Brandeis Brief: May 2022 This month, the Brandeis Center was busy leading efforts and partnering with allies to protect Jews from anti-Semitic harassment and discrimination, both on and off campus: LDB filed a brief in the legal case against Ben & Jerry’s, arguing that Unilever “effectively concede[s] that the only reason for not renewing [our clients’] license is [their] refusal to engage in illegal conduct.” As Mohammed El-Kurd prepared to speak at Georgetown, LDB urged the University to promptly condemn anti-Semitic rhetoric that threatens to poison the atmosphere against Jewish students. LDB partnered with AMCHA Initiative, Academic Engagement Network, and Scholars for Peace in the Middle East to urge a dozen U.S. universities to withdraw institutional membership from the Middle East Studies Association after it endorsed an academic boycott of Israel. LDB urged the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to uphold the Texas anti-BDS law. LDB expanded its chapter network to include the University of Illinois-Chicago Law school. Elan Carr, former U.S. Special Envoy to monitor and combat anti-Semitism, relied on LDB’s groundbreaking survey of openly Jewish college students in his latest article. Kenneth Marcus wrote in Newsweek about the NYC subway shooter’s anti-Semitic worldview. Alyza Lewin was a featured speaker in webinars for TIKVAH Fund and CUNY Alliance for Inclusion while Kenneth Marcus was a featured speaker for the DePaul College of Law’s Center for Jewish Law and Judaic Studies. Campus Reform interviewed LDB Chairman Kenneth Marcus about a student newspaper’s “disgraceful” apology for publishing an op-ed condemning anti-Semitism. LDB Scholar-in-Residence Diane Kunz recommended two new readings on anti-Zionism and the reestablishment of the modern state of Israel. LDB intern Davis Allen blogged about new laws from Iowa and Kanas adopting the IHRA Definition – and received two awards for his work on Holocaust and Genocide Studies. LDB hired its first director of communications. Call-for-submissions: law school fellowships for the 2022-23 academic year. Read about these and other developments at the Center in this month’s Brief. As always, we thank you for your tax-deductible donations and acknowledge that without you our work could not be done. LDB’s Rebuttal Brief in Ben & Jerry’s Case Argues Unilever ‘Conceded’ Key Argument In a rebuttal brief filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, LDB noted that Defendant Unilever (in its opposition brief) “Effectively concede[s] that the only reason for not renewing [our client American Quality Products and its owner Avi Zinger]’s license is AQP’s refusal to engage in illegal conduct.” LDB argued that Unilever’s insistence that it possesