison. In January, Ms. Miller testified before a Wisconsin legislative committee in support of the state’s anti-BDS bill. Wisconsin became the 25th state to pass such a bill. Ms. Miller has interned for the Consulate of Israel to the Midwest in Chicago, and was a Goldman Fellow for the American Jewish Committee this past summer. As a Communications and Development Intern for the Brandeis Center, Hilary is excited to learn more about the organization and its multifaceted approach to combatting anti-Israelism and anti-Semitism on campus. She looks forward to engaging with topics that focus on Israel, Jewish student life, and global Jewish affairs. This experience will continue to enrich her understanding that promoting rights and justice for the Jewish people is part of a universal effort to promote rights and justice for all people.

Joseph Seidler is currently a Sophomore at the University of Maryland: College Park, majoring in Criminology & Criminal Justice, minoring in Philosophy and a student in the Justice and Legal Thought Scholar’s Program. This program investigates the question of “what is the right thing to do” through analyzing philosophical texts and Supreme Court cases. He has previously worked as a Student Police Aide with the University of Maryland: College Park, interned with two separate law offices and participated in a program with the FBI’s Baltimore Division and the Military Police at Fort Belvoir. After graduating from the University of Maryland: College Park, he plans on attending Law School. Mr. Seidler decided to intern with the Brandeis Center because he is passionate about promoting human rights and ensuring the fair and just treatment of all people. Furthermore, from growing up Jewish and attending a Jewish Day School, he is passionate about fighting the rise of anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism on college campuses. As an intern with the Brandeis Center, Mr. Seidler hopes to develop a deeper understanding of how anti-Semitic incidents can be addressed through the law. He also desires to strengthen his communication skills.

These new staff members join Senior Communications & Development Intern Edward Kunz, who was been with the Brandeis Center since the beginning of 2017, and Communications & Development Intern Emma Enig, who has been with the Brandeis Center since May 2018.

On October 2nd, four members of the anti-Semitic Rise Above Movement were arrested after being charged with conspiracy and incitement of a riot and participating in attacks against counter-protesters at the Charlottesville Unite the Right rally last year. The defendants, who are currently in custody in California, each face up to 10 years in prison.

A federal arrest affidavit claims that the defendants were “among the most violent individuals present in Charlottesville,” citing photos and video footage as evidence that they attacked counter-protesters during the rally. Government investigators were able to place these men at the rally using social media posts and bank records. They are believed to have traveled to Virginia for the white nationalist rally held on August 12, 2017 with the “intent to encourage, promote, incite, participate in, and commit violent acts in furtherance of a riot.” US Attorney for the Western District of Virginia Thomas Cullen said that “with their hands taped and ready to do street battle,” the four “committed multiple acts of violence, including punching, kicking, head-butting and pushing numerous people.”

According to the Anti-Defamation League, the Rise Above Movement is “a white supremacist group based in Southern California whose members believe they are fighting against a ‘modern world’ corrupted by the ‘destructive cultural influences’ of liberals, Jews, Muslims and non-white immigrants. They refer to themselves as the ‘premier MMA (mixed martial arts) club of the Alt-Right.’”

Instead of charging them under a hate crimes statute, officials elected to charge each defendant with violating the federal riots statue and with conspiracy to violate the riots statute. According to Virginia Code §18.2-408, “Any person who conspired with others to cause or produce a riot, or directs, incites, or solicits other persons who participate in a riot to acts of force of violence, shall be guilty of a Class 5 felony.” US Attorney Cullen said that officials were “more comfortable that the riot act was a better fit,” primarily because they would not have to ascribe motivations to their actions. However, it is possible that additional charges will be added in the future.

While these men participated in the Charlottesville rally, the affidavit also claims they had taken part in “acts of violence” at rallies in Huntington Beach and Berkley, California. US Attorney Cullen said, “These guys came to Charlottesville in order to commit violent acts, and it wasn’t the first time they’d done it.”

