By Kenneth L. Marcus, opinion contributor to The Hill . Days ago, the U.S. Education Department’s civil rights office, OCR, resolved a major anti-Semitism case at Kyrene School District #28 in Arizona. Not only did OCR call out anti-Semitism in this one school district, it used this primary school case to fire a shot across the bow of higher education administrators who have not taken sufficient action to protect their own Jewish students, suggesting important nationwide implications for a civil rights agency that has faced congressional pressure for delays in processing anti-Semitism cases. . The federal investigation concludes that the Kyrene District, which comprises K-8 schools, violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by failing to respond appropriately to harassment of a Jewish student by numerous classmates over a period of several months, both in school and on social media. Other students called the girl a “dirty Jew,” “stinky Jew,” and “filthy Jew.” They said, “I hear you are good at head because Jews are so good at gasping for air” and asked her “How do you get a Jewish girl’s number?” then “lift her sleeve,” referencing the location of tattoos which were used to identify inmates in Nazi concentration camps during the Holocaust. They created a pervasively hostile environment that too sadly resembles the situation students are facing around the country. . This case is a wakeup call. Under the new Resolution Agreement, the school district must, at a minimum, overhaul its policies and procedures. They should also hold the responsible administrators accountable. Other districts should take this as a signal to review their own policies. . It is conspicuous and rare that OCR announces a case with a press release. Having headed the agency during two prior presidential administrations, I can say that such announcements are intended to send a nationwide signal. . Significantly, Assistant Secretary of Education Catharine E. Lhamon, used the release to identify a “distressing rise in reports of anti-Semitism on campuses across the country.” Lhamon is right to highlight the historic rise in anti-Semitism. Last year the Anti-Defamation League recorded the highest number of anti-Semitic incidents that it has ever seen in the United States. Internationally, other organizations found that worldwide anti-Semitism had also reached record levels. And the Louis D. Brandeis Center, the organization I head, found that 65 percent of strongly self-identified Jewish students surveyed have felt unsafe on campus and 50 percent have felt the need to hide their Jewish identity. . Some who read this statement might ask: Why would the Biden administration decry rising anti-Semitism “on campuses” when announcing its resolution of a primary school case, when “campus anti-Semitism” is most often used to describe the pandemic of Jew hatred at colleges and universities? It is unusual enough for the assistant secretary to make any announcement when resolving such a case. But it seems downright strange for her to use that opportunity to address the situation in higher education. . In fact, the timing is significant. When a high-level political appointee reaches down to a primary school case to make a statement about higher education, it is because she has an important statement that she wants to make as soon as possible, and any vehicle will do. . Over the last several months, OCR has quietly opened several cases involving systemic anti-Semitism in colleges, including cases brought by the Brandeis Center against Brooklyn College, the University of Illinois, and the University of Southern California. The issue was brought to a nationwide audience on Sunday night when CNN broadcasted a primetime special featuring an interview with my colleague, Alyza Lewin, and one of our college student clients. . Lhamon’s message is important, and not only to reassure the Jewish community that she gets the problem. It is especially important for its true audience, which is the higher education community. This administration had not publicly signaled its commitment to the rising campus problem, although President Biden and his team have been outspoken about anti-Semitism in other contexts. Through her new statement, Lhamon is effectively telling university leaders that they had better not ignore anti-Semitism on their campuses, because OCR will hold them accountable. . While Lhamon’s message is laudable, it must be followed by action. The Biden White House has announced that the Education Department will begin formal rulemaking later this year based on the prior administration’s executive order on anti-Semitism. It is critical that the Biden administration use this opportunity to enhance federal protections against campus anti-Semitism, just as each of the last three administration, in its own way, moved the ball forward. At a minimum, this should include reinforcing OCR’s use of the internationally agreed-upon IHRA Working Definition of Anti-Semitism, within the constitutional constraints that the prior administration adopted. . In the meantime, Lhamon’s announcement must be heard by university leaders. OCR has sent them a message: they must respond promptly and effectively to campus anti-Semitism. It is a message that they must diligently heed or face federal consequences. . Marcus is founder and chairman of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law and author of The Definition of Anti-Semitism. He served as the 11th Assistant U.S. Secretary of Education for Civil Rights.
Published by Gabe Stutman for J Weekly on 8/26/22 . A strongly worded pro-BDS bylaw adopted by a handful of student groups at Berkeley Law is quietly raising the temperature of the debate surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and prompted the law school dean, a progressive Zionist, to write an email expressing concern to students. . sThe statement, written by Berkeley Law Students for Justice in Palestine, goes beyond the now-familiar calls for boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel, pledges that have become commonplace at U.S. universities (The campus advocacy group Amcha Initiative has tallied 28 such resolutions adopted since 2021.) . Rather, in addition to supporting BDS, groups that adopt the bylaw also pledge not to invite “speakers that have expressed and continued to hold views … in support of Zionism, the apartheid state of Israel, and the occupation of Palestine.” . The rule is in the interest of “protecting the safety and welfare of Palestinian students,” the provision says. As to how it will be enforced, the bylaw leaves that up to each group, though “suggested strategies can include publicly stipulating [each individual] organization’s position of anti-racism and anti-settler colonialism to speakers, ensuring that proposals for speakers emphasize the organization’s desire for equality and inclusion,” or “informing speakers of the event’s goals and mission values.” . Neither Berkeley Law Students for Justice in Palestine (BLSJP) nor any of the bylaw adopters responded to emails from J. seeking comment. Its title is “To include a Palestine-centered and de-colonial approach to holding club activities.” . Although the bylaw was proposed to the more than 100 student and affinity groups at Berkeley Law, only nine had adopted it as of early this week. About 1,100 students are enrolled at the prestigious law school. . Berkeley Law Students for Justice in Palestine nevertheless celebrated what it called a major “BDS victory” in an Instagram post on Sunday, listing the groups that had adopted the measure. Among them were the Berkeley Law Muslim Student Association, the Queer Caucus, Law Students of African Descent and Women of Berkeley Law. . View this post on Instagram A post shared by Berkeley LSJP (@berkeleylawforpalestine) . It’s not the first time BLSJP has made waves protesting Israel at Berkeley. . In April 2021, the group condemned the law school’s acceptance of a major gift from a pro-Israel philanthropy and demanded the school return the money. The Helen Diller Foundation, which donates to a wide range of causes, including Israel, drew controversy years ago for donating to the right-wing Canary Mission; BLSJP said the foundation had given to causes that spread “Islamophobic hatred.” . The foundation’s $10 million gift to a center for Jewish and Israel studies housed at the law school was announced in February 2021 and with it, the law school changed the center’s name to the Helen Diller Institute for Jewish Law and Israel Studies. Berkeley Law Dean Erwin Chemerinsky defended the decision at the time, saying the university valued its partnership with the Dillers and the gift “aligned[ed] with the values of the Law School.” . The passage of the new bylaw comes as American universities continue to face lawsuits and administrative complaints — primarily filed by pro-bono, pro-Israel, Jewish civil rights organizations — alleging the exclusion of and mistreatment of Jewish students who profess support for Israel. . In 2019 San Francisco State University settled a lawsuit brought by Jewish students involved with the Hillel after the students said they were blocked from participating in a human rights fair because of their Zionist views. . The U.S. Department of Education is currently investigating claims made by Jewish USC student Rose Ritch, who said she was harassed for her Zionist views and ultimately resigned from a position in student government. Other complaints are ongoing at the University of Illinois, Brooklyn College and Stanford University. . Though many Berkeley Law student groups are quite small, without large budgets, investment portfolios or endowments to wield in an act of protest, the student groups nevertheless pledged in the bylaw that they will boycott, sanction and divest funds from “institutions, organizations, companies, and any entity that participated in or is directly/indirectly complicit in the occupation of the Palestinian territories and/or supports the actions of the apartheid state of Israel.” . Erwin Chemerinsky The measure raised concerns for Chemerinsky, dean of the law school since 2017. Chemerinsky, who is Jewish, told J. he considers himself a Zionist even though he “condemn[s] a lot of Israel’s policies, just like I condemn a lot of the United States’ policies.” . Chemerinsky helped found the L.A.-based Progressive Jewish Alliance, and in the mid-2000s represented the family of Rachel Corrie, a protester killed while trying to stop an Israeli bulldozer from demolishing a Palestinian home. . He told J. he was motivated to address the matter publicly after a visit from students from Women of Berkeley Law who had voted against the measure. The students were “quite upset,” Chemerinsky later wrote in an email to students. . “The reality is, the message is seen by many students as antisemitic,” Chemerinsky told J. . His email was sent this week to the leaders of all of Berkeley Law’s student groups and shared with J. . “I have learned that student groups have been asked to adopt a statement strongly condemning Israel and some have done so. Of course, it is the First Amendment right of students to express their views on any issues,” he wrote. . “It is troubling to broadly exclude a particular viewpoint from being expressed,” he added. “Indeed, taken literally, this would mean that I could not be invited to speak because I support the existence of Israel, though I condemn many of its policies.” . His email went on: “The principles of community for the Berkeley campus stress that we are committed to ensuring freedom of expression and dialogue that elicits the full spectrum of views held by our varied communities.” . Chemerinsky, speaking to J., added that “to say that anyone who supports the existence of Israel — that’s what you define as Zionism — shouldn’t speak would exclude about, I don’t know, 90 percent or more of our Jewish students.” . Kenneth L. Marcus, an attorney and a Berkeley Law alumnus, also criticized the bylaw in an interview Thursday. Marcus is the founder and chairman of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, a pro-Israel Jewish civil rights organization currently spearheading the lawsuits and complaints named above. . He said students in this case “are taking a step down a very ugly road.” . “Berkeley Law wouldn’t be Berkeley Law if students didn’t engage in a certain amount of wrongheaded political nonsense,” he said. “This is different, because it’s not just a political stunt. It is tinged with antisemitism and anti-Israel national origin discrimination.” (National origin discrimination is unfair treatment based on the country someone is from, and it’s unlawful in employment settings and by government agencies). . “They may as well have just stated, ‘No Zionists allowed,’” Tammi Rossman-Benjamin of the Amcha Initiative wrote to J. “This is clear antisemitism. The university needs to ensure that every student, regardless of identity, will be equally protected from behavior such as this … and should, at a minimum, promptly issue a statement denouncing the targeting of Jewish students for their identity.” . The adoption of the BDS bylaw represents the latest dustup at a university that, like many across the country and in Europe, has in recent years seen its share of Israel controversies bleed into antisemitism claims. . For example, in 2019 and 2020, amid heated student government meetings, one Jewish student’s views were brushed off as “Zionist tears,” another Jewish student was called a “Nazi” for supporting Israel, and another was asked to leave the room because of an Israeli flag sticker on her laptop computer. . Partially in response to those incidents and others like it, a group of faculty and campus Jewish leaders established the Antisemitism Education Initiative, a training effort led by the school’s Hillel director and professors of Jewish history, which received funding from the Academic Engagement Network, a pro-Israel nonprofit. One of the group’s first projects was to create an 11-minute explainer video called “Antisemitism in Our Midst” for students and staff, which defines antisemitism and describes when criticism of Israel crosses the line into antisemitism. . Ethan Katz, an associate professor of Jewish history at UC Berkeley, co-founded and co-directs the initiative. He criticized the BLSJP bylaw, saying it was disappointing that while Palestinian groups have historically felt stifled in their ability to express their views freely, some now appear to be doing the same thing to those who hold pro-Israel views. . By instituting the bylaws and others like them, “organizations are effectively shutting down any kind of lively conversation about the Zionist-Arab conflict, or the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” he said. . Katz, a scholar of modern European and Mediterranean Jewish history, also pointed to a broader problem on the UC Berkeley campus and on campuses across the country that starts with one word: Zionism. . The BLSJP bylaw, and others like it, treat Zionism as a pernicious evil on par with white supremacy. For many Jews, its meaning could not be more different. . “For these students and for a significant number of Palestinians, Zionism means settler colonial dispossession, full stop,” he said. “They do not think of events like the refugee crisis of 1948 as part of the history of Zionism. They see any cases of violence or dispossession experienced by Palestinians in the history of this conflict as the essence of Zionism. . “The deeper roots or affirmative meanings of Zionism are not really there,” he added. For example, he said, an idea widely shared among historians and large segments of the Jewish community is that Zionism, at its core, is the national liberation movement of the Jewish people, or that Zionism in its “most basic definition” is support for a “political or, even, for some people, a cultural entity that is Jewish in character in some portion” of the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River. . Among groups like BLSJP, that “perspective doesn’t hold any water,” he said.
