Lea Speyer Algemeiner September 2, 2016 The heads of major Jewish groups told The Algemeiner on Friday that they were outraged over the handling by the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) of the harassment and relentless attacks against a former student leader by anti-Israel activists. Earlier this week, now former UCLA Graduate Student Association (GSA) President Milan Chatterjee announced that he was leaving the university over the “hostile and unsafe campus climate” fostered by Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) groups and the UCLA administration. Kenneth Marcus — president and general counsel of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law who provided legal aid to Chatterjee — told The Algemeiner, “This is a very dark day for the University of California, and a bad day for America.” He continued: “The Milan Chatterjee affair reflects the insidiousness of the anti-Israel movement’s new strategy, which is to suppress pro-Israel advocacy and intimidate not only Jewish pro-Israel students but also anyone who even remains neutral. Good, conscientious students will be driven away from student government and replaced by extremists of the sort who victimized Mr. Chatterjee.” Aron Hier, director of Campus Outreach for the Simon Wiesenthal Center, criticized UCLA for what he described as its “implacable and unethical approach” to the situation. “It is one thing to have the BDS movement tar and smear you,” Hier said, “But once the university chose to side against Chatterjee, it becomes too much to ask of any student to bear this responsibility. UCLA has doubled down on its wrongdoing and continues to dig the pit even deeper.” Hier, whose organization acted as a mediator at times between Chatterjee and the UCLA administration, also told The Algemeiner that when raising the issue of Chatterjee’s treatment and issues of campus antisemitism in general, he was told by the university, “Let this be a teaching moment.” “I ask the public at large: would any other minority group accept this answer from a university? This ethos is everything that is wrong with how the UCLA administration tackles campus antisemitism,” Hier said. On Friday, the American Jewish Committee (AJC) issued a statement calling on the US Department of Education (DOE) to “conduct a thorough investigation” of UCLA’s conduct regarding Chatterjee. AJC General Counsel Marc D. Stern wrote in a letter to the DOE that the leaking of a confidential university report on Chatterjee and UCLA’s subsequent actions constituted “a blatant violation of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).” Should UCLA be found to have violated FERPA, the university could lose federal funding. Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) — and a former instructor at UCLA’s business school — said in a statement that regardless of one’s views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, “no student should have to endure the kind of bullying and vitriol [Chatterjee] describes.” “If the allegations are true,” he said, “it is troubling that anti-Israel student activists are creating an environment where students do not feel safe.” As reported by The Algemeiner on Thursday, Chatterjee — a third-year law student — said he had “no choice” but to leave UCLA due to the harassment he suffered at the hands of BDS groups and activists. “It is very scary how BDS activists will go to any measure to destroy people’s reputations and careers,” Chatterjee told The Algemeiner in an interview. “UCLA should be ashamed of themselves for refusing to take action, and rather joining in the harassment I endured by BDS groups. I am not the first student nor will I be the last.” Chatterjee — who is Indian-American and a Hindu — became the focus of a four-month investigation by the UCLA Discrimination Prevention Office (DPO) for distributing GSA funds for a November 2015 diversity event based on a stipulation that the event not officially associate itself with the BDS movement and the school’s Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) chapter. Over the course of the investigation, BDS groups began a “deadly, malicious campaign against me,” Chatterjee told The Algemeiner. “They wrote defamatory articles in the media, circulated petitions and tried to remove me as GSA president three times. A lot of venom was spread around campus against me.” The DPO investigation concluded that Chatterjee — who said he was maintaining the GSA’s unanimous “zero engagement/endorsement policy” towards supporting any BDS-related organizations — “violated University policy requiring viewpoint neutrality,” and accused him of concocting the “zero engagement” policy. The result of the investigation, Chatterjee told The Algemeiner, was the “straw that broke the camel’s back, adding that “the report is a clear cover-up by the UCLA administration for its own mishandling of the situation.” “I am absolutely grateful for the support from groups like the AJC, the Louis D. Brandeis Center, the Israeli-American Council and the Simon Wiesenthal Center,” he said. Since news broke of his exit from UCLA, Chatterjee said he has received a “stream of messages from people around the world expressing their solidarity.” Chatterjee will complete his final year of law school at New York University. UCLA has yet to respond to The Algemeiner‘s request for comment on his departure. Original Article
Richard Stellar Jewish Journal September 1, 2016 UCLA Chancellor Block’s assertion that BDS ‘isn’t going to be sustained’ on this campus’ has never appeared to be anything but lip service as UCLA succumbs to a virulent form of anti-Semitism that has a Hindu in its cross-hairs. UCLA Graduate Law Student Milan Chatterjee was betrayed by UCLA, and that betrayal is moving like the Zika virus through UCLA’s active Jewish student population. Unlike Zika, this virus is selective and based solely on religious and social affiliation. Although UCLA holds the antidote, they seem hesitant to use it. At this point you may be scratching your head, and trying to figure out if ‘Chatterjee’ is a Jewish name. It’s not. Milan is Indian. Milan is a Hindu. Milan is as Jewish as the Maharishi is Irish – yet he is suffering the same fate as Jewish students who find themselves up against Students for Justice in Palestine and a cause that SJP champions called ‘BDS’. This ‘movement’ urges foundations, corporations, educational institutions and individuals to ‘Boycott, Divest and Sanction’ Israel in retribution for the Palestinian conflict in that country. Milan’s betrayal is a lesson in the adage that ‘no good deed goes unpunished’, and ironically, his betrayal is the harbinger for what is happening to Jewish students on campus, and has ultimately resulted in his being driven from UCLA – pilloried for his accidental involvement with a scurrilous, anti-Semitic movement that not only criticizes policy, but attacks opponents viciously. At the time of his betrayal, Milan was President of UCLA’s Graduate Student’s Association (GSA), an organization that although part of the Associated Students of UCLA, works independently when it comes to its own rules and procedures. In October of 2015, Milan received a direct funding request for a Town Hall event by a member of the UCLA student