In the wake of Brett Kavanaugh’s controversial appointment to the Supreme Court, attention turned to four U.S. college campuses where anti-Semitic fliers pervaded student centers and classrooms. Fliers posted at UC-Berkeley, UC-Davis, Vassar College, and Marist College blamed Jews for stirring the sexual assault allegations against Kavanaugh. New reports claim that the same fliers were canvassed on the doors of various civil society organizations in Iowa, such as the Interfaith Alliance of Iowa and Planned Parenthood Health Centers in Des Moines.

The handouts portray an image of Kavanaugh surrounded by caricatures of Jewish members of the U.S. Senate along with Jewish billionaire George Soros. Each individual is marked by a Star of David. Christine Blasey Ford, one of Kavanaugh’s accusers who testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee in late September, and the outspoken anti-Trump attorney Michael Avenatti are also depicted in the collage of characters with “Good Goy” written on their foreheads. University administrative officials were quick to respond to the proliferation of fliers. UC-Davis Chancellor Gary S. May reproached them as “reprehensible” and called out those responsible for violating the university’s posting policy. .At the bottom of each flyer is a claim from “your local Stormer book club,” indicating that they were a project of Daily Stormer Book Club (SBC) chapters that are embedded in local communities throughout the United States.

Anti-Semitic fliers blaming Jews for leading opposition against Brett Kavanaugh’s appointment to the Supreme Court (StandWithUs)

 

SBC chapters are a syndicate of The Daily Stormer, an online media presence founded by Andrew Anglin in 2013. Since its beginning, the Daily Stormer has espoused hatred and animosity toward Jews. Anglin named the site after Der Stürmer, a pernicious anti-Semitic weekly that Hitler devoutly followed during the Nazi period. The site rallies young, American Neo-Nazi sympathizers who deny the Holocaust and embrace ideas underpinned by white supremacy and male dominance. Stormer fanatics have hailed Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court as a milestone victory. Concomitantly, they chastised Jews and other individuals who posed a perceived obstacle to the historic appointment.

The SBC fliers evoke classic anti-Semitic stereotypes that were especially profound during Hitler’s rise to power. They demonize Jews as political operatives who leverage their power to manipulate a greater scheme or conspiracy to their personal benefit. This portrayal of the Jew is transhistorical, a phenomenon that has cast a lingering haunt over the global Jewish community for centuries. Most unsettling about the Stormer’s recent provocation is not their explicit display of prototypical anti-Semitism, but instead that their response to an especially charged, divisive political issue was fallaciously anti-Semitic. To brand such a high-profile controversy like Kavanaugh’s appointment as a Jewish-related issue with absolutely no basis is extremely troubling and presents a much larger issue.

Scapegoating Jews during heightened periods of chaos is in not unique. However, to see it pervade college campuses, where anti-Semitism in recent years has taken shape in anti-Israelism or anti-Zionism, breeds a new cause for alarm. The SBC fliers beg serious question for Jewish students across the country. Should the next political quarrel or heated debate come to campus, who will be able to read past the spurious rhetoric? Who will condemn the baseless hatred? Who will be equipped with the knowledge to historicize such virulent anti-Semitic claims? It’s too delicate of a time to overlook the SBC fliers as a mere feature of the larger dispute over Kavanaugh. Failing to acknowledge their significance is to disparage the past and create a vacuum for others to evoke bigoted anti-Semitism on college campuses in the not so distant future.

On September 21st, the Brandeis Center’s President Alyza Lewin and Director of Legal Initiatives Aviva Vogelstein, sent a letter to University of Michigan’s President Dr. Mark D. Schlissel, urging his administration to take further action following a discriminatory incident by a professor. Professor John Cheney-Lippold refused to provide a letter of recommendation to a University of Michigan student upon realizing that she intended to study abroad in Israel.

The university has since disciplined the professor, condemned the actions of a second instructor who refused to provide a letter of recommendation to a student, and created a panel to examine “the intersection between political thought/ideology and faculty members’ responsibilities to students.”Additionally, the Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs (SACUA) passed a resolution declaring that faculty should base their decision to write letters of recommendation on a student’s merit.

Professor Cheney-Lippold, who had previously agreed to write a letter of recommendation for the student claimed that “many university departments have pledged an academic boycott against Israel in support of Palestinians living in Palestine. This boycott includes writing letters of recommendation for students planning to study there … for reasons of these politics, I must rescind my offer to write your letter.”

University of Michigan has previously condemned academic boycotts. In 2013, the University President, Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs, and Provost released a statement regarding BDS, stating that “The University of Michigan strongly opposes the boycott of academic institutions in Israel.” In 2017, members of the university’s governing Board of Regents stated, “we strongly oppose any action involving the boycott, divestment or sanction of Israel.”

On September 18th, President Schlissel released a statement condemning the professor’s actions, saying:

“Injecting personal politics into a decision regarding support for our students is counter to our values and expectations as an institution. The academic goals of our students are of paramount importance. It is the university’s position to take all steps necessary to make sure our students are supported … While members of the University of Michigan community have a wide range of individual opinions on this and many other topics, the university has consistently opposed any boycott of Israeli institutions of higher education. No academic department or any other unit at the University of Michigan has taken a stance that departs from this long-held university position.”

On September 20th, he followed up by saying that “The Regents, Executive Officers and I have been deeply engaged in this matter. We will be taking appropriate steps to address this issue and the broader questions it has raised.”

In their letter, the Brandeis Center pointed out the fact that the professor’s refusal to write the letter of recommendation, solely based of his political views, violates the University’s Faculty Handbook, which declares that it is “an open and accepting community” where differences based on a multitude of factors are “welcomed, nurtured, and respected.”

Additionally, the professor’s conduct violates the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Michigan, and potentially violates state and federal anti-boycott law:

“The professor is surely aware that most of the students at the University of Michigan who choose to continue academically at a university in Israel are Jewish. Hence, regardless of his personal intent – which was, we believe, contrary to federal and state anti-boycott laws – the necessary effect of the professor’s refusal to write a letter of recommendation for any student seeking to study in Israel is to prejudice Jewish students at the University of Michigan. The United States Supreme Court has declared that discrimination is illegal and unconstitutional regardless of personal intent if it has a ‘disparate impact’ based on race or religion. E.g.Texas Dep’t of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, 135 S. Ct. 2507, 2521-2522 (2015). The professor’s public declaration plainly has a “disparate impact” on Jewish students at the University.”

Furthermore, if a hostile campus climate develops for Jewish or Israeli students, the University risks violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VI prohibits discrimination in federally funded programs against anyone on the basis of their race, color, or national origin. In 2004, the Marcus Policy extended Title VI protection to Jewish students based on shared ethnic or ancestral characteristics. As the letter points out:

“Harassment rises to the level of a ‘hostile environment’ when the conduct is ‘sufficiently severe, pervasive, or persistent so as to interfere with or limit a student’s ability to participate in or benefit from the services, activities or opportunities offered by a school district.’ Jewish students have a proclivity to study in Israel due to the Jewish historic and spiritual connection to ‘Zion’/ the Land of Israel.”

Therefore, “If these students are denied letters of recommendation, they are denied the services and opportunities provided by the university – which by definition amounts to a hostile environment.”

On September 24th, the Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs (SACUA) passed a resolution declaring that faculty should only base their decision to write letters of recommendation on a student’s merit, not their political beliefs. While the Brandeis Center was pleased to learn of the resolution issued by the faculty senate, the Brandeis Center recommended, as listed in their letter, that President Schlissel reiterate his position on the professor’s actions, direct the professor to write a letter of recommendation for the student, discipline him if he is found to have violated school policies, and make it clear to all professors that such conduct could lead to disciplinary action. Additionally, the university should provide “mandatory training and education to all faculty members on how anti-Semitism is often manifested as anti-Zionism, and make it clear to the university community that anti-Jewish discrimination will not be tolerated on campus, just like other forms of racial and religious hate have no place at the university.”