Contact: Nicole Rosen 202-309-5724 . Washington, D.C., August 18, 2022 : Two Jewish State University of New York (SUNY) at New Paltz students kicked out of a sexual assault awareness group and then cyberbullied, harassed and threatened, over their Jewish and Israeli identities, filed a formal complaint with the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights. . The complaint, which will be included as a segment in Dana Bash’s CNN Special Report “Rising Hate: Antisemitism in America” to air this Sunday night, alleges the university was fully aware of the situation yet, in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, allowed a hostile environment to proliferate on campus for Jewish survivors of sexual assault, to the point where both students felt unsafe to attend class and Jewish and Israeli survivors of sexual assault at SUNY New Paltz feel “shunned,” “isolated,” and “fearful.” . The complaint was filed by the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law on behalf of the students and Jewish on Campus. . These students have been thrice victimized: first, by sexual predators; second, by the anti-Zionist leaders of a support group who expelled the students, including one of its founders, from the organization; and third, by the University which failed to hold accountable those who had discriminated against the students and failed to satisfactorily address the hostile climate on campus for Jewish survivors of sexual assault. . “SUNY [New Paltz]…is permitting a hostile environment that marginalizes and excludes these Jewish…and Israeli sexual assault survivor students. SUNY [New Paltz]…is also denying Jewish and Israeli survivors of sexual assault on campus equal access to the educational opportunities and services they need, on the basis of their shared ancestry, ethnicity and national origin in violation of Title VI,” wrote the Brandeis Center in the complaint. “The exclusion of Jewish and Israeli students…on the basis of their ethnic and national origin identities has left survivors of sexual assault without a place at SUNY…[New Paltz] to receive these programs and services while openly expressing their Jewish identity.” . The issues began in December, as first reported by The New Paltz Oracle and later Algemeiner, when Cassandra Blotner posted a message on her personal Instagram that read, “Jews are an ethnic group who come from Israel. This is proven by genealogical, historical and archeological evidence. Israel is not a ‘colonial’ state and Israelis aren’t ‘settlers.’ You cannot colonize the land your ancestors are from.” Members of New Paltz Accountability (NPA), a group Blotner and another student founded to combat sexual assault, denounced the post and demanded Blotner defend her views, arguing her personal post “concerns the organization as a whole.” . Noting that no other NPA members were asked to explain or justify their identities or subjected to questioning about core beliefs, Blotner initially declined. As “the only Jew of the group…it seems that I am being held accountable for the actions of a foreign government (which is something that I am not and is antisemitic),” she explained, adding, “I am worried for the future of the group and other survivors who come seeking support. Will they too be made to feel this way due to misperceptions of shared posts, lack of cultural/religious understandings, or general difference of opinions?” After consulting with Jewish leaders on campus, though, Blotner offered to discuss her post, and suggested including representatives from the Jewish Student Union. .. The NPA leaders refused the offer to meet and told her that Zionists were not welcome in NPA. . “While I didn’t initially think I should be forced to defend my personal beliefs, I realized the opportunity here to educate NPA that as Jews we share a history, theology and culture – we’re both a faith and an ethnicity — and it’s all deeply tied to the Land of Israel. Expressing support for the Jewish homeland is core to my Jewish identity, the two are inseparable, and I shouldn’t have to shed that piece of my Judaism in order to advocate for survivors of sexual assault,” stated Blotner. “To then get cancelled, stalked and harassed, well I can’t even put into words what a horrific and frightening experience this all turned into for me.” . Ofek Preis, another NPA member who is a Jewish Israeli student, shared on her personal Instagram the same post that Blotner had posted. Soon after, NPA stopped contacting Preis about the organization’s activities and blocked her access to shared organizational documents. The NPA then made clear to Preis, and through numerous posts on its Instagram, the group was only open to those who reject Zionism. . NPA went on to publish numerous statements doubling down on its stance that Zionists are not welcome in NPA, extending its exclusionary and discriminatory stance to all Jewish Zionist and Israeli sexual assault survivors at SUNY New Paltz, and advancing the anti-Semitic narrative that Zionism is a form of racism and white-supremacy. These NPA posts fueled further harassment on social media directed personally towards Blotner. Some posts threatened to spit on her, others stated “cassie needs to go…” and called her a “dumb b*tch” that supports “mass genocide !!!!!!!” . Blotner and Preis reported to the university that they felt unsafe on campus. The university declined Blotner’s request for a security escort to accompany her to class and advised her not to attend. Unable to attend class safely, Blotner left campus to be with her family. The hostile anti-Semitic atmosphere for Jewish Zionist sexual assault survivors brewing on campus after NPA’s posts caused Preis, publicly identified and spurned by NPA as a Zionist and an Israeli, to feel so anxious about her safety she was also unable to attend class. . NPA’s behavior and the harassment that ensued had a harmful impact and resulted in a hostile environment for the larger community of Jewish and Israeli survivors of sexual assault at SUNY New Paltz. In a letter to the campus community, the Jewish Student Union explained how the university’s “half-measures and empty rhetoric” signaled that anti-Semitism is acceptable on campus and that the university’s values of tolerance and inclusivity don’t apply to Jewish sexual assault survivors. . While New Paltz President Donald Christian issued a statement acknowledging the actions taken by NPA were exclusionary, discriminatory, and motivated by anti-Semitism, the school claimed its ability to intervene was limited because NPA is not a recognized student organization, and it took no further action. Despite NPA’s discriminatory conduct, the school has allowed NPA to operate on campus like any other recognized student group using SUNY resources and providing valuable educational programs and services to student sexual assault survivors and their allies on campus. . “Excommunicating and excluding Jewish and Israeli survivors from NPA denies us of our right to fight against sexual assault on college campuses and hold our universities accountable,” stated Preis. “We were left with nowhere to go, feeling isolated from those who claim to be fighting for us, for our right to an uninterrupted education. The accusations made against me on account of my national origin denied everything I inherently am as a person: a fighter for justice, an anti-racist, a combater of oppression, and most relevantly, a survivor. I should not have been asked to choose between being Israeli or being a survivor. I should not have been asked to align with only survivorship or only Zionism. It is possible and necessary to include intersectional identities in spaces that fight for survivors.” . Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin, including discrimination against Jews on the basis of their actual or perceived shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics, in educational institutions that receive federal funding. Title VI protects individuals from exclusionary conduct that denies them the ability to participate in or benefit from university programs and activities, including joining a student club and feeling safe enough to attend class, as well as from harassment that creates a hostile environment. Marginalizing, demonizing and excluding Jewish students on the basis of the Zionist component of their Jewish ethnic and ancestral identity, and discriminating on the basis of national origin identity, violates Title VI. . “Jewish students, like all students, deserve a college experience free from discrimination and abuse. In this case, acceptance into a community designed to protect survivors was conditional. These students were subject to a litmus test which forced them to decide: forfeit your commitment to an integral social cause, or forfeit your identity. Beyond the clear example of anti-Semitism and sexism which this case shows, it further demonstrates how normalized xenophobia against Israelis has become on American campuses, with one student being explicitly harassed for their Israeli nationality—an identity they were born into, and one they have the protected right to be proud of. This case is about anti-Semitism, it is about sexism, it is about harassment, and it is about xenophobia. More than anything, though, it is about justice and equality,” stated Julia Jassey, CEO of Jewish on Campus. “And as jarring as this case is, the experience these students have faced is unfortunately not unique. All over the country, Jewish students face unjust treatment due to their identities. It is our duty, as an organization that speaks by and for Jewish students, to ensure that no student is denied the protection they deserve.” . “This case involves a form of anti-Semitic discrimination that is increasingly prevalent on college and university campuses. Students are being marginalized and excluded from campus activities on the basis of their Jewish identity, which in some cases is deeply connected to Israel. At the same time, Israeli students are being targeted by anti-Zionist hatred that invokes classic anti-Semitic tropes about Jewish power and control. Ms. Blotner and Ms. Preis were shunned and isolated by the very people to whom they had turned for support as sexual assault survivors; these women were excluded from a survivor support group merely because they expressed pride in the Jewish people’s ethnic and ancestral connection to Israel,” stated Denise Katz-Prober, Brandeis Center’s director of legal initiatives. “Unfortunately, universities often fail to recognize this form of anti-Semitic harassment and discrimination. When Jewish students, like Ms. Blotner and Ms. Preis, are cast out of social justice spaces and campus activities because they express pride in their ethnic or national identity, that is a form of unlawful discrimination, not political speech. This case is not about the awful things that were said to these women. Rather, it is about the awful things that were done to them. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act requires universities like SUNY New Paltz to ensure that Jewish and Israeli students are not denied educational opportunities due to discriminatory behavior that targets them on the basis of their ethnic and national identities. That’s exactly what was done here when these women were thrown out of their student organization because, as Jews, they feel a strong sense of connection to the Jewish homeland. Unfortunately, universities are misdiagnosing the problem and, as a result, failing to protect their Jewish students, like Ms. Blotner and Ms. Preis, from unlawful discrimination.” . The Louis D. Brandeis Center is an independent, nonprofit organization established to advance the civil and human rights of the Jewish people and promote justice for all. The Brandeis Center conducts research, education, and advocacy to combat the resurgence of anti-Semitism on college and university campuses. It is not affiliated with the Massachusetts university, the Kentucky law school, or any of the other institutions that share the name and honor the memory of the late U.S. Supreme Court justice. . Jewish on Campus is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization founded and run by Jewish college students, for Jewish college students. Since its founding in 2020, JOC has collected stories of anti-Semitism from thousands of students around the world and has assisted in creating change on campus.
Published August 17, 2022 by JewishPress.com . The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, The Jewish Federations of North America, and the American Jewish Committee on Tuesday each urged the Securities and Exchange Commission to take action on anti-Israel bias in financial ratings. . Financial rating firms that provide specialized ratings based on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors have been found to incorporate biased methodologies and sources that systematically produce worse ratings for Israeli companies and companies doing business related to Israel, potentially without full knowledge of the investors who rely on those ratings. . These outcomes have been hailed as victories by the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaign to delegitimize Israel. . The ESG investment sector has grown to reach one-third of funds under advisement globally, making it a significant source of investment for companies. . As the SEC prepares a regulatory rule on ESG ratings, Jewish Federations, AJC, and the Brandeis Center provided public comment ahead of Tuesday’s deadline urging the regulator to take concrete actions to ensure that anti-Israel bias does not creep into ESG ratings. . The best practices outlined for ESG raters included: more critical use of media sources, creating stronger processes for evaluating reputational risk, addressing fundamental assumptions in their methodologies and increasing transparency around them, and establishing training for analysts to help them avoid bias. . “Israel deserves to be held to the same standards as every other country, whether it’s at international bodies or in financial ratings,” said Eric Fingerhut, President and CEO of the Jewish Federations of North America. “We hope the SEC fulfills its responsibility to regulate financial institutions fairly and ensure they don’t become party to discrimination and falsehoods.” . “We have seen the infiltration of ESG rating systems by anti-Semitic groups like BDS, which seek to use ESG to deliberately target, isolate, and ultimately destroy the Jewish State, resulting in biased and distorted ‘S’ ratings for companies doing business in or with Israel,” added L. Rachel Lerman, Vice Chair and General Counsel of the Brandeis Center. “The new rulemaking will require transparency across the board, and we are asking the SEC specifically to require ESG-related funds that focus on the social aspect of ESG to tell investors how they derive ratings for such companies, how they check for and eliminate anti-Israel bias in their sources, and whether they include anti-Semitism on their human rights radar.” . “We and others in the Jewish community who have commented on these rules have come to learn that activists of various strips critical of Israel flying under the banner of corporate social responsibility use a multiplicity of techniques addressed by the instant proposal to pressure companies and investment advisors to discourage them from doing business with, or investing in, Israel. Many, if not most, of these techniques are invisible to investors in a timely fashion,” said AJC Chief Legal Officer Marc D. Stern. . “We do not seek to have the SEC bar those efforts to boycott Israel. People have the right to urge their moral vision on companies in which they invest, including urging participation in what we believe to be the unwise, even immoral boycott of Israel. But other people have a right to know of those efforts, and to oppose them to the extent that they affect their own investment decisions, whether because they don’t want to support that boycott, or because those efforts might trigger state anti-boycott laws. To be effective in those efforts, investors need to know in real-time who is urging what decisions on companies, funds, and investment advisors,” Stern said.
