As spring approaches, the United States is reeling from a surge in anti-Semitic incidents, including threats to Jewish Community Centers and attacks on Jewish Cemeteries.

Read Brief

Download PDF

Kenneth L. Marcus, president of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law made the following statement today commending the South Carolina House of Representatives for its overwhelming approval of H. 3643, a bill to combat rising campus anti-Semitism:

“Anti-Semitism is on the rise across our nation. In the past few weeks, many hateful acts have been committed against the Jewish community. According to the FBI’s latest reporting, there were more incidents of anti-Semitism than all other religious hate crimes combined. And the situation is worst on college campuses where the threat to Jewish students is escalating at a rapid and frightening rate.

“We applaud the South Carolina legislators for standing up against this growing anti-Jewish bigotry, and in a way that fully protects free speech on campus. We particularly commend Representative Alan Clemmons who authored this bill and has been a tremendous leader in protecting Jewish students and all students. We congratulate Representative Clemmons, his colleagues in the Israel Allies Caucus, and the Israel Allies Foundation (IAF) for their successful efforts to fight discrimination on campus.”

IAF also applauded this success. “This bill speaks directly to a critical public policy need in South Carolina and around the country. We are pleased to mobilize our educational and policy resources behind this legislative effort, along with our many partner organizations, and believe it is a necessary compliment to state laws that regulate against commercial manifestations of anti-Jewish bigotry,” stated Joseph Sabag, U.S. National Director of IAF. “Representative Clemmons possesses a unique level of moral clarity, and is once again to be applauded for proving himself to be a historic champion in the fight against anti-Jewish bigotry.”

H. 3643 passed the House on Second Reading by a vote of 103 – 3 and received unanimous consent for a third reading tomorrow. After the third reading, it will move to the Senate for consideration.

Marcus is a renowned anti-Semitism expert, an award-winning author of two books, The Definition of Anti-Semitism (Oxford University Press: 2015) and Jewish Identity and Civil Rights in America (Cambridge University Press: 2010) and the associate editor of the Journal for the Study of Anti-Semitism. He is the former staff director of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, was delegated the authority of Assistant Secretary of Education for Civil Rights and is the individual who drafted the policy by which the U.S. Department of Education investigates anti-Semitism claims.

March 4-5, 2017 

LDB’s Kenneth L. Marcus will be a featured speaker at this year’s annual StandWithUs anti-BDS conference in Los Angeles. Other presenters will include Professors Alan Dershowitz and Anne Bayefsky.

http://standwithus.com/ppsc/bdsconf2017.asp

Jewish Voice
March 1, 2017

The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law (LDB) last week endorsed a bill introduced in the South Carolina Legislature which will help combat the growing threat of anti-Semitism on state college campuses.

The South Carolina bill follows similar efforts at the federal level and in Virginia and Tennessee. In January, Virginia Delegate Dave A. LaRock introduced a bill in the Virginia House of Delegates. In February, Senator Dolores R. Gresham and Representative Judd Matheny introduced a bill in the Tennessee General Assembly. And the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act is awaiting reintroduction in Congress this term.

“According to the latest FBI tracking, there were more Jewish hate crime victims than victims of all other religious groups combined. And nowhere is this problem worse than on college campuses where anti-Semitism is spiking at an alarming rate coast to coast,” stated Kenneth L. Marcus, LDB president and the individual who drafted the policy under which the U.S. Department of Education investigates anti-Semitism claims. “We are grateful to South Carolina Representative Alan D. Clemmons for his leadership in the national fight to combat escalating anti-Semitism.”

The South Carolina bill, H.3643, will ensure crucial legal protections to the rights of Jewish students. It defines anti-Semitism using the U.S. Department of State’s definition and will provide South Carolina public post-secondary institutions with the means to fight discrimination of Jewish students. It was introduced in the South Carolina House of Representatives and referred to the House Committee on Judiciary. The Subcommittee on General Laws, yesterday, voted unanimously in support of the measure and 105 out of 121 seated members of the South Carolina House of Representatives have signed on as cosponsors.

