LDB Announces Inaugural National Law Student Conference

 

The Brandeis Center announced today that it will conduct an inaugural national law student leadership training conference in Los Angeles, California on January 2-3, 2014. This inaugural national law student conference coincides with the launch of the Center’s new Law Student Chapter Initiative.  The conference will draw law student leaders together to exchange lessons on advancing civil and human rights.  Key topics will include campus anti-Semitism, international law, human rights, and freedom of speech.  Attorney mentors will also discuss career paths for law students interested in advancing the civil and human rights and combating campus anti-Semitism.

This announcement follows shortly upon the establishment of the first Brandeis Center law school chapters.  This Fall, law student leaders have formed Brandeis Center chapters at UCLA School of Law  and the American University’s Washington College of Law.  Law students are also working to form Brandeis Center chapters at other law schools nationwide.

Addressing BDS at Fordham School of Law

IMG_5542

On November 20, 2013, the Louis Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, presented a mini-conference on the subjects of BDS, Israel, and Academic Freedom. The Fordham Law School Jewish Students Association hosted the event. The event was also co-hosted by the Louis Brandeis Center, the American Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists, and the Lawfare Project.

Fordham Law School hosted a BDS event in October which happened to coincide with the Jewish holiday of Sukkot. This conference provided a response to those proponents as to why the BDS movement is a sham.

The turnout to this event was fantastic. The event drew young, intelligent law school students intermingling with many professional members of the community. The panelists, Richard Cravatts, President, Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, and Brooke Goldstein, President, Lawfare project, consisted of two profound experts in the fields of Academic Freedom, Human Rights, and Israel. The moderator, Stephen Greenwald, IMG_5548Immediate Past President, American Association of Jewish Lawyers & Jurists, and introductory speaker, Kenneth L. Marcus, Founder, Louis Brandeis Center, are also very respected and prestigious scholars in regard to these topics. Talk about an All-Star lineup. The audience had no idea what they were in store for.

The conference began with Mr. Marcus, who in addition to founding the Louis Brandeis Center, was the former head of the U.S. Commission of Civil Rights, giving introductory remarks. Mr. Marcus shed light on the issues this conference intended to focus on by providing an excellent analogy. Comparing disparate impact with anti-Israelism because hatred isn’t always advertised, but rather it is coded. A new phenomena Jews face today is accurately depicting what anti-Semitism is because it is a grey area. Of course every individual is entitled to criticize a country, but when it comes to dealing with Israel, the only Jewish state in the universe, criticism is a grey area. When an individual carries so much hostility towards a supporter of Israel, but in defending himself, denies being anti-Semitic, one must wonder if this hatred is coded.

Brandeis Center will present a conference at Fordham University Law School

 

The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law is excited to present a Fordham Law School mini-conference on “Israel, BDS, Academic Freedom and the Law,” next week.

 The event will take place next Wednesday, November 20, 2013 from 4:30 to 6:00 pm. It will be held in room 207 at Fordham University School of Law located at 140 W 62nd St, New York, NY 10023. The event will be hosted by the Fordham Law School Jewish Students Association. The conference is co-sponsored by LDB, the American Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists, and The Lawfare Project.

UC Berkeley Student Assesses Campus Anti-Semitism

 

UC Berkeley freshman Elijah Z. Granet has written an interesting account of anti-Semitism that he has faced there and on Facebook.  Granet’s op ed in The Daily Californian relates his own personal experience with anti-Semitism before he even set his foot on UC Berkeley’s ground. He elaborates on the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights’ decision to dismiss claims that the university had failed to protect Jewish students from anti-Semitism at that campus. Granet argues that OCR would never hold Berkeley legally liable, no matter the degree of hostility faced by Jewish students because the issues faced by Jewish students stem from the general student body and not from a single organization. Recent incidents and reports reinforce the idea that Jewish students are not welcome at UC Berkeley.  Despite these hateful events, Granet believes we can still move on. 