Contact: Nicole Rosen 202-309-5724 . Washington, D.C. (August 16, 2022): The Louis D. Brandeis Center For Human Rights Under Law, The Jewish Federations of North America, and American Jewish Committee on Tuesday each urged the Securities and Exchange Commission to take action on anti-Israel bias in financial ratings. . Financial ratings firms that provide specialized ratings based on environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors have been found to incorporate biased methodologies and sources that systematically produce worse ratings for Israeli companies and companies doing business related to Israel, potentially without full knowledge of the investors who rely on those ratings. . These outcomes have been hailed as victories by the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaign to delegitimize Israel. . The ESG investment sector has grown to reach one third of funds under advisement globally, making it a significant source of investment for companies. . As the SEC prepares a regulatory rule on ESG ratings, Jewish Federations, AJC, and the Brandeis Center provided public comment ahead of Tuesday’s deadline urging the regulator to take concrete actions ensuring that anti-Israel bias does not creep into ESG ratings. . The best practices outlined included for ESG raters included: more critical use of media sources, creating stronger processes for evaluating reputational risk, addressing fundamental assumptions in their methodologies and increasing transparency around them, and establishing trainings for analysts to help them avoid bias. . “Israel deserves to be held to the same standards as every other country, whether it’s at international bodies or in financial ratings,” said Eric Fingerhut, President and CEO of the Jewish Federations of North America. “We hope the SEC fulfills its responsibility to regulate financial institutions fairly and ensure they don’t become party to discrimination and falsehoods.” . “We have seen infiltration of ESG ratings systems by anti-Semitic groups like BDS, which seek to use ESG to deliberately target, isolate, and ultimately destroy the Jewish State, resulting in biased and distorted ‘S’ ratings for companies doing business in or with Israel,” added L. Rachel Lerman, Vice Chair and General Counsel of the Brandeis Center. “The new rulemaking will require transparency across the board, and we are asking the SEC specifically to require ESG-related funds that focus on the social aspect of ESG to tell investors how they derive ratings for such companies, how they check for and eliminate anti-Israel bias in their sources, and whether they include anti-Semitism on their human rights radar.” . “We, and others in the Jewish community who have commented on these rules have come to learn that activists of various strips critical of Israel flying under the banner of corporate social responsibility use a multiplicity of techniques addressed by the instant proposal to pressure companies and investment advisors to discourage them from doing business with, or investing in, Israel. Many, if not most, of these techniques are invisible to investors in timely fashion,” said AJC Chief Legal Officer Marc D. Stern. “We do not seek to have the SEC bar those efforts to boycott Israel. People have the right to urge their moral vision on companies in which they invest, including urging participation in what we believe to be the unwise, even immoral boycott of Israel. But other people have a right to know of those efforts, and to oppose them to the extent that they affect their own investment decisions, whether because they don’t want to support that boycott, or because those efforts might trigger state anti-boycott laws. To be effective in those efforts, investors need to know in real time who is urging what decisions on companies, funds, and investment advisors.” . You can find the full SEC comments from Jewish Federations here, from the AJC here, and from the Brandeis Center here. . The Louis D. Brandeis Center is an independent, non-partisan institution for public interest advocacy, research and education. The Center’s mission is to advance the civil and human rights of the Jewish people and to promote justice for all. The Center’s education, research and advocacy focus especially, but not exclusively, on the problems of anti-Semitism on college and university campuses. https://brandeiscenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SEC-ESG-ratings-joint-release-w-JFNA-AJC.pdf
On June 30, Brandeis Center President Alyza D. Lewin testified before the New York City Council Committee on Higher Education. Lewin, along with many others, spoke before the council to demonstrate the prevalence of anti-Semitism on college campuses and the threat that it poses to Jewish students all over the country. In addition to Lewin, numerous students including Adela Cojab and Ofek Preis bravely gave their own accounts of anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist behavior that they had personally experienced on college campuses in the state of New York. . In her testimony, Lewin highlighted the fact that self-proclaimed ‘progressive’ spaces on campuses marginalize Jewish students. University administrators do not recognize the discrimination that is happening right under their noses: “The reason that anti-Semitism is increasing and not decreasing on these campuses is because university administrators are misdiagnosing the problem,” said Lewin. . Universities don’t recognize how Jewish Zionist students are being ostracized on campus. They mistakenly treat the marginalization of pro-Israel students as a speech issue. Time and time again, administrators choose to take a step back and do nothing when Jewish students are excluded, often claiming that the groups who are shunning the Jewish students are simply exercising their right to free speech, rather than acknowledging the harassment and discrimination that is taking place. . Lewin explained that Zionism is the glue that has held Jews together for millennia, even if not all Jews would describe themselves as Zionists: “Judaism is not only a religion,” she explained. “Jews also share a sense of Jewish peoplehood with a common ancestry and ethnicity.” Jews have been praying for the return to Jerusalem for centuries, and this shared sense of ethnic and ancestral identity, this “Zionism,” is as integral to the identity of many Jews as observing the Jewish Sabbath or keeping a kosher diet. . The majority of university administrators do not yet understand these facts about Jewish identity and anti-Semitism. Therefore, when Jewish students are forced to shed the Zionist component of their Jewish identity to participate on campus, administrators fail to take action to protect them. . For example, as SUNY New Paltz Israeli international student Ofek Preis described in her testimony before the NYCC hearing, she was excluded from an advocacy group that fights against sexual violence on campus because of her Israeli national origin and Jewish ethnic identities: “I am an Israeli student, a political science and sociology major, and a prominent member of advocacy and activist spaces on and off campus, and a survivor of sexual assault, who was denied the right to fight against rape culture as a result of anti-Zionism,” stated Preis. . After Preis reposted to her personal Instagram account an infographic expressing pride in the Jewish people’s ethnic and ancestral connection to Israel and refuting the claim that Israel is a colonial state, she was told that she was no longer welcome to participate in a student group dedicated to combatting sexual violence. Despite fighting against injustice her entire life, and being a sexual assault survivor herself, Preis was castigated as an enemy in the fight against oppression and cast out of the student group she had been part of. As a result of the harassment she faced, Preis spent the rest of her semester feeling isolated and fearful. . At the NYCC hearing, Preis echoed Lewin’s message that university administrators’ misdiagnosis of the problem was to blame: “This is the result of promoting dialogue instead of directly denouncing anti-Zionism. It is not a matter of difficult conversations, but an issue of hostility, isolation, and discrimination.” . Another student, NYU graduate Adela Cojab, described for the NYCC hearing how she took legal action against her former university for refusing to address incidents of campus anti-Semitism. Cojab filed a Title VI complaint against NYU for “failing to protect the Jewish community against discrimination and harassment.” Since 2004, OCR guidance has clarified that Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act protects members of faith based groups, including Jews, Sikhs and Muslims, from discrimination based on their ethnic or ancestral background. .. During her time at NYU, Cojab experienced anti-Semitism when she saw that Zionism was equated to Nazism and racism by a governance council of minority students. When Jewish students wished to publish a response simply explaining why this was so offensive, they were told not to by mentors because it would “only make the problem grow.” Within just three months the problem grew significantly worse: there were anti-Israel boycott resolutions raised in student government, movements to boycott NYU’s Tel Aviv campus, harassment of Jewish students, and Israeli flags burned. . This all led to Cojab leaving her position on student government because she was being bullied: “Had that happened to any other minority group, the university would have responded,” claimed Cojab. According to her, the university was aware of the flag-burning incident, yet later gave an award to the very group that burned the Israeli flag. . This all circles back to Lewin’s point that Jewish students are held to a severe double-standard on college campuses. When a Jew is forced to shed the Zionist component of their Jewish identity, Lewin says that “it is comparable to demanding that a Catholic disavow the Vatican or a Muslim shed their connection to Mecca.” . Lewin’s testimony, along with those of Preis and Cojab, emphasize the need to hold universities accountable. When Jewish students are marginalized on campus, action needs to be taken, or the problem will simply worsen, like we saw on NYU’s campus. The Brandeis Center works to do just that and is always willing to listen to students who feel that they have experienced anti-Semitism. . Universities need to acknowledge the struggles of their Jewish students. As Lewin stated: “No community other than the Jews is being charged such a high price for admission, and excluding an individual in this manner on the basis of their identity is discrimination and has to be recognized as such.”