“In reviewing, investigating, or deciding whether there has been a violation of a college or a university policy prohibiting discriminatory practices on the basis of religion, South Carolina public colleges and universities shall take into consideration the definition of anti-Semitism for purposes of determining whether the alleged practice was motivated by anti-Semitic intent.”

(Sub-clause B of H. 3643 Section 1)

Marcus, who recently wrote The Definition of Anti-Semitism (Oxford University Press 2015) and testified before the South Carolina subcommittee on the measure yesterday, explained, “These bills provide much-needed clarity, especially about assaults, vandalism, and other illegal conduct that is motivated by a hatred of Jews. This is particularly important for addressing and defining a core and often times confusing problem on campus, anti-Semitic incidents that have some relationship to anti-Israel activity. What I really like about this legislation is that it provides well-established tools for addressing Jew-hatred while steering clear of constitutionally protected speech.”

Just like the other legislation, the South Carolina bill is careful to protect students’ First Amendment rights. H. 3643 in no way regulates or restricts free speech and/or academic freedom. Rather, the bill ensures that authorities consider the U.S. Department of State’s definition of anti-Semitism in instances when it is necessary to determine the intent of unprotected activities, including assault, battery and vandalism.

The State Department definition is the single most authoritative definition of anti-Semitism in the U.S. In addition to defining classic forms of anti-Semitism, the State Department definition clarifies the confusion surrounding the line between anti-Semitism and legitimate criticism of the State of Israel. The world’s most preeminent scholars of anti-Semitism endorse it, global leaders agree with it and student governments at several institutions (e.g., UC Berkeley, UCLA, UC Santa Barbara, Indiana University, Ryerson University and Capital University) have adopted it. The United Kingdom recently announced that it will formally adopt a definition of anti-Semitism that is substantially the same as the U.S. State Department’s and is supported by the more than 50 countries that make up the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe.

“It is well-known that the government can use criminal admissions, such as confessions and other contemporaneous utterances, to establish intent. For example, if someone says they hate French people, they are engaging in free speech. It may be offensive, but they have a right to say it. On the other hand, if they then go on to kill a Frenchman, the district attorney can admit their statement to prove intent or premeditation. The criminal justice system depends on such admissions. Rep. Clemmons’ bill does the same thing. It provides South Carolina universities with tools that they can use to determine when unlawful conduct is motivated by anti-Semitic intent,” Marcus explained.

Anti-Semitism is an urgent and compounding problem across the nation. Jewish hate crime victims, totaling 664 in 2015 according to the FBI’s Hate Crime Report, outnumber victims of all other religious groups combined (580 victims). A Brandeis Center-Trinity College study found that 54 percent of Jewish students reported experiencing or witnessing anti-Semitism in 2014. And the situation is getting worse. An AMCHA Initiative study reports a 45 percent increase in anti-Semitic incidents in the first half of 2016 as compared to the same period in 2015.

There has been significant work on the national and state level to tackle discrimination of Jewish students. Sens. Tim Scott (R-SC) and Bob Casey (D-PA) introduced and unanimously passed the bipartisan Anti-Semitism Awareness Act in the Senate in early December. This Act will assist the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights in deciding whether harassment was motivated by anti-Semitic intent. Reps. Peter J. Roskam (R-IL) and Ted Deutch (D-FL) introduced the companion bipartisan House bill (H.R.6421), but it was too late in the congressional term to achieve passage. Congress is expected to take action this year.

Original Article

Download PDF

The Brandeis Center is pleased to announce the arrival of Michael Grant as a Civil Rights Legal Fellow. Michael brings great energy and skill to the advancement of justice for all. He will conduct research on issues of federal and state law and provide general legal and policy support to LDB.

“We are excited to have Michael with us,” says LDB President and General Counsel Kenneth L. Marcus. “He is very energetic and passionate about civil rights, and we look forward to his contributions to our work fighting against anti-Semitism.”