organization, Diversity Caucus (DC) – what appears to be, among other things, a front for the BDS Movement. The request seemed to be more about sponsorship for what may seem a hidden agenda, as DC did not go through the proper channels for funding. It went straight to Milan, and demanded a $2,000 bequest knowing full well that the limit on such grants was $800. The request was nonetheless granted, with the stipulation that the GSA would not be funding any event organized by or actively connected with “Divest from Israel or any related movement/organization.” Knowing that some of the more rabid BDS supporters are known to go for the jugular by confronting and challenging Jewish students, GSA did not want to sponsor ‘a position that will alienate a significant portion of students.” Milan made it explicitly clear to the Diversity Caucus representative through a phone call, in-person meeting, and email that this stipulation equally applied to advocates both for and against the BDS movement. What’s fair is fair, and there was a concerted effort to avoid a situation that pitted student against student, for whatever cause. The Diversity Caucus representative accepted the stipulation—in writing—without any objection. The town hall event was successfully held on November 5, 2015, and throwing caution to the wind, both sides of the BDS issue attended. That should have been the end of the story, with maybe a thank-you note the only punctuation needed to end the event. This however is where Milan’s nightmare began. Instead of a thank you note, Milan was reprimanded by UCLA. Reprimanded? Strike that. He was sanctioned, and made a scapegoat for the failings of UCLA to take a stand against hate speak. The hypocrisy of UCLA’s position was elevated in a letter dated February 9, 2016, L. Amy Blum, Interim Vice Chancellor of Legal Affairs stated “University policy requires student governments to allocate mandatory student fee funds on a viewpoint neutral basis.” If that was University policy, it should have ended there. It didn’t. Soon after the event, Milan began to be hassled, bullied and harassed by SJP and the BDS movement. They enlisted Palestine Legal and the ACLU to launch a vicious PR attack against Milan, where they falsely accused him of engaging in “viewpoint discrimination.” Erwin Chemerinsky, one of America’s leading constitutional law scholars, and the American Center for Law and Justice, thoroughly debunked this accusation. Logic and thoughtful jurisprudence had no effect. The fuse was lit, and Milan was handed a device that UCLA alone could disarm. The campus’ Jewish community waited. In the ensuing days, both SJP and pro-BDS activists launched several attempts to get Milan removed as GSA President, though they were not successful. Moreover, they enlisted pro-BDS blogs and publications to publish defamatory articles about Milan. SJP and pro-BDS activists also circulated a petition around the UCLA campus, and visited all the graduate school councils, where they continued to make defamatory accusations about Milan. There was no way that the GSA cabinet was going to get involved in this, and in taking a step back, Milan fell over the cowering form of UCLA Chancellor Block, who scurried away and hid while Milan was pilloried in what became a public shaming. It looks like the DC and SJP got their BDS face-off after all, on the back of a person whose only crime was assisting in getting a so-called diversity event funded. In what seems a huge misapplication of UCLA policy, that states that even ‘chancellors shall adopt campus implementing regulations consistent with these policies’ – there was nothing coming in way of support of Milan or the Jewish students being affected by SJP and pro-BDS activists. Chancellor Block’s voice was conspicuously silent, and was taken as tacit approval of BDS and its goals. Facing a vicious, nine-month long campaign of attacks, Milan rapidly became the poster boy for religious oppression. The irony that he’s not even close to being Jewish only shows that the tentacles of hate tend to wrap around anyone that crosses BDS. UCLA has suffered a history of anti-Semitism that lately has reached a fever pitch of hate and hypocrisy. Led by a movement that would rather see a child die than provide life saving treatments courtesy of Israeli technology, the BDS’ers have provided Chancellor Block with a poetic double standard. Had this been a group that went after a visible minority, they would have been quickly and rightly dispatched. Not so with BDS who only seems to direct their ire almost exclusively at pro-Israel and most likely Jewish, mostly white students. It is that double standard that threatens every Jewish student on campus. It was just a year ago that UCLA’s Student Council challenged undergraduate Rachel Beyda a seat on its Judicial Board based solely on her religion. Rachel was Jewish. Citing concerns that Rachel’s religion might affect her decision making abilities, the active practice of anti-Semitism became transparent, and — though she was eventually seated– it was clear it was infecting the upper echelons of UCLA student government. Chancellor Block claimed in an articlel in the Jewish Journal that BDS ‘isn’t going to be sustained on this campus’. He was right. BDS is not merely sustained. BDS is nurtured and fertilized by the silence of Chancellor Block and the UCLA hierarchy that can sound the alarm. UCLA isn’t the only campus in the UC system whose Jewish community is at Defcon 2. During a screening of the Israeli Defense Forces documentary “Beneath the Helmet’ at UC Irvine, a Jewish student was corralled and 10 UCI students were threatened by Students for Justice in Palestine. A statement issued by The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law (LDB) recognized that what was happening at UC Irvine and at UCLA with Milan “suggests a pattern in which Jewish and non-Jewish students are under assault.” Think back in history when Jews and those who spoke out in sympathy to their plight were publicly chastised. This isn’t Weimar, Germany. This is Westwood, California. While Milan continued to be digitally drawn and quartered in leaked documents and furtive e-mails, UCLA again found themselves defending hate-speak to the detriment of Jewish students. Lisa Marie Mendez is a UCLA Student who was employed at the UCLA Medical Center. Lisa’s connection to Jews and cultural empathy was on full display in a Facebook rant. In response to a pro-Israel post by Jewish actress Mayim Bialick, Lisa went off on a racial rant that focused on ‘fucking Zionist pigs’. Not satisfied to leave it at that, Lisa left the following literary gem: Fucking Jews. GTFOH with all your Zionist bullshit. Crazy ass fucking troglodyte albino monsters of cultural destruction. Fucking Jews. GTFOH with your whiny bullshit. Give the Palestinians back their land, go back to Poland or whatever freezer-state you’re from, and realize that faith does not constitute race. In an effort to sound as lame as they could, UCLA issued a response as if this was a First Amendment issue. It was more than that. Mendez crossed a line that defined the level of care that a Jewish patient of UCLA Health could expect. It doesn’t matter if Mendez was an anesthesiologist or if she sold fish sticks in the cafeteria – her