Government-Created Anti-Semitism (Part 3)

protocols-02-136x204

 

In a recent article written for The Tablet, Kenneth R. Timmerman said that when he traveled to Gaza, Amman, and Damascus in 1994, he kept asking Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood leaders whether they thought the Jews had a plan to dominate the world. Timmerman recounted the enthusiastic answer one Hamas leader: “Yes, indeed. I have a copy right here.” The man then pulled down from a shelf his copy of an Arabic version of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Says Timmerman: “It was a response I heard again and again.”

Why did that happen? How did a horrible anti-Semitic tract spread though the Muslim world? Once again, this was not a natural development; anti-Semitic hatred was cultivated by the Soviet government’s disinformation experts.

In 1948, when the state of Israel was re-established, Stalin hoped to fill it with Russian Jewish agents. His plan was to use them to transform Israel into a springboard from which he would launch Soviet expansion into the Middle East. In 1948, however, Golda Meir visited Moscow, and she was enthusiastically greeted by huge groups of Russian Jews. Soon, many of these Jews were promoting the idea of a mass emigration to Israel.

ACTA and Academic Freedom

From the beginning, academic freedom has been a core concern of the Louis D. Brandeis Center.  As civil rights lawyers, we are concerned both when academic freedom is violated and also when the doctrine is abused.  For example, we are concerned when anti-Israel activists suppress the ability of pro-Israel speakers to communicate their messages on campus.  We are also concerned when the doctrine of academic freedom is abused in efforts to justify or protect hateful, harassing or biased academic lectures.  LDB President Kenneth L. Marcus has presented some of these issues in the current issue of the Journal of College and University Law.  See his article on “Academic Freedom and Political Indoctrination.”

In order to share with our readers the latest research on academic freedom, we have asked experts at the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA) to appear as our guests on this blog.  ACTA is an independent, non-profit organization committed to academic freedom, excellence, and accountability at America’s colleges and universities.  Under the inspired leadership of Anne Neal,  ACTA has recently issued an important trustees’ guide on “Free to Teach, Free to Learn: Understanding and Maintaining Academic Freedom in the United States.”  This guide compiles critical source materials, case studies and commentaries from leading experts.  We are pleased that two of ACTA’s key staffers, William Gonch and Avi Snyder, will be our guests over the coming weeks.

Israel Lives in a Dangerous Neighborhood, Struggles Against Terrorism and is Engaged in a Battle for Justice at the United Nations

Over the past sixty five years, Israel has faced and continues to face momentous challenges including wars, skirmishes, rocket attacks, terrorist murderous suicide bombings and assaults on her citizens, challenges to her legal status, boycotts, threats, accusations and demonization.

In the summer of 2000, Chairman Yasser Arafat of the Palestine Liberation Organization met at Camp David with President Clinton and Prime Minister Ehud Barak. The Prime Minister offered to the Palestinians an agreement that included the establishment of the Palestinian state based on territorial borders that essentially constituted approximately 96% of the land located west of the Jordan River, known as the West Bank and included the Gaza strip on the Mediterranean.

Much to the chagrin of President Clinton and disappointment of PM Barak, Chairman Arafat did not accept the proposal and left the President and the Prime Minister essentially standing alone at Camp David.

Shortly thereafter, in late September 2000, the Palestinian uprising known as the Second Intifada commenced, bringing with it murderous suicide bombings and other attacks inside Israel, targeting busses, shopping centers, hotels, restaurants, University cafeterias and attacking people in their homes and in the streets.

In response, in order to protect her people, the Israeli government commenced construction of a terrorism prevention security fence, parts of which include concrete barriers akin to what we know as Jersey walls on our expressways, although portions are quite high and obtrusive in order to provide safety to vehicles and persons below.