Michael graduated from the Macaulay Honors College at Hunter College, CUNY in 2012 with a BA in Political Science. At Macaulay, he founded the Hunter College Mock Trial team and organized Hillel events. Michael also spent a summer abroad in Israel, studying Israel and Palestine. He later attended Brooklyn Law School, where he was involved with the National Security Law Society and the Mentoring Youth through Legal Education organization. Michael primarily focused on First Amendment Law in law school and is published in the National Law Review for his article on campaign finance.

“I’ve always been interested in political theory and have a particular passion for civil rights,” says Michael. “I joined the Brandeis Center because anti-Semitism, while always in the background, is now a growing concern for the Jewish community. As an Orthodox Jew, I remember being on the front lines, where some students wouldn’t even talk to me because of either my kippa, or what they assumed were the political positions that necessarily came with it.”

On Tuesday, Feb. 28, Professor Steven Resnicoff will address LDB law students at the University of Minnesota on, “Anti-Israel Rhetoric as Camouflage for anti-Semitism and Its Effects at the United Nations.” Professor Resnicoff is an internationally known legal scholar who has written and lectured extensively on a wide variety of subjects, including alternative dispute resolution, bankruptcy, commercial paper, legal ethics, and medical ethics. Drawing on his formal Talmudic training as well as law firm experience, Professor Resnicoff analyzes these issues from both secular and religious perspectives, often exploring how these disparate systems interact. As holder of DePaul’s Wicklander Chair for Professional Ethics in 2001, he focused on honesty and integrity in the legal profession and in legal education. His works also have been cited favorably by academics and courts.

On Monday, February 27, Jeffrey Robbins will address students at the University of Virginia (UVA) School of Law chapter of the Louis D. Brandeis Center on, “The Progressive Lawyer’s Case for Israel.” Robbins is an attorney at Mintz Levin in which he specializes in complex civil litigation, including litigation involving allegations of fraud, First Amendment issues, and claims of defamation. He also served as deputy chief counsel for the minority of the US Senate Governmental Affairs Committee Special Investigation into campaign fundraising practices, as chief counsel for the minority of the US Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, and as an assistant US attorney in the District of Massachusetts.

Benjamin Wermund
Politico
February 24, 2017

Morning Education
A daily overview of education policy news

By Robert Malley and Marc Lynch
Anti-Semitism a growing concern on college campuses

With help from Caitlin Emma, Kimberly Hefling, Michael Stratford and Ian Kullgren

ANTI-SEMITISM A GROWING CONCERN ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES: A few years ago, Kenneth Marcus, the former head of the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights, could tick off a few campuses that were “hot spots” for anti-Semitism. Now, he says: “It’s really all over.” Marcus, now president of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, drafted the policy OCR uses to investigate allegations of anti-Semitism. He told Morning Education that anti-Semitism is “so pervasive that in any given semester it could be virtually anywhere.” And it’s been spiking over the last year, he said. Recent incidents have drawn attention to the University of Michigan, Stanford, Texas State University and elsewhere. Lawmakers in at least three states have filed bills to define and curb anti-Semitism — and the Trump administration is under pressure to take action.

— Multiple studies have tracked the prevalence of anti-Semitism in recent years. A 2014 Trinity College poll found 54 percent of Jewish students had experienced anti-Semitism on campus. The next year, Brandeis University found that figure was closer to three-quarters of Jewish students. A study last year by the AMCHA Initiative, a group that aims to fight anti-Semitism, found a 45 percent increase in incidents during the first half of 2016 compared to the same period the year before. Jewish hate crime victims, meanwhile, outnumbered victims of all other religious groups combined in 2015, according to FBI statistics.

— The rise of the “alt-right” white nationalist movement is partially to blame — but so are extremists on the far left, Marcus said. And the latter can be harder for universities to deal with. “University administrators know they need to respond to extremist right-wing neo-Nazi propaganda,” Marcus said. “It’s harder to deal with anti-Semitism that disguises itself as anti-Israel in some respect.”