The University of Michigan has now disciplined Professor Cheney-Lippold. A letter from Elizabeth Cole, interim dean of the College of Literature, Science, and the Arts, was obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request and details the discipline Professor Cheney-Lippold will receive. According to the October 3rd letter, he will not receive a merit raise during this 2018-2019 school year. He will also not be allowed to go on his upcoming sabbatical in January or another sabbatical for two years. If he is found guilty of similar conduct in the future, he could also face dismissal.

Additionally, Cole expressed disapproval of his actions, saying, “Your conduct has fallen far short of the University’s and College’s expectations for how LSA faculty interact with and treat students. This letter is a strong warning that your behavior in this circumstance was inappropriate and will not be tolerated … In the future, a student’s merit should be your primary guide for determining how and whether to provide a letter of recommendation. You are not to use student requests for recommendations as a platform to discuss your personal political beliefs.”

On October 9th, it was discovered that a second instructor at the university had declined to provide a letter of recommendation for a student. When a half-Israeli student asked his graduate student instructor, Lucy Peterson, for a letter of recommendation, she said she would “be delighted.” However, after learning that he intended to study in Israel, she informed him that she would not write the letter. In an email that echoes that of Professor Cheney-Lippold, she said, “I’m so sorry that I didn’t ask before agreeing to write your recommendation letter, but I regrettably will not be able to write on your behalf. Along with numerous other academics in the US and elsewhere, I have pledged myself to a boycott of Israeli institutions as a way of showing solidarity with Palestine. Please know that this decision is not about you as a student or a person, and I would be happy to write a recommendation for you if you end up applying to other programs.”

That same day, President Schlissel released another statement condemning the actions of both instructors, reiterating the university’s stance on BDS, and announcing the creation of a “panel of distinguished faculty members to examine the intersection between political thought/ideology and faculty members’ responsibilities to students.” The primary objectives of the panel are to examine relevant university policy, gather and review relevant policy statements of peer institutions, gather input from stakeholders across the university, and “to recommend how to clarify current policy or create new policy that clearly articulates institutional principles and expectations at the intersection of faculty members’ responsibilities to students and their personal views.” He added:

“Withholding letters of recommendation based on personal views does not meet our university’s expectations for supporting the academic aspirations of our students. Conduct that violates this expectation and harms students will not be tolerated and will be addressed with serious consequences. Such actions interfere with our students’ opportunities, violate their academic freedom and betray our university’s educational mission … We will work to make absolutely clear that faculty members’ personal political beliefs cannot interfere with their obligations to our students with regard to letter-writing and all other modes of academic support.”

On October 4th, Emory Douglas was invited to speak to students at University of Michigan as part of the Stamps School of Art & Design’s “Penny Stamps Speakers Series Presentation.” Students receive academic credit for attending these lectures. While his lecture was about his work, the Black Panther Party, and the early days of voting rights, Douglas showed a slide that compared Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to Adolf Hitler, accusing him of genocide. “Guilty of Genocide” is written across Netanyahu’s forehead, and his hand is raised as if he is giving a Nazi salute.

One student in attendance captured a photo of the slide, posting it to Facebook and criticizing the administration for allowing such a comparison to be made in a mandatory course. In addition to claiming that this was not the first time a Stamps lecture speaker had demonized Israelis, she said:

“As a Wolverine, I sat through this lecture horrified at the hatred and intolerance being spewed on our campus. As a Jew who is proud of my people and my homeland, I sat through this lecture feeling targeted and smeared to be as evil as the man who perpetuated the Holocaust and systematically murdered six million Jews… . The administration is repeatedly failing to forcefully respond to antisemitism, and so it comes back worse and worse each time. A line needs to be drawn and it needs to be drawn now.”