white hot anti-Semitism was most certainly expressed at work, and probably to friends who shared her ignorance. Regardless of her position, she created a hostile environment for Jewish patients and doctors. What was Chancellor Block’s response? There was none. “He’s a wimp” complained a leading Jewish religious figure in Los Angeles. The official response came from Josh Samuels, who was Mendez’s boss. In a mincing, apologetic attempt to support his employee, Samuels offered this: “We must also keep in mind that the University cannot control the activities of individuals in their personal lives when not acting on behalf of the University, and that the First Amendment protects individual’s private speech, however reprehensible the University finds it.” Dr. John Mazziotta, the Vice Chancellor of UCLA Health Sciences and CEO of UCLA Health System offered little more. “The post absolutely does not represent the values of our health system or the believes of our campus community. It displays insensitivity and ignorance of the history and racial diversity of the Jewish people and a lack of empathy.” That’s it? That’s his response to a racist rant that left no expletive unturned? Would the response be the same had the author taken down African Americans, or Asians, or Muslims? The double standard in practice at UCLA endangers every Jewish student. What do students think? I asked a Jewish student if he ever felt ‘challenged’ by BDS: “In one word, YES.” The perception is that if you speak out against BDS, the backlash can threaten your education. “They go after individuals to scare them from being vocal.” Another student said ‘We feel attacked, constantly.” And what of Milan Chatterjee? Every day seems to bring more swipes at his personality and more attempts to destroy his reputation. “I’m very disappointed that Chancellor Block and his administration did not provide me with any of the necessary support or guidance to overcome the harassment and bullying by BDS,” Milan said in a conversation that I had with him. Milan has found support, and ironically it comes from one of the groups that he was neutral towards in the town hall event. The Jewish and Pro-Israel community has reached out to Milan. As BDS attempts to destroy Milan, groups like the American Jewish Committee, Stand With Us, The American Center for Law and Justice, The Lawfare Project, the Zionist Organization of America, and the multi-cultural Israel Christian Nexus have embraced Milan and welcomed him with open arms into their communities. As UCLA turns away from their responsibility to provide a safe environment for Jewish students, they continue to punish Milan. Chancellor Block’s silence is deafening. The potential for harm to Jewish students increases every day that this hate speech is not addressed. Milan Chatterjee is a brave man who took a stand against taking a stand. He will be paying for that decision for a long time. If there is anything positive in this charade, it is the realization that anti-Semitism is a virulent form of hate that masquerades as social reform. BDS is anti-Semitism. Milan Chatterjee needn’t be Jewish to experience anti-Semitism. Original Article
Lea Speyer Algemeiner September 1, 2016 The capitulation of the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) to the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement has set a “dangerous precedent” for the further harassment of Jewish and pro-Israel students, a former UCLA student leader, who recently left the university due to BDS pressure, told The Algemeiner on Thursday. Milan Chatterjee, a third-year law student and now former UCLA Graduate Student Association (GSA) president, spoke with The Algemeiner a day after his public announcement that he was leaving the school due to the “hostile and unsafe campus climate” fostered by BDS groups and the UCLA administration. “It is very scary how BDS activists will go to any measure to destroy people’s reputations and careers,” Chatterjee told The Algemeiner. “UCLA should be ashamed of themselves for refusing to take action, and rather joining in the harassment I endured by BDS groups. I am not the first student nor will I be the last.” In a sharply worded letter addressed to UCLA Chancellor Gene Block last week, Chatterjee said that he had “no choice” but to leave the school due to the relentless attacks, bullying and harassment he suffered at the hands of BDS groups and activists. Chatterjee wrote: UCLA is one of the finest universities in the world. It is unfortunate, indeed, that your administration has not only allowed BDS organizations and student activists to freely engage in intimidation of students who do not support the BDS agenda, but has decided to affirmatively engage in discriminatory practices of its own against those same students. Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, the fact is that the UCLA campus has become a hostile and unsafe environment for students, Jewish students and non-Jewish, who choose not to support the BDS movement, let alone support the state of Israel. As reported by The Algemeiner, Chatterjee — who is Indian-American and a Hindu — became the focus of a four-month investigation by the UCLA Discrimination Prevention Office (DPO) for distributing GSA funds for a November 2015 diversity event based on a stipulation that the event not officially associate itself with the BDS movement and the school’s Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) chapter. The stipulation, Chatterjee told The Algemeiner, was accepted by all parties involved, including “five administrators who knew before the event and never expressed any problems.” “Everyone knew about the stipulation from the very beginning,” he said. “I even received explicit approval. Yet, when SJP made it political, they scapegoated me.” Over the course of the investigation, BDS groups began a “deadly, malicious campaign against me,” Chatterjee said. “They wrote defamatory articles in the media, circulated petitions and tried to remove me as GSA president three times. A lot of venom was spread around campus against me.” The DPO investigation concluded that Chatterjee — who said he was maintaining the GSA’s unanimous “zero engagement/endorsement policy” towards supporting any BDS-related organizations — “violated University policy requiring viewpoint neutrality,” and accused him of concocting the “zero engagement” policy. The result of the investigation, Chatterjee told The Algemeiner, was the “straw that broke the camel’s back.” “The report is a clear cover-up by the UCLA administration for its own mishandling of the situation. They chose to scapegoat me and it is disappointing that a university would act this way,” he said, adding that he felt “very threatened personally and professionally.” Making matters worse, the DPO report, which included a confidentiality and retaliation clause, was “very openly leaked by SJP on the internet,” Chatterjee said, attracting even greater harassment from BDS activists. “I filed a complaint with the office of Vice Chancellor for Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Jerry Kang, who took zero action and refused to investigate,” he told The Algemeiner. “Then, astonishingly, Kang went and wrote on his blog about the report and gave people access to it by