— The “single most important step” toward combating the trend is to take the State Department’s definition of anti-Semitism abroad and apply it in the U.S. — at the Education and Justice departments, Marcus said. That definition includes descriptions of anti-Israel language, as well as more traditional forms of anti-Semitism. States including South Carolina, Virginia and Tennessee have proposed adopting the definition locally.

— The Trump administration has faced pressure to more strongly condemn anti-Semitism after a rash of incidents across the country, including the desecration of Jewish cemeteries and threats against Jewish community centers. Trump earlier this week said the threats are “horrible and are painful and a very sad reminder of the work that still must be done to root out hate and prejudice and evil.” Vice President Mike Pence visited a vandalized cemetery near St. Louis. “There’s now a real awareness that anti-Semitism has reawakened as a major problem of the year 2017,” Marcus said. “There’s more pressure to do something about it.”

HAPPY FRIDAY AND WELCOME TO MORNING EDUCATION. I got my king cake fix all the way from Southeast Texas. Happy Mardi Gras. Laissez les bons temps rouler. Tips? Feedback? Send it my way: bwermund@politico.com or @BenjaminEW. Share event listings: educalendar@politicopro.com. And follow us on Twitter: @Morning_Edu and @POLITICOPro.

JUDGE TELLS TRUMP TO TAKE STANCE ON STUDENT LOAN FEES: The Education Department must determine by next week if it will continue to enforce the Obama administration’s ban on collection of some student loan fees, U.S. District Judge Amit P. Mehta said in an order Thursday night. Mehta is overseeing a legal challenge to the Obama administration’s 2015 guidance, which specifically prohibits guaranty agencies that collect federally backed loans from imposing collection fees when a borrower defaults on his or her debt but quickly agrees to start repaying. United Student Aid Funds, a former student loan guaranty agency, has sued to block the guidance, arguing that the Higher Education Act permits them to impose such fees. Michael Stratford has more.

TRANSGENDER DECISION SKIRTS THORNIEST LEGAL ISSUES: President Donald Trump’s move to scrap an Obama directive on transgender student rights satisfied his evangelical base, but it avoided taking a stance on the thorniest moral and legal issues: whether transgender students are covered by federal education law and whether they should be protected regardless.

— The letter to schools rescinding the Obama directive took a states’ rights position, but it didn’t address the legal issue at all — whether Title IX protects against gender-identity discrimination. At the heart of conservative-led lawsuits against Barack Obama’s directive is the argument that his administration unilaterally attempted to rewrite Title IX to include gender identity under “sex-based discrimination.” But that argument wasn’t offered by the Trump administration in defense of its action on Wednesday night.

— Since the release of the administration’s “Dear Colleague” letter, the Trump administration has sent mixed messages. White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said: “The guidance put forward obviously sends a signal to the court on where the administration stands on this issue.” But he also said the president doesn’t want to “force his issues or beliefs” on anyone. “It’s a states’ rights issue,” he said. “That’s entirely what he believes.” Caitlin Emma has the story.

SCOTUS ASKS: WHAT’S NEXT? With the Supreme Court set to hear a case on transgender rights next month, the justices on Thursday asked the parties in the case — Gavin Grimm, a transgender high school senior seeking bathroom access in accordance with his gender identity, and his Virginia school district — how they want to proceed in light of the Trump administration’s move. They must tell the court by March 1. The ACLU, representing Grimm, filed a brief Thursday saying the court should provide clarity on protections provided by Title IX. Some legal experts believe Trump’s action could kick the case back to a lower court. Pros, read the ACLU brief here.