This terrorism prevention security fence is called by some a “wall”; and was the centerpiece of a request of the UN General Assembly referring to the International Court of Justice a legal question worded as follows:

What are the legal consequences arising from the construction of the wall being built by Israel, the occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, as described in the report of the Secretary-General, considering the rules and principles of international law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, and relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions?

Israeli student wins case against university


Kudos to United Kingdom Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) for their recent victory against anti-Israel bias at Warwick University.  In an interesting new case, UKLFI has achieved a measure of justice for an Israeli student who allegedly faced biased instruction at the English university.  UKLFI’s Jonathan Turner reports on the win:

The Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA), which rules on complaints against British universities, has recommended that Warwick University make a full apology to Israeli student Smadar Bakovic, and pay her £1,000 in compensation.

Ms Bakovic studied for an MA at Warwick, writing her dissertation on the subject of the feelings of identity of Israeli Arabs. The University allocated as supervisor Dr Nicola Pratt, a proponent of boycotts, divestment and sanctions against Israel. Ms Bakovic asked for a different supervisor at the outset but the University refused. Dr Pratt and another member of the department gave a mediocre mark, bringing Ms Bakovic’s average down below the level required for a distinction. They criticised a footnote, in which she referred to the fact that minorities in Arab countries do not have equal citizenship rights, as evidence of her “tendency … to adopt Israeli/Zionist narratives as though they were uncontested facts.”

Mr. Turner reports that Ms. Bakovic first appealed to the University’s complaints committee, which ruled in part in favor of Ms. Bakovic, permitting her to revise her dissertation, ordering the department to remark it, and leading to a 9% improvement in her mark.

Islamic Republic of Iran: The World’s Worst Sponsor of Terror Must Be Stopped

The Islamic Republic of Iran, a designated State Sponsor of Terrorism since 1984, remains the world’s “most active state sponsor of terrorism” according to the U.S. Department of State’s most recent Country Reports on Terrorism. Yet the world continues to turn a blind eye to Iran’s sponsorship of terror, ignoring the suffering of terror victims and the instability sown by terrorist groups acting at the behest of the Islamic Republic of Iran and continuing both threats and attacks throughout the world .

While the United States, Europe and the United Nations have imposed sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran, the world has not stopped Iran’s continued development of its nuclear enrichment program. Sanctions, strong and clear, approved by the United States Congress and the White House, have not done the job. During his tenure as Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad flaunted the international community’s repeated deadlines and there is no indication that Iran’s new President or its Ayatollah leadership will stop their drive to achieve nuclear capability. How can the world accept the prospect of a nuclear Iran, with its inherent real-time dangers, including its threats against Israel and the United States, particularly when viewed through the lens of Iran’s continued sponsorship of terrorist attacks? Indeed, separate from and in addition to the justified and crucially important ongoing focus on Iran’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD) threat, the time is ripe for the US and the world to take concerted steps to stop Iranian-sponsored terrorism.

SYRIA: A STATE SPONSOR OF TERROR NOW KILLING ITS OWN PEOPLE

The Syrian Arab Republic has been listed on the US Department of State List of State Sponsors of Terror since 1979 and continues today as one of the world’s worst sponsors of terror, funding and providing safe haven for Hezbollah, HAMAS and other terrorist organizations.

Support takes the form of money, passage through and across roads and airports, safe houses and providing safe haven for the training of terrorist organizations and their operatives.

Syria’s relationship with the Islamic Republic of Iran has had Syria serving as a conduit for Iranian terrorist sponsorship, as well as the feeding of materials, men, munitions, training and activities in both Syria and Lebanon. Particular focus has been in Lebanon’s Bakaa valley where Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations have trained and operated for decades. Syria hosted the infamous Abu Nidal and his terrorist organization in Damascus and its military-style training camps which operated under Syria’s intelligence and from which the Abu Nidal Organization launched attacks on sites in Europe. Included in these terror assaults were the Rome and Vienna Airport Attacks in 1985 and the EgyptAir Flight 648 Hijacking, also in 1985.