Published by Alan Zeitlin for JewishPress.com on 8/3/22. . In the summer of 2020, while people were hunkered down and dealing with Covid, Rose Ritch was dealing with hundreds of antisemitic slurs online, she said, after she won the race to become vice president of the University of Southern California’s student government. . “It was anything and everything,” Ritch said of the negative comments in an interview with The Jewish Press. . The Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) is investigating a Title VI complaint on behalf of Ritch, who resigned from student government in August 2000 due to intense pressure. . Ritch said that first, her running-mate, who was not Jewish and was elected president, first resigned after it was stated by students that he had made a racist micro-aggression and that then the pressure fell on her as she was hit with a bevy of attacks online. . Due to her position, she was granted an opportunity to speak with USC President Carol Folt. Ritch wanted a firm message that such behavior was not to be tolerated. She said she explained how antisemitism and anti-Zionism fit together. She added that her campaign posters were torn down and she was told camera footage couldn’t clearly show who was responsible. . She said that some in the administration were apologetic behind closed doors, but overall, “the message I got was that this is an autonomous student body.” . She said she evaluated her predicament for a month and then made her decision. . “The decision to resign wasn’t something I decided as a snap decision,” Ritch said. “From the time this started to when I resigned, it was a month. I wanted to see how things played out. I wanted to see if online comments calmed down. I wanted to see how the university responded. It definitely affected my physical and mental wellbeing.” . With no public statement defending Ritch or specifically addressing the campaign against her, Ritch wrote her letter of resignation in August 2020, which included: “I have been told that my support for Israel has made me complicit in racism, and that, by association, I am racist. Students launched an aggressive social media campaign to “impeach [my] Zionist a**.” This is antisemitism. . .. At this point, resignation is the only sustainable choice I can make to protect my physical safety on campus and my mental health.” . Ritch, 24, who lives in Washington D.C., was assisted in filing by The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law. Founded by Kenneth Marcus, the nonprofit seeks to protect the civil rights of Jews and promote justice for everyone. Ritch isn’t seeking any financial compensation and the complaint states that she was a victim of antisemitic harassment “that targeted her on the basis of her shared ancestral and ethnic characteristics and sought to exclude her from the Undergraduate Student Government justice on account of her Jewish identity.” In addition, it states she was pressured to step down from her position “because she demonstrated pride in her Jewish ancestry and ethnicity by expressing support for a Jewish homeland.” The university “failed to take prompt or effective steps to end the harassment or eliminate the hostile environment” the complaint states. . Denise Katz-Prober, director of Legal Initiatives for Brandeis Center praised Ritch for coming forward, as some in the past have been afraid to make their cases public. . “We hope that universities will take note of this case and we think that they are starting to get the message,” she said. . That message is that it is not a political issue but an issue of rights. Katz-Prober said that while Title VI, which forbids discrimination on race, origin and similar characteristics but didn’t originally cover religion, can now be included under the umbrella of shared ancestry and ethic characteristics. Ritch’s civil rights were violated, Katz-Prober says, by being hindered from participating in her position due to harassment. . Ritch said in the debate that a student asked how she could be a fair student leader with her Jewish/Israel life, and she responded that her focus would be on campus affairs, not the complex international issues. She also said that the university violated its own bylaws. She said in cases of impeachment, paid faculty members are to determine if the case should go forward to the Senate. She said this step was skipped. . Ritch said that eventually the impeachment proceedings were suspended by the administration, but this wasn’t publicized, and a statement about attacks on her wasn’t issued until after her resignation. . According to a statement from the Brandeis Center, the response was “not designed to protect Ms. Ritch from discrimination, but rather, to protect the University from the public outrage that ensued when it became apparent that Ritch had been forced to resign due to the hostile environment created by discriminatory harassment at USC.” . Ritch said she was president of Trojans for Israel, was very active in Hillel, and attended Chabad events. She said up to that point, she hadn’t experienced antisemitism on campus and was part of the student government senate and nobody had any problem with her. . She said the time when she got attacked online was chaotic and extremely difficult to deal with. . “The Hillel director was my rock during this period,” Ritch said. “He was an incredible resource and support system and a great guy.” . The executive director of USC Hillel, is Dave Cohn. “I know Rose very well and have had the honor of providing intensive personal support to her throughout this challenging experience,” Cohn wrote to The Jewish Press in an email. “Rose was a cherished student leader at USC Hillel and we have continued to share a wonderful relationship with her as an alum. Hillel is here to support Jewish students comprehensively, including if and when they confront the reality of antisemitism and anti-Zionism in today’s world.” . He also sent an earlier statement in which Hillel says it will be working with the administration and that the university is not immune to a problem that has affected other Jewish students on American campuses. . Rabbi Dov Wagner, director of Chabad at USC, also had praise for the student. . “Rose is a wonderful young woman and a very special person we supported from the start,” Wagner told The Jewish Press. “She is a dynamic young woman who got involved in student leadership. In general, Jewish life is thriving and it’s a welcome environment here. Generally speaking, the administration is acting in good faith and is trying to learn the lessons that are being learned nationwide, including issues of de-legitimization and antisemitism and these are important conversations to have.” . He added that he hopes soon the press would print positive stories about Jewish life at USC. There are 250-300 Jewish students every Friday night [at Chabad], he said. . Ritch said nobody should think the school is full of antisemites. She said one student started the harassment campaign. She believes that anger over racism resulting from the killing of George Floyd spilled over to somehow call Zionists and Jews racists. She added that with people bored during the pandemic and on their computers, it likely fed people’s desire to continue to pile on insults against her. . “There was a reckoning for social justice,” she said. “But any idea that Palestinian students or any student would not feel safe because of me, clearly didn’t make any sense.” . Ritch, a ballet dancer, said she had picked USC because of its dance program but switched after freshman year. She graduated with a minor in Dance, a degree in Sociology, Law-History and Culture. . She said due to the deluge of online insults part of her “wanted to crawl into a corner and hope everything would