DUNCAN AND LHAMON ASK: WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF … ? In an op-ed in The Washington Post on Thursday, former Education Secretary Arne Duncan and former assistant education secretary for civil rights Catherine Lhamon disputed the Trump administration’s states’ rights logic: “Leaving these questions to states means some students in some schools will have less protection than students in other schools.” And the Obama administration alums noted, as we reported, that DeVos was said to be opposed to rescinding the order but that Trump sided with Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

“If DeVos can’t win on this issue, what would happen if the law-abiding children of undocumented parents, kids who have spent most of their lives in the United States, were deported like common criminals?” they continued. “Would she win if federal education funds targeted to low-income children were instead spent on higher-income children? Would she win if students with disabilities were illegally denied the educational supports they need and deserve? Would she win if students of color continued to be suspended and expelled far out of proportion to their numbers? Would she block schools from discriminating in other nefarious ways?” More.

SCHOOLS STAND UP FOR TRANSGENDER STUDENTS: A number of school districts and states have made it clear they’ll uphold transgender student rights, irrespective of where the Trump administration falls on Title IX. “All students deserve a safe and supportive school environment. California will continue to work to provide that environment for our lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students regardless of any misguided directives by the federal government and the Trump administration,” said California State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson.

— Rhode Island state chief Ken Wagner also refused to back down: “The rescinding of this federal guidance does not change our policy — there is no room for discrimination in our schools, and we will continue to protect all students, including transgender and gender-nonconforming students, from any type of bias.”

— And District of Columbia Public Schools Chancellor Antwan Wilson said the district will stick to its policy of ensuring “all students are treated equitably and with dignity.” In an email to the DCPS community, Wilson added: “We remain committed to supporting and protecting our transgender school community, as well as all of the students, families and community members of DCPS.”

‘BATHROOM BILLS’ LIKELY TO STALL: Legislative attempts to restrict which bathrooms transgender people may use have popped up in at least a dozen states, but they’ve proven to be a tough sell even in the most conservative places, The Associated Press reports. Bills in Texas and Arkansas lack support from crucial state leadership, and efforts to pass similar laws have already failed this year in Virginia, South Dakota and Wyoming. The main reason, transgender-rights leaders told the AP, is the backlash and economic hit that North Carolina suffered when it passed its HB2 measure last year.

PROFS CALL OUT DEVOS OVER CPAC COMMENTS: Education Secretary Betsy DeVos threw red meat to conservative college students at CPAC on Thursday, saying that “faculty, from adjunct professors to deans, tell you what to do, what to say, and more ominously, what to think.” The comment didn’t play so well with many university professors. “As someone who teaches college students, this is utter and complete bulls–t relying on conservative shibboleths, not 1 iota of fact,” Brian Rosenwald, a fellow at the Robert A. Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and an instructor at Penn, tweeted. Robert Mann, a professor of mass communications at Louisiana State University, was just as blunt, tweeting: “Betsy DeVos is clueless.” They were two of many college professors who took to Twitter to express outrage over DeVos’ remarks.

— DeVos brought up free speech in a meeting with public university leaders just after her CPAC appearance. It was among a slew of topics that surfaced in her first meeting with the Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities and presidents from 11 universities. “The presidents expressed their strong belief and commitment to ensuring that campuses are open to a diverse array of perspectives and beliefs,” an APLU member who was at the meeting told Morning Education. After the meeting, DeVos tweeted: “Appreciate these university leaders meeting to discuss controlling costs, protecting students, graduation rates and workforce readiness.”

DEVOS IS THE QUESTION: Another Republican senator has faced tough questioning related to DeVos during a town hall meeting. In Louisiana, Sen. Bill Cassidy was grilled Wednesday about accepting $70,000 in campaign donations from DeVos and her family, the Hill reports. “I asked Mrs. DeVos, ‘Will you enforce the law?’ ‘Absolutely.’ … ‘Do you support public education?’ She goes: ‘Absolutely,'” Cassidy told the crowd. Earlier in the week, Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley took heat in his home state for supporting DeVos.