On October 8th, the same student announced that she and other Jewish students had met with the Dean of Stamps and the university’s Chief Diversity Officer, demanding that the university adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Working Definition of Antisemitism. One example included in the IHRA definition says that “Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis” constitutes anti-Semitism, which is exactly what Douglas did during his presentation. A follow-up meeting has been scheduled to discuss the matter further.

The day after Douglas’s presentation, the administration issued a statement saying that “The Israeli leader’s image in question was on a single slide among nearly 200 other slides not related to Israel that were presented over the course of an hour. Douglas’ work is critical of a wide range of world leaders, including several U.S. presidents. The video of the talk may shed more light on his message.” Additionally, they defended the speaker’s right to freedom of speech, stating:

“Freedom of speech, for both invited speakers and community members, is a bedrock principle of our academic community … There are instances where some or many members of our community may find a speaker or the content of their speech reprehensible or hateful. A speaker’s appearance on our campus does not imply any endorsement. By protecting the constitutional right to free speech and expression for those we disagree with, we are protecting our own right to express that disagreement. If our laws and practices allowed us to prevent objectionable speech, the very groups that today are exercising their own speech rights to protest against such a speaker, might have those rights threatened in the future.”

On October 9th, President Mark S. Schissel and Provost and Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs Martin A. Philbert issued a more detailed statement. While they reiterated their stance on allowing speakers to voice their views, even if they’re controversial, they stated that:

“It also is important to note that the ideas discussed in our teaching venues do not necessarily reflect the institutional values or position of the University of Michigan or its regents … Hitler and the genocide that he led, however, represent a horrific level of evil with few if any parallels in human history. We understand how these images are offensive, particularly in this case to Jewish students. We are sorry students were hurt by this experience.”

While the speaker does have a right to freedom of speech, many Jewish students were offended by the comparison for a reason, especially since this incident comes on the heels of other anti-Semitic incidents against students, perpetrated by instructors on campus.

University of Michigan has been facing severe backlash after two instructors denied letters of recommendations to Jewish students after learning that they were planning to study aboard in Israel. While they did this in support of the BDS movement, the university’s administration has continuously stated that they do not support the BDS movement. The administration has disciplined the first professor, condemned their actions, and established a panel to examine faculty members’ obligations towards students.

In their October 9th statement, the administration also addressed these incidents. Direct to all members of the campus community, they said:

“Recent events on our campus have raised important questions around issues of personal beliefs, our responsibilities as educators, and anti-Semitism. Provost Philbert and I, along with the Board of Regents and several academic leaders, have been engaged in discussions about these issues with members of the university and broader communities in recent weeks. The incidents have caused hurt and made some members of our community feel that their religious identity and academic aspirations are not valued. We want everyone in our Jewish community and beyond to know that we are committed to upholding an equitable and inclusive environment where everyone is given a chance to succeed and pursue the academic opportunities they have earned. First and foremost, this applies to our students. These are core values of our university, and even in moments of turmoil and strong disagreement, they guide our work and give us a path forward.”

The university is taking steps in the right direction by reiterating their stance against BDS, making it clear that discriminatory actions will not be tolerated by instructors, and establishing a panel and policies that will hopefully reduce the likelihood of such incidents occurring in the future. By adopting the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism, as recommended by University of Michigan students, the university would help protect Jewish students from future discrimination on campus.

On October 24th, the LDB chapter at UCLA School of Law will host Rabbi Arthur Gross-Schaefer to Rabbi Gross-Schaefer is a Professor of Marketing and Business Law at the College of Business Administration at Loyola Marymount University. He previously taught at Western States School of Law, Boston University and USC. He is a past president of the Pacific Southwest Academy of Legal Studies, representative to National Conference of the Pacific Southwest Region of Reform Rabbis, and a member of the Central Conference of American Rabbis. He is also a member of the California State Bar Association and the California Society of Public Accountants and has earned more than a dozen teaching awards and published over 150 articles.