redirecting readers. This is very disturbing behavior and shows a double standard at play at UCLA. If SJP files a complaint, they will bend over backwards. If it’s anyone else, they don’t care.” Chatterjee — who will be completing his final year of law school at New York University (NYU) — said the entire ordeal has been “very stressful” and has taken a “huge toll” on himself and his family. “I am leaving many close friends behind at UCLA and the LA community, which I formed a very strong connection with, particularly the Jewish community, which has been very supportive,” he said. “I am having to pay a lot of more money to go to NYU Law School and am essentially being forced to pay a financial premium for my education. My parents have been very supportive because they’ve come to realize that UCLA has become an unsafe place. Thankfully, they are willing to help me in taking on a huge financial expense.” While Chatterjee said he is in the process of pursuing an internal discrimination grievance against UCLA, “it has crossed my mind to go to court,” he told The Algemeiner. “I called on UCLA to rescind or, at the very least, amend the report. UCLA has been absolutely non-responsive and if they keep this up, I will have no choice but to consider my legal options. It is very sad that a student needs to use legal options to work with their university.” While Chatterjee said he was shocked to become a target of the BDS movement, the entire ordeal has “made me sympathize with the Jewish student body and how unsafe the campus climate is towards them, especially at UCLA,” he stated. “The Jewish students I know are some of the nicest, hardworking, most cultured people I’ve ever met,” he said. “They come to college to celebrate their heritage and are instead targeted because of their faith and culture, which is ridiculous. The fact that the UCLA administration joins them [the instigators] is even more shameful.” Chatterjee also expressed his thanks to the Jewish community for the support he has received. “I am absolutely grateful for the support from groups like the American Jewish Committee, the Louis D. Brandeis Center, the Israeli-American Council and the Simon Wiesenthal Center,” he said, adding that over the past 24 hours, since news broke of his exit from UCLA, he has received a “stream of messages from people around the world expressing their solidarity.” UCLA did not immediately respond to The Algemeiner’s request for comment on Chatterjee’s decision. Original Article
On Wednesday, August 31, Professor Alexander Tsesis will speak to the LDB law student chapter at Emory University Law School on the topic of, “Social Media and Terrorist Incitement.” Tsesis, a professor at the Loyola University Chicago School of Law, is an expert in Constitutional Law, the First Amendment, Civil Procedure, as well as civil rights issues and constitutional interpretation. He is a widely published author whose articles have appeared in a variety of law reviews across the country. as well as a frequent presenter to law school faculties nationwide on issues involving constitutional law, free speech, and civil rights.
Download PDF Washington, D.C. On Friday, the UC Irvine Office of Student Conduct announced that it had concluded a three-month investigation into an aggressive and disruptive incident on the UCI campus last May. The incident involved an anti-Israel mob that disrupted a small event held by a Jewish student group on campus. The angry mob of about 50 students blocked the entrances and exits while loudly chanting angry, anti-Israel, anti-police, and pro-Palestinian sentiments that promoted violence, anti-Semitism, and hate. One Jewish student, Eliana Kopley, attempted to get away, but was chased and hounded by members of the angry mob, forcing her to hide in a kitchen while a UCI staff member protected her. The Louis D. Brandeis Center (“LDB”), a national civil rights legal advocacy organization best known for its work fighting anti-Semitism in higher education, represents Ms. Kopley. According to yesterday’s announcement, the student group Students for Justice in Palestine (“SJP”) is responsible for violation of the UCI Code of Conduct’s provision prohibiting “Obstruction or disruption of teaching, research, administration, disciplinary procedures, or other University activities.” As for sanctions, SJP was issued a written warning, effective immediately and continuing until March 29, 2017. SJP must also host an educational program by November 18, 2016. LDB President and General Counsel Kenneth L. Marcus expressed his concerns about the university’s announcement, stating, “I am disappointed in the outcome, which fails to hold SJP accountable for the harassment and physical intimidation of Eliana Kopley – or to even acknowledge that anything happened to her that night.” Indeed, the statement yesterday makes no reference to any student being chased, followed, or needing to hide from attendees of SJP’s “protest” gone wrong. Marcus further stated, “I do believe that it is a step forward for UC Irvine to finally acknowledge that SJP’s disruptive behavior violates university polices. We are pleased that the university has implicitly rejected the spurious claims by the National Lawyers’ Guild and Palestine Legal that such disruptive behavior is protected by the First Amendment, when it clearly is a violation of the freedom of speech. We are also glad that the Office of Student Affairs has — at a minimum — issued SJP a warning, and we hope that administrators will closely monitor SJP’s activities over the coming year and respond quickly to any further crimes, infractions or violations that they commit.” However, Marcus described the weak sanctions as “a slap on the wrist for SJP, and a slap in the face to the Jewish community.” Ms. Kopley agreed, stating, “I feel like their punishment is not enough to keep the pro-Israel and Jewish students on campus safe. It isn’t guaranteeing our safety. What happened that night does not warrant just a ‘warning’. There should be a real, visible action by the school to ensure safety to all students on our campus.” Jennie Gross, Senior Staff Attorney at LDB, considered the effect that the weak sanctions might have on future incidents, “This will not be the last protest to occur at UCI. Nor should it be. Peaceful protest is an important element of public discourse, even when the topic is controversial – perhaps particularly when the topic is controversial. But the group that organized this protest and their advocates would have us believe that the First Amendment provides a free pass for any and all conduct by protesters. That message is not only false, as any first-year law student can tell you. That message is dangerous. The school acknowledged that the First Amendment does not protect this type of conduct, but by failing to appropriately punish the offenders, UCI failed to counter that dangerous message.” Irvine officials have not disclosed whether university investigators have identified the persons who chased Ms. Kopley, although LDB attorneys believe it would have been relatively easy for them to do so using basic investigative techniques. The university would not even confirm that they attempted to identify the offenders, although Ms. Kopley can partially describe articles of clothing that they wore, and believes she would be able to recognize them in an unbiased line-up or photo array. Marcus also stated, “Vice Chancellor Parham’s statement also fails to mention the obviously anti-Semitic nature of the violations here. One would never know from his statement that hate was at work in this angry mob.” Despite the claims of SJP, NLG, and Palestine Legal, political activism played no role in the decision of a few to harass Ms. Kopley. Eliana had gone to see a movie with other Jewish students. She was interested in a documentary about Israelis her own age, and what it their lives are like when they are required to serve in the IDF. The only thing the harassers knew about her was that she identified with the Jewish students on the other side of the door. That is anti-Semitism – not anti-Israel political action. Marcus continued, “Indeed, it appears that Dr. Parham is either unaware of the gravity of the facts in this case or unwilling to publicly disclose them. The signal this sends to the Jewish community and to all minorities on campus is one of indifference. That signal will be heard by victims of intimidation, harassment, and bias for some time to come.” Finally, LDB attorneys noted that the Regents of the University of California sent UC administrators a very strong signal just a few months ago that they need to respond more firmly to anti-Semitism and intolerance. Marcus commented, “It now seems clear that the Regents’ message still hasn’t been fully heard at UCI. The Regents should be appalled at how little their statements are being followed by Irvine’s Office of Student Affairs. Irvine needs to demonstrate that they have heard the Regents’ statement and that they are prepared to reform their process. At this point, it appears that Irvine’s Office of Student Affairs is still behaving in the same old way that got the Regents so incensed in the first place.”
Lea Speyer Algemeiner August 22, 2016 The heads of major campus and legal groups told The Algemeiner on Monday that they are outraged by the mild response of the University of California, Irvine (UCI) to the violent behavior of an anti-Israel student organization on its campus. Referring to a letter from UCI’s vice chancellor of student affairs criticizing Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) for “disrupting” a pro-Israel event, Ilan Sinelnikov, founder and president of Students Supporting Israel (SSI) — whose UCI chapter was the target of SJP’s violent protest in May — said, “UCI has turned its back on the Jewish and pro-Israel campus community.” He continued, “On the one hand, the school writes that SJP broke the student code of conduct. On the other hand, the punishment is no more than a written warning and that SJP needs to host an ‘educational event.’ SSI and many other pro-Israel groups that worked with the university during its investigation believed the school would come up with just and fair results.” Roz Rothstein, CEO and co-founder of Israel advocacy group StandWithUs, expressed “disappointment that SJP is not facing more serious consequences” from the university. “This is not the first time anti-Israel extremists have attempted to shut down free speech at UCI, and we hope to see a no tolerance policy for this kind of behavior this year,” she told The Algemeiner. “UCI was the first university to publicly commit itself to implementing the UC Regents Principles Against Intolerance, and we hope to see greater accountability for racism and anti-Israel extremism going forward.” Aron Hier, director of Campus Outreach for the human rights organization the Simon Wiesenthal Center, called UCI’s written reprimand to SJP “a completely feckless ‘punishment.’” “The university’s message here is clear,” he told The Algemeiner. “Pro-Israel free speech deserves less First Amendment protection than other forms of free speech.” Tammi Rossman-Benjamin, the head of campus watchdog group the AMCHA Initiative, questioned whether UCI’s punishment of SJP “is consistent with disciplinary measures that would be handed down to members of any registered student organization that had engaged in similar acts of harassment, intimidation, bullying and suppression of speech directed against any other racial, ethnic or gender group on campus.” Antisemitism expert Kenneth L. Marcus — president and general counsel of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law — told The Algemeiner his organization is “glad that UCI has finally acknowledged that SJP’s disruptive behavior violates University of California policies.” Nevertheless, he said, the letter of warning that was the upshot of the investigation is “an insult to the victims of SJP’s activities and to the entire Jewish community.” UCI administrators “need to do more than…apply slaps on the wrist,” he said. In a joint statement provided to The Algemeiner by Hillel International, Orange County Hillel and the Rose Project of Jewish Federation and Family Services, the groups said that while acknowledging SJP’s violation is “a step in the right direction…further action is needed to ensure Jewish students are protected and afforded the right to free speech and assembly, and to make clear that efforts to thwart those freedoms by groups or individuals will not be tolerated.” As reported by The Algemeiner, UCI found SJP in violation of university policy, which included “obstruction or disruption of teaching, research, administration, disciplinary procedures, or other University activities.” SJP was issued a written warning and ordered to host an educational program by November 2016. UCI’s decision was reached following a drawn out investigation after, as reported by The Algemeiner, SJP and other anti-Israel student groups at UCI violently demonstrated against a SSI event featuring IDF veterans and the screening of a movie about the Israeli army. According to reports at the time, the protesters blockaded attendees and shouted slogans like, “Long live the intifada,” “f*** the police,” “displacing people since ’48 / there’s nothing here to celebrate,” and “all white people need to die.” One female student was so harassed and chased that she was forced to take refuge inside a nearby building. Police were eventually called in, but the protest was allowed to continue. In July, as reported by The Algemeiner, UCI’s chapter of SJP came under investigation by the Orange County District Attorney’s office to determine whether the protesters’ behavior was criminal. The DA’s office concluded that SJP did not engage in any criminal wrongdoing. The results of UCI’s investigation come on the heels of an AMCHA report, which found a dramatic rise in attacks against Jewish and pro-Israel students across more than 100 US college campuses between January and June 2016. According to the report’s findings, antisemitic incidents on college campuses increased by 45 percent as compared with the same time period in 2015. Original Article