MURRAY PRESSES DEVOS ON REMARKS ABOUT ED DEPT EMPLOYEES: Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), top Democrat on the Senate education committee, says she’s concerned by Secretary DeVos’ comments last week that suggested she planned to take action against Education Department employees who could be trying to “subvert” the agency’s mission. Murray said the comments could have a “chilling effect” within the department and make federal employees uncomfortable to speak out about unethical or unlawful activities. Murray wrote to DeVos on Thursday, demanding information and clarification about her comments. Read it here.

GROUPS URGE FCC TO PROTECT BROADBAND PROGRAM: Dozens of civil rights, labor and social justice organizations are urging the Federal Communications Commission to reverse a decision earlier this month which the groups say “undermined” the Lifeline program. That decision was made by the FCC’s new Republican Chairman Ajit Pai, who blocked nine companies from receiving federal funding to help connect low-income families to affordable broadband.

— “Just as Lifeline is set to catch up with the 21st century, it is once again under attack from critics using flawed logic,” the groups write in a letter to the commission. “They suggest that Lifeline is unnecessary because poor people would adopt these technologies absent a subsidy, and they retreat to the long-discredited argument that waste, fraud and abuse are rampant in the program. The dangerous assumption that poor people still may adopt [broadband] absent a subsidy fails to recognize that, for most poor people, taking on a bill for an essential communications service means forgoing food, healthcare, clothing, school supplies, and other basic necessities.” The letter.

4 DEMS HUNGRY FOR FOOD-INSECURITY STUDY: Patty Murray and a group of fellow Democratic senators are asking the Government Accountability Office to investigate food insecurity at colleges and universities, pointing to studies that show large numbers of students struggling with food access. In a letter sent Thursday, Murray (Wash.), Debbie Stabenow (Mich.), Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) and Ed Markey (Mass.) cite a survey in which half of community college students said they struggle to feed themselves.

— “Sacrificing food for education can undermine a student’s educational goals and create barriers on their path to obtaining a certificate, degree, or credential,” the lawmakers say. “This situation raises concern and deserves greater scrutiny.”

NGA GIVES SOME LOVE TO PRE-K: Hollywood darling Jennifer Garner will be joining Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley and Washington Gov. Jay Inslee during a National Governors Association session Saturday morning focused on early childhood education. Other speakers include Mark Shriver, president of Save the Children Action Network, and Mike Petters, president of Huntington Ingalls Industries. The NGA winter meeting starts today. View the schedule here.

MOVERS AND SHAKERS

— The Wallace Foundation announced today it has selected a new director of learning and enrichment who will oversee one of the foundation’s key grant-making areas. Giselle “Gigi” Antoni, president and CEO of Big Thought in Dallas, a nonprofit organization that focuses on building partnerships that close the opportunity gap through creative out-of-school time programs, will join Wallace after May 1, said Will Miller, the foundation’s president. Antoni will succeed Nancy Devine, who is retiring.

REPORT ROLL CALL

— A new poll by the University of Texas at Austin’s Texas Politics Project finds more Texans oppose using tax money on private school vouchers than support the idea — by nearly 10 percentage points.

SYLLABUS

— Trump says removal of undocumented immigrants is a “military operation”: POLITICO.

— A bill that would let Wyoming school districts allow K-12 school employees to carry guns on campus has passed a Senate committee and now heads to the Senate floor: The Associated Press.

— Texas lawmakers are pushing vouchers for private schools — but many of the state’s poorest students live in areas with no private schools to use them on: The Dallas Morning News.

Original Article

Eddie Kadhim
ABC News 15
February 23, 2017

South Carolina lawmakers are working to fight the growing number of anti-Semitic crimes on college campuses.

Rep. Alan Clemmons from Myrtle Beach is the main sponsor of a bill that would give colleges and universities the ability to look at the motives behind illegal activity, and if it’s considered an anti-Semitic hate crime, the punishment would be harsher.

Clemmons says it’s not about what’s said or free speech.

“When that speech gives rise to illegal activity, then this will be a tool for institutions of higher learning in South Carolina,” said Clemmons. “For administrators to look back at the facts behind that illegal activity or violation of university policy to determine the intent whether it was bigoted anti-Semitic intent or not.”

FBI statistics show there were more Jewish hate crime victims than of all other religions combined in 2015.

Kenneth Marcus is the president of a group that fights hate crimes on college campuses called the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law.

He says we should provide a clear definition of what is hateful by using the “3 D test”.

“The Jewish State is being demonized, not just criticized in the way the Jewish people for centuries were. Ask whether the Jewish faith is being delegitimized. Whether its legitimacy is being questioned in a way that other nations aren’t being questioned. Ask whether double standards are being applied. Not just whether Israel is being criticized, but if another set of standards are being used for Israel than any other country.”

The bill actually states it cannot be “construed to diminish or infringe upon any right protected under the First Amendment.”

The president of the South Carolina Conference of the American Association of University Professors Brandon Inabinet said while he had not read this bill to comment on it directly, he’s concerned about academic freedom.

“Our whole interest is we promote speech on multiple sides of an issue, rather than silencing or forcing people not to think about something which usually leads to extremism,” said Inabinet.

The bill cleared the House Judiciary Subcommittee Wednesday morning.

It will advance to the full Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives Tuesday of next week, and then will likely be up for second reading in the full House the following week.

Original Article

Download PDF

Washington, D.C.: The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law (LDB) today endorsed a bill introduced in the South Carolina Legislature which will help combat the growing threat of anti-Semitism on state college campuses.

The South Carolina bill follows similar efforts at the federal level and in Virginia and Tennessee. In January, Virginia Delegate Dave A. LaRock introduced a bill in the Virginia House of Delegates. In February, Senator Dolores R. Gresham and Representative Judd Matheny introduced a bill in the Tennessee General Assembly. And the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act is awaiting reintroduction in Congress this term.

“According to the latest FBI tracking, there were more Jewish hate crime victims than victims of all other religious groups combined. And no where is this problem worse than on college campuses where anti-Semitism is spiking at an alarming rate coast to coast,” stated Kenneth L. Marcus, LDB president and the individual who drafted the policy under which the U.S. Department of Education investigates anti-Semitism claims. “We are grateful to South Carolina Representative Alan D. Clemmons for his leadership in the national fight to combat escalating anti-Semitism.”

“This bill speaks directly to a critical public policy need in South Carolina and around the country. We are pleased to mobilize our educational and policy resources behind this legislative effort, along with our many partner organizations, and believe it is a necessary compliment to state laws that regulate against commercial manifestations of anti-Jewish bigotry,” stated Joseph Sabag, U.S. National Director of the Israel Allies Foundation (IAF). “Representative Clemmons possesses a unique level of moral clarity, and is once again to be applauded for proving himself to be a historic champion in the fight against anti-Jewish bigotry.”

The South Carolina bill, H.3643, will ensure crucial legal protections to the rights of Jewish students. It defines anti-Semitism using the U.S. Department of State’s definition and will provide South Carolina public post-secondary institutions with the means to fight discrimination of Jewish students. It was introduced in the South Carolina House of Representatives and referred to the House Committee on Judiciary. The Subcommittee on General Laws, yesterday, voted unanimously in support of the measure and 105 out of 121 seated members of the South Carolina House of Representatives have signed on as cosponsors.

“In reviewing, investigating, or deciding whether there has been a violation of a college or a university policy prohibiting discriminatory practices on the basis of religion, South Carolina public colleges and universities shall take into consideration the definition of anti-Semitism for purposes of determining whether the alleged practice was motivated by anti-Semitic intent.”
(Sub-clause B of H. 3643 Section 1)

Marcus, who recently wrote The Definition of Anti-Semitism (Oxford University Press 2015) and testified before the South Carolina subcommittee on the measure yesterday, explained, “These bills provide much-needed clarity, especially about assaults, vandalism, and other illegal conduct that is motivated by a hatred of Jews. This is particularly important for addressing and defining a core and often times confusing problem on campus, anti-Semitic incidents that have some relationship to anti-Israel activity. What I really like about this legislation is that it provides well-established tools for addressing Jew-hatred while steering clear of constitutionally protected speech.”

Just like the other legislation, the South Carolina bill is careful to protect students’ First Amendment rights. H. 3643 in no way regulates or restricts free speech and/or academic freedom. Rather, the bill ensures that authorities consider the U.S. Department of State’s definition of anti-Semitism in instances when it is necessary to determine the intent of unprotected activities, including assault, battery and vandalism.

The State Department definition is the single most authoritative definition of anti-Semitism in the U.S. In addition to defining classic forms of anti-Semitism, the State Department definition clarifies the confusion surrounding the line between anti-Semitism and legitimate criticism of the State of Israel. The world’s most preeminent scholars of anti-Semitism endorse it, global leaders agree with it and student governments at several institutions (e.g., UC Berkeley, UCLA, UC Santa Barbara, Indiana University, Ryerson University and Capital University) have adopted it. The United Kingdom recently announced that it will formally adopt a definition of anti-Semitism that is substantially the same as the U.S. State Department’s and is supported by the more than 50 countries that make up the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe.

“It is well-known that the government can use criminal admissions, such as confessions and other contemporaneous utterances, to establish intent. For example, if someone says they hate French people, they are engaging in free speech. It may be offensive, but they have a right to say it. On the other hand, if they then go on to kill a Frenchman, the district attorney can admit their statement to prove intent or premeditation. The criminal justice system depends on such admissions. Rep. Clemmons’ bill does the same thing. It provides South Carolina universities with tools that they can use to determine when unlawful conduct is motivated by anti-Semitic intent,” Marcus explained.

Anti-Semitism is an urgent and compounding problem across the nation. Jewish hate crime victims, totaling 664 in 2015 according to the FBI’s Hate Crime Report, outnumber victims of all other religious groups combined (580 victims). A Brandeis Center-Trinity College study found that 54 percent of Jewish students reported experiencing or witnessing anti-Semitism in 2014. And the situation is getting worse. An AMCHA Initiative study reports a 45 percent increase in anti-Semitic incidents in the first half of 2016 as compared to the same period in 2015.

There has been significant work on the national and state level to tackle discrimination of Jewish students. Sens. Tim Scott (R-SC) and Bob Casey (D-PA) introduced and unanimously passed the bipartisan Anti-Semitism Awareness Act in the Senate in early December. This Act will assist the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights in deciding whether harassment was motivated by anti-Semitic intent. Reps. Peter J. Roskam (R-IL) and Ted Deutch (D-FL) introduced the companion bipartisan House bill (H.R.6421), but it was too late in the congressional term to achieve passage. Congress is expected to take action this year.

The Virginia bill, HB 2261, seeks to revise the Virginia Code to recognize anti-Semitism as a form of unlawful discriminatory practice, calls upon the board of visitors of public institutions of higher education to enact policies or regulations against discrimination, including anti-Semitism, and defines anti-Semitism using the U.S. Department of State’s definition. Though Virginia’s 30-day legislative session ran out before the bill was passed, Virginia Deputy Majority Leader Delegate C. Todd Gilbert acknowledged the severity of the problem and committed to place the initiative at the top of the docket during next year’s legislative session.

The Tennessee bill aims to increase understanding about anti-Semitism. It calls for the Tennessee Department of Education and institutions of higher education to take into consideration the U.S. State Department definition of anti-Semitism to assess whether an unprotected action was motivated by anti-Semitic intent.

“Thanks to Representative Clemmons’ leadership, South Carolina was the first state in the nation to adopt modern anti-BDS legislation, and since then, many other states have followed South Carolina’s lead,” stated Marcus. “With South Carolina and Representative Clemmons assuming a national leadership role once again with this bill, we expect other states will certainly follow suit.”