go away,” referring to the hateful comments. She said even after she resigned, several students messaged her that she was a “k-ke.” . She said she went off social media from June 2020 to February 2022, though she had friends check for her once in a while in case there was an important message. . She said she was sad when Jewish friends asked if it would be safe to return to campus when in-class sessions resumed. . Ritch’s complaint requests that several measures be taken, including adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance Working Definition of Antisemitism, setting up a task force and publicly denouncing antisemitism, and stating that Zionism is a “key component of identity for many Jewish students at USC.” . The office of President Holt did not answer questions but referred to a university statement: . “USC is proud of its culture of inclusivity for all students, including members of our Jewish community. USC over the last two years has made a number of commitments to combat antisemitism and anti-Jewish hatred. These significant steps have included developing strong partnerships with national organizations such as the Anti-Defamation League, the Jewish Federation and the American Jewish Committee (AJC); expanding the Stronger Than Hate initiative at the USC Shoah Foundation; sending senior leaders to attend the President’s Summit on Campus Antisemitism at NYU (hosted by Hillel International, the Academic Engagement Network (AEN), and the AJC); convening the President’s Advisory Committee on Jewish Life at USC; and participating in AEN’s Signature Seminar Series. We are continuing to take these steps to further build on the welcoming environment we have created for our Jewish community. We look forward to addressing any concerns or questions by the U.S. Department of Education regarding this matter.” . Ritch said it was her dream to visit Israel and she went to the Holy Land for a dance program when she was 18. . “I grew up in a household where being Jewish and believing in the state of Israel were greatly intertwined,” she said. “I never used the label of a Zionist to describe myself not because I wasn’t one, but because it was intertwined in my Jewish identity. They were one in the same. I didn’t feel the need to separate them.” . According to the complaint, one student exclaimed: “The IDF trains the LAPD, so it’s all connected.” . Originally from San Francisco and a fan of former catcher Buster Posey, she said it is crucial not to let false accusations slide. . “Of course, nothing has been concluded yet,” she said of the federal investigation. “But this is saying it’s not okay and I think something should have been done. It shouldn’t happen at USC or anywhere.”
Brandeis Center Founder and Chairman Kenneth L. Marcus authored a new review for the Spring 2022 edition of the Journal of Contemporary Antisemitism. Editor-in-chief and law school professor Lesley Klaff serves on the Brandeis Center’s academic advisory board. . Marcus’s article is a book review of ‘Key Concepts in the Study of Antisemitism,’ published in 2021 and edited by Sol Goldberg, Scott Ury, and Kalman Weiser. The book is a collection of 21 essays and serves as a handbook to educate college instructors on the nature of anti-Semitism. Marcus takes the reader through different authors and essays, including Jonathan Judaken on the historiography of anti-Semitism, James Loeffler on anti-Zionism, Sol Goldberg on Jewish self-hatred, Maurice Samuels on philo-Semitism, and Lena Salaymeh and Shai Levi on Secularism. . Marcus’s review highlights the increasing divide in anti-Semitism studies. As anti-Semitism continues to increase in its various forms, this divide will likely become even more drastic. . The book’s editors argue that anti-Semitism must be studied within the broader context of different manifestations of evil. They criticize what Marcus calls ‘Wistrichism,’ named from the work of the late Hebrew University historian Robert Wistrich. Wistrichism views anti-Semitism as a long and unique tradition in history rather than a modern pathology. Wistrichism also views anti-Semitism as a unique phenomenon, rather than a manifestation of other evils. The editors charge that that Wistrichism is accepted “without questioning,” which Marcus argues is incorrect – because it ignores that other scholars do not necessarily accept this concept at face value. Marcus argues that the authors’ resolute anti-Wistrichism suffers from many of the same flaws that they attribute to Dr. Wistrich’s perspective. . Former Brandeis Center intern Hilary Miller co-published an article in this issue with David Hirsh, titled ‘Durban Antizionism: Its Sources, Its Impact, and Its Relation to Older Anti-Jewish Ideologies.’
Contact: Nicole Rosen 202-309-5724 . Washington, D.C., July 26, 2022: The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) announced it has opened an investigation into a complaint alleging the University of Southern California (USC) allowed a hostile environment of anti-Semitism to proliferate on its campus, resulting in the resignation in August 2020 of its Jewish student government vice president, in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. OCR evaluates all complaints it receives but only pursues investigations in those it determines warrant a more thorough investigation. . The complaint OCR will investigate was submitted by The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law on behalf of Rose Ritch, the USC Undergraduate Student Government (USG) vice president who was the victim of anti-Semitic harassment and baseless accusations by USC students who castigated Ritch as a Zionist and sought to exclude her from the USG on the basis of her Jewish ethnic identity. . The complaint alleges that “[t]he discriminatory harassment against Ms. Ritch was so severe and persistent that it created a hostile environment that hindered her ability to continue serving in the USG. Although USC was aware of the discriminatory harassment against Ms. Ritch and the hostile environment it fostered, the University failed to take prompt and effective steps to end the harassment or eliminate the hostile environment. As a result of the University’s refusal to protect Ms. Ritch from the discriminatory harassment, Ms. Ritch was ultimately forced to resign from the USG under the mounting pressure of the hostile environment.” . As Ritch herself explained in a Newsweek op-ed at the time of her resignation, she “resigned as vice president of the undergraduate student government at the University of Southern California (USC) after being harassed and pressured for months by fellow students because they didn’t like one of my identities. It wasn’t because I am a woman, or identify as queer, femme or cisgender. All of these identities qualified me as electable when students’ votes were cast last February. But because I also openly identify as a Jew who supports Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state—i.e., a Zionist—I was accused by a group of students of being unsuitable as a student government leader. I was told my support for Israel made me complicit in racism, and that by association, I am racist. Students launched an aggressive social media campaign to ‘impeach [my] Zionist a**.’” . According to the Brandeis Center, the harassment began during Ritch’s campaign when her posters were repeatedly vandalized and the campaign posters of other Jewish students running for student senate were torn down. Ritch was also bullied and harassed repeatedly on social media, and the ongoing and persistent harassment continued after she was elected. USC students launched a social media campaign demanding Ritch be impeached and/or resign from the USG because of her perceived ethnic Jewish identity as a “Zionist.” Some examples of the social media onslaught include, “tell your Zionist a** VP to resign, too;” “the Zionist [referring to Ritch] need [sic] to be IMPEACHED!;” “[D]on’t forget that USG’s Vice President, Rose Ritch, has openly expressed pro-Israeli sentiment…Get rid of her too;” “The president is trash & so is the VP who is a proud Zionist;” “Rose should be impeached too! Just as complicit and also a Zionist! The IDF trains LAPD so it’s all connected;” and “warms my heart to see al [sic] the zionists from usc and usg getting relentlessly cyberbullied.” And a formal impeachment complaint was filed against Ritch with the USG. . Ritch and many Jewish organizations urged the University to intervene. Hillel at USC asked the USC administration to condemn and take steps to stop the “dangerous escalation” of anti-Semitic harassment against Ritch on social media. Ritch herself met with USC President Carol Folt and VP for Student Affairs Winston Crisp and implored the university to speak out and to intervene to stop the impeachment proceedings. . USC, however, repeatedly failed to pursue readily available opportunities that would have prevented the baseless impeachment trial from being scheduled and pre-empted the weeks’ long deluge of anti-Semitic harassment targeting Ritch. For example, USC administrators did not speak out to condemn or call for the abatement of the anti-Semitic harassment and discrimination directed at Ritch on social media. In addition, the baseless and discriminatory impeachment complaint could have been stopped by the University before it ever reached the USG Student Senate, as provided for by the Student Government bylaws, but USC administrators abrogated their responsibility to review the impeachment complaint. . It took the Brandeis Center sending a letter to USC warning of the persistent, severe, and ongoing anti-Semitic harassment against Ritch and the University’s legal obligations to her under Title VI and urging the administration to take prompt steps to protect Ritch from the discriminatory harassment that sought to deny her an equal educational opportunity to serve in USG solely on the basis of her Jewish ethnic identity for the University to take any action. Within days of receiving the Brandeis Center’s letter, the University suspended Ritch’s impeachment proceedings, however, when it did, it informed only the 12 members of the USG Senate who were to preside over Ritch’s trial. Despite Ritch’s request, the University refused to publicly announce its decision to the 100 USG members or to the larger USC campus community Rose was expected to lead. The University’s failure to publicly condemn the anti-Semitic harassment or vindicate Rose by acknowledging that she had done nothing wrong and had been wrongly targeted on the basis of her identity, made it impossible for Rose to serve as student body president. . The alert to the 12 Senators also was insufficient. It made no mention of the unlawful harassment Ritch had been subjected to and it failed to note the legal deficiencies of the impeachment complaint, instead stating that it was suspending the impeachment hearings pending a review that would take months. According to the Brandeis Center, the University’s decision to “suspend” rather than void the impeachment proceedings served to further prolong the harassment. And the fact that the alert took place just one hour before the administrators were scheduled to meet with Jewish community representatives suggests the University intended to placate the Jewish community rather than meaningfully and effectively remedy the ongoing hostile environment. . Learning of the suspension, the Jewish community again urged the University to issue a statement condemning the anti-Semitic harassment against Ritch. The University refused. Not until news broke that Ritch had resigned did the University finally make a public statement. According to the Brandeis Center, the timing of USC’s statement demonstrates that the University’s response was “not designed to protect Ms. Ritch from discrimination, but rather, to protect the University from the public outrage that ensued when it became apparent that Ritch had been forced to resign due to the hostile environment created by discriminatory harassment at USC. The University did nothing to address or eliminate the harassment or hostile environment until after the damage was irreversibly inflicted on Ms. Ritch.” . “USC failed to intervene; failed to speak out publicly in support of Ms. Ritch; failed to condemn or ever acknowledge the harassment that targeted her; and failed to void the baseless impeachment complaint filed against her. Through its silence and inaction, the University tolerated the discriminatory harassment directed at Ms. Ritch, thus emboldening it and leaving Ms. Ritch vulnerable to the negative effects of the hostile environment that the harassment created at USC,” wrote the Brandeis Center it its complaint, noting that this lack of action is a direct violation of Title VI. . Earlier this year, USC found itself embroiled in a new anti-Semitism scandal over its failure to adequately respond to virulently anti-Semitic and threatening tweets from a USC graduate student, which included, “I want to kill every mother f—king Zionist,” “Zionists are going to f—king pay” and “yel3an el yahood [curse the Jews].” The school formed an Advisory Committee on Jewish Life, but concrete action to amend policy, institute additional training, or incorporate Jewish identity into the University’s DEI program has yet to occur. . OCR is also currently investigating complaints filed by the Brandeis Center against the University of Illinois and Brooklyn College. And the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is investigating a Brandeis Center employment discrimination complaint of anti-Semitism in the DEI program at Stanford University. . The Louis D. Brandeis Center is an independent, non-partisan institution for public interest advocacy, research and education. The Center’s mission is to advance the civil and human rights of the Jewish people and to promote justice for all. The Center’s education, research and advocacy focus especially, but not exclusively, on the problems of anti-Semitism on college and university campuses.
Earlier this month, Brandeis Center General Counsel L. Rachel Lerman, a nationally prominent appellate litigator, was asked to join the prestigious State Appellate Judicial Evaluation Committee (SAJEC) of the Los Angeles County Bar Association (LACBA). . The LACBA is a voluntary bar association founded in 1878, and it is one of the largest in the country, with over 18,000 members. Besides being the “voice of the legal community in Southern California,” the association provides counsel to “juvenile and indigent criminal defendants,” and it offers pro bono legal services. . Ms. Lerman was asked to participate in the SAJEC, which evaluates those nominated by the Governor to the California Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal. The committee goes through a lengthy vetting procedure to ensure that each candidate is qualified to serve in this position. Lerman joins 15 committee members, along with Chair Alana H. Rotter. . Before joining the Brandeis Center, Ms. Lerman was a partner at Barnes & Thornburg LLP, where she co-chaired the firm’s national appellate law practice. She is a member of the California Academy of Appellate Lawyers and has served on the Appellate Courts Committee of the LACBA. Ms. Lerman did pro bono work for many individuals and non-profit organizations before joining the Brandeis Center. She has been a part of the Brandeis Center for many years even before her recent appointment as General Counsel, serving as Vice Chair of the Board of Directors, a position she continues to hold.