Lea Speyer Algemeiner August 16, 2016 Jewish groups in Tennessee expressed “anger, disappointment and worry” over the “tepid response” of university administrators to antisemitism and racism on the Knoxville campus, The Algemeiner has learned. The Jewish Federations of Nashville and Middle Tennessee, Memphis, Chattanooga and Knoxville on Tuesday urged the chancellor of the University of Tennessee Knoxville (UTK), Jimmy Cheek, to stop downplaying evidence — exposed recently by The Algemeiner — of rampant Jew-hatred and anti-Zionism at his institution. In a letter obtained by The Algemeiner, the heads of the four Tennessee Jewish Federations said they were reaching out to “share our collective concerns and ongoing concerns about the antisemitic and anti-Israel social media postings by current and former students of UTK,” adding that such rhetoric should not be cloaked or excused by the school under the rubric of free speech. The letter reads in part: All four of our Jewish communities have strong ties to the University and many of our constituents have been in contact with us to express their anger, disappointment and worry about these incidents and UTK’s official response. We are deeply troubled by recent events and we insist the University act swiftly and forcefully to condemn this hateful, antisemitic language in clear and unambiguous terms. Their outrage was sparked after a report earlier this month by The Algemeiner revealed what a covert campus watchdog group Canary Mission described as a “cesspool” of racism and antisemitism at UTK, created by a ring of students associated with Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and the Muslim Student Association (MSA). The Jewish Federations of Tennessee are the latest voices in a chorus imploring UTK to condemn antisemitism and racism on its campus. On Friday, the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law (LDB) called on UTK’s chancellor not only to “’condone the statements’ expressed by the UTK statements, [but] we believe you must go a step further and condemn the statements as antisemitic.” LDB wrote in a letter: While we do not dispute the right of students to express themselves, even outrageously or hurtfully, these messages revive bigoted antisemitic and discriminatory tropes, and we are concerned that these types of statements, and similar statements, could create an environment that Israeli students, Jewish students, LGBTQ students, and other students, will reasonably perceive to be hostile. In a follow-up to The Algemeiner’s original report and UTK’s subsequent response, Canary Mission – a secret organization that monitors anti-American, anti-Israel and antisemitic activities on college campuses – released an expanded dossier on the racist activities of UTK students associated with SJP and the MSA. According to the group, 14 current students, eight former students and one individual campus outsider are responsible for a total of “97 highly racist, bigoted, antisemitic or threatening posts” on social media.” The information, the group said, is just “the tip of the iceberg.” The 97 posts span a wide range of offenses, Canary Mission said, including inciting and threatening violence, antisemitism, racism against black and white people, homophobia, praise for Nazi leader Adolf Hitler and endorsing terrorism and terrorist organizations. Original Article
Download PDF Washington, D.C: Yesterday, the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law (LDB) urged the University of Tennessee – Knoxville (UTK) Chancellor Jimmy Cheek to condemn recently reported anti-Semitic social media postings by current and former University of Tennessee – Knoxville students, demonstrating a long-standing problem on the UTK campus. The Brandeis Center is a national civil rights legal advocacy organization, best known for its work fighting anti-Semitism in higher education. LDB President Kenneth L. Marcus commented, “The University of Tennessee needs to take these incidents seriously, to investigate fully, and to respond with greater firmness and resolve than we have seen so far. University administrators would also be wise to view this situation as an opportunity to raise public awareness within their community about the persistence of anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry.” Sources have reported that nearly 100 anti-Semitic, racist, bigoted, or threatening posts were found on the social media accounts of current UTK students and recent graduates. The postings include a mixture of inciting violence against Jews and Israelis; displaying anti-Semitic, homophobic, and racist sentiment; and praising Hitler, endorsing terrorist organizations, and endorsing terror. The Twitter messages, as reported by the Algemeiner, included statements such as, “Hitler had alot [sic] of great ideas. We need a guy like that in the White House”; “…I already hate you. You dirty filthy Jew. All your people do is f***ed s*** up. Wish hitler [sic] was still around to show you guys”; and “’@PalAnonymous Today marks the 26th anniversary of the First #Intifada #Palestine.’ About time for another one…” At a time when anti-Semitism, and anti-Semitism masked as anti-Zionism, is on the rise throughout our country, university leaders must be forceful in condemning such anti-Semitism and bigotry. The full text of LDB’s letter can be found below: August 11, 2016 Jimmy G. Cheek Chancellor University of Tennessee – Knoxville 527 Andy Holt Tower Knoxville, TN 37996-0184 VIA E-MAIL (chancellor@utk.edu) Dear Chancellor Cheek: We write on behalf of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law (LDB), a national public interest advocacy organization established to advance the civil and human rights of the Jewish people and promote justice for all. We fight campus anti-Semitism through legal advocacy, and often work with university administrators nationwide to offer best practices on how to combat and prevent anti-Semitism on their campuses. We are concerned about the recently reported anti-Semitic social media postings by current and former University of Tennessee – Knoxville students, demonstrating a long-standing problem on your campus. This past December, outgoing U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan reminded us that “we must be vigilant about maintaining safe, respectful, and nondiscriminatory learning environments for all students in our schools and institutions,” noting that Jewish students are among those who are “especially at risk of harassment,” and urging educators like yourself to “anticipate the potential challenges” that they may face (see attached Sec. Arne Duncan, Dear Colleague Letter (Dec. 31, 2015)). Today, we urge you to promptly and properly address this challenge at UTK, in an effective manner, as other universities are doing nationwide. While we are aware that your administration issued a statement saying that you do not “condone the statements” expressed by the UTK statements, we believe you must go a step further, and condemn the statements as anti-Semitic. The tweets which were revealed last week, and even more tweets which were revealed early this morning, include a mixture of inciting violence against Jews and Israelis; displaying anti-Semitic, homophobic, and racist sentiment; and praising Hitler, endorsing terrorist organizations, and endorsing terror. The Twitter messages included statements such as, “Hitler had alot [sic] of great ideas. We need a guy like that in the White House”; “…I already hate you. You dirty filthy Jew. All your people do is f***ed s*** up. Wish hitler [sic] was still around to show you guys”; and “’@PalAnonymous Today marks the 26th anniversary of the First #Intifada #Palestine.’ About time for another one…” Sources are reporting as many 97 bigoted, anti-Semitic or threatening posts on social media. While we do not dispute the right of students to express themselves, even outrageously or hurtfully, these messages revive bigoted anti-Semitic and discriminatory tropes, and we are concerned that these types of statements, and similar statements, could create an environment that Israeli students, Jewish students, LGBTQ students, and other students, will reasonably perceive to be hostile. We urge your administration to exercise its obligation to address the harms that arise when speakers misuse that right in ways that poison the environment and sends a message of exclusion and hate. Allowing such statements by UTK students, without strong condemnation from the University administration, will signal that UTK takes a disparaging view of Jewish students and students of Israeli national origin. Such messages are incompatible with UTK’s values – and federal civil rights law. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in programs that receive federal funds. The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) has announced that Title VI applies to discrimination on the basis of Jewish ethnicity or ancestry in guidance issued in 2004 (see attached Kenneth L. Marcus, Dear Colleague Letter (Sep. 13, 2004)). In 2010, OCR clarified that unlawful harassment need not include intent to harm, be directed at a specific target, or involve repeated incidents (see attached Russlynn Ali, Dear Colleague Letter (Oct. 26, 2010)). Speech that invokes anti-Semitic stereotypes against Israelis and Jews, such as the social media messages at issue, can create a hostile environment for Israeli and Jewish students on campus in violation of Title VI. Furthermore, according to UTK’s Student Handbook, “The University of Tennessee is committed to maintaining a safe environment grounded in civility and respect for all members within the campus community.” (See Incidents of Bias, p. 54, http://hilltopics.utk.edu/files/Hilltopics%202015-16.pdf). A “bias incident” is defined as “[a]ny act of bigotry, harassment, intimidation, coercion, or damage to property by known or unknown perpetrators that occurs on UT’s campus or within an area that impacts the UT community and that one could reasonably conclude is directed at a member or a group of the UT community because of that individual’s or group’s actual or perceived. . . . national origin, race, religion,. . . or any combination of these or related factors.” While we respect the right of all members of the university community to express their opinions, such hateful and bigoted speech should be strongly condemned by UTK’s administration. We hope that you will seize this as a teachable moment to educate your students about the evils of anti-Semitism and racism and the need to take a firm stand against them, by doing the following: • Address the harm done to the community by issuing a stronger university statement condemning anti-Semitism, along the lines that we discuss in “Best Practice Guide for Combating Anti-Semitism and Anti-Israelism” (see attached), firmly, promptly, and with specificity. As we describe in our Best Practice Guide, it is necessary for university leaders to exercise moral leadership by expressing their views of difficult subjects. A good example of a strong leadership statement was seen at UCLA this past semester, when Vice Chancellor Janina Montero issued a statement to her university community in response to anti-Semitic Facebook postings by a UCLA student, stating in part that the “hurtful and offensive comments displayed ignorance of the history and racial diversity of the Jewish people, insensitivity and a disappointing lack of empathy. Bigotry against the Jewish people or other groups is abhorrent and does not represent the values of UCLA or the beliefs of our community.” • Investigate the situation thoroughly and take responsive actions consistent with your policies. • Reach out to targeted student groups, local community leaders, and experts, including UTK Hillel, and offer support and resources as needed. • Provide extracurricular programming to raise community awareness about global and campus anti-Semitism, making use of valuable UTK resources, such as, by way of example, a public showing by the Office of the Chancellor of UTK Honorary Artist in Residence Gloria Greenfield’s path-breaking film on Unmasked Judeophobia. • Provide training to students and faculty like on the nature of and different manifestations of anti-Semitism, and the appropriate means of addressing it. • Adopt a uniform definition of anti-Semitism, such as the definition used by the U.S. State Department (see attached) or the recently adopted University of California Regents’ Statement of Principles Against Intolerance, in order to avoid and properly identify anti-Semitism should it arise in the future. • Create more academic, curricular, and other programming on anti-Semitism. In accordance with the directive of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, we ask you to exercise your “ethical moral obligation to act as leaders, and promote the values of respect, tolerance, and inclusiveness on campus,” and to educate your students and faculty “that with freedom of speech comes responsibility.” We urge you to take these actions to remedy the current situation, and lower the likelihood that anti-Semitic discrimination will recur. We are available to share our expertise on these issues, and further discuss our recommendations with you, and can be reached by e-mail at klmarcus@brandeiscenter.com or by phone at (202) 559-9296. Thank you in advance for your serious consideration of this matter. Sincerely, The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law /s/ Kenneth L. Marcus Kenneth L. Marcus President & General Counsel klmarcus@brandeiscenter.com Jennie Gross, Senior Staff Attorney The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law jenniegross@brandeiscenter.com Aviva Vogelstein, Staff Attorney The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law avogelst@brandeiscenter.com CC: Jacob R. Rudolph Vice Chancellor for Communications, UTK jrudolph@utk.edu Dr. Melissa Shivers Dean of Students, UTK mshivers@utk.edu Dr. Theresa M. Lee Dean of the College of Arts & Sciences, UTK tlee35@utk.edu Deborah Oleshansky Hillel Director, UTK doleshansky@jewishknoxville.org Dr. Greg Kaplan Hillel Faculty Advisor, UTK gkaplan@utk.edu
Emma Dillon Brandeis Blog August 5, 2016 On August 3, Hasbara Fellowships Canada, a pro-Israel campus activism organization and the country’s largest grassroots campus advocacy organization, announced that a complaint had been filed with the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal against both the Student Association and the Faculty Association of the University of Ontario Institute of Technology (UOIT) and Durham College. Hasbara filed the complaint after being denied an opportunity to participate in a campus Social Justice Week event, alleging this wan as a discriminatory decision. It is the first time a Jewish student group has filed such a complaint. In early March, the Students Association of UOIT & Durham College hosted a “Social Justice Week.” Hasbara’s work includes countering “Israel Apartheid Week” and the anti-Israel BDS movement, and had asked to table its Israel Peace Week materials during the campus’s Social Justice Week. According to a press release from Hasbara, when Robert Walker, National Director of Hasbara Fellowships Canada, responded to an open invitation for community groups to participate, he was denied because Hasbara seems “closely tied to the state of Israel.” In an email sent to Walker on March 3, 2016, Denise Martins, executive assistant of UOIT’s Faculty Association, wrote that since the student association had passed an anti-Israel BDS motion at its previous annual meeting, it would be “against the motion to provide any type of resources” to the organization. While Hasbara was banned from participating, several anti-Israel events headlined the Week, including a 5-hour “Oshawa Against Israeli Apartheid” event and an art show organized by the anti-Israel group Students for Justice for Palestine, which “illustrated what is being done to combat the illegal occupation of Palestine.” Walker called the decision to ban the group from participating “outright, explicit, unapologetic discrimination” based on ethnic identity. In a statement to CIJnews, Walker elaborated on his decision to file the complaint, saying: “This is a Jewish issue, not an Israel issue or a political issue. This is about banning a Canadian Jewish organization because of its ties to Israel.” In its press release, Hasbara demanded that the Student and Faculty Association publicly apologize, disseminate their apology to campus, local & national media and their respective websites, invite the group to campus for a public presentation, and repeal any discriminatory policies in place. This incident is just the most recent example of Jewish organizations being penalized due to discriminatory BDS measures. However, it is promising that Hasbara has decided to file a complaint against the Student Association and Faculty Association and call attention to their discriminatory policies. Like the two recent lawsuits against the ASA, including the Brandeis Center’s suit against the ASA for its unlawful boycott of Israel, this demonstrates the significant legal options aside from legislation that can be utilized to combat the discriminatory policies of BDS motions.
Download PDF WASHINGTON, D.C. – Yesterday, The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law (LDB) submitted a statement to several federal agencies as part of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) Civil Society Consultation process, urging officials to more effectively address campus anti-Semitism. This is a key component of LDB’s participation in the upcoming series of Civil Society Consultations, which are hosted on behalf of various federal agencies to ensure the implementation of recommendations from the United States’ 2015 Universal Periodic Review before the United Nations Human Rights Council. Anne Crowell, an LDB Civil Rights Legal Fellow, is scheduled to speak at three of the consultations. LDB, a national civil rights organization, is best known for its work fighting anti-Semitism in higher education. The UPR, created in 2006 by the U.N. General Assembly, is a process in which the human rights records of all U.N. Member States are examined and reviewed. This process provides an opportunity for all Member States to declare what actions they have taken to improve the human rights situations in their respective countries, as well as to overcome challenges to human rights. During the process, the country under review receives recommendations to improve its human rights record from other U.N. Member States. After receiving recommendations through the UPR process, the United States is now calling on major civil society organizations like the Brandeis Center to provide advice to the federal government on how to implement key recommendations. LDB President Kenneth L. Marcus commented, “It is important that federal agencies including the State Department, Justice Department, and Department of Homeland Security are listening to the feedback that civil society organizations like the Brandeis Center have to offer when it comes to implementing the UPR recommendations. We are pleased to have been invited to participate in this process and delighted that Civil Rights Legal Fellow Anne Crowell will lead LDB’s engagement with this process and draw the government’s attention to the ongoing problem of campus anti-Semitism.” In addition to yesterday’s statement, LDB also issued a statement last week for another upcoming Civil Society Consultation on the topic of religious accommodations for prisoners. Although LDB’s primary focus is campus anti-Semitism, Mr. Marcus has previously testified on the subject of religious discrimination against Muslim prisoners. LDB’s full statement on campus anti-Semitism can be found below. Statement in Advance of the UPR Consultation on August 4, 2016 The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law July 28, 2016 The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law (LDB) is an independent, unaffiliated, nonprofit corporation established to advance the civil and human rights of the Jewish people and promote justice for all. LDB is principally focused on fighting anti-Semitism on American college and university campuses. Our work includes combating the spread of hate crimes motivated by anti-Semitism and other forms of religious or ethnic discrimination, especially on the college campus. In the upcoming UPR Consultation on civil rights and discrimination related to law enforcement, we would like to bring particular attention to the issue of religiously and ethnically motivated discrimination and hate crimes. A 2014 report by LDB and Trinity College found that 54% of Jewish students had experienced or witnessed anti-Semitism on their college campuses during the last academic year. This overall prevalence of campus anti-Semitism puts Jewish students at risk of discrimination and anti-Semitic hate crimes. We believe that, in addition to action at the university level, the federal government has a vital role to play in preventing discrimination and hate crimes and ensuring accountability when they do occur. To this end, we have encouraged the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights to take a more active role in investigating and protecting against anti-Semitic and other religiously and ethnically motivated hate crimes on campus. In addition, we have called for the Department of Education, along with other federal agencies, to adopt the State Department’s definition of anti-Semitism, which clarifies when anti-Israelism and anti-Zionism cross the line into anti-Semitism. UPR Recommendation 131 calls for the United States to “Continue to take strong actions, including appropriate judicial measures, to counter all forms of discrimination and hate crimes, in particular those based on religion and ethnicity.” Additional UPR recommendations call for similar action. We believe that continuing to take strong action is essential to the federal government’s approach in combating anti-Semitic discrimination and hate crimes. We look forward to discussing this important issue in greater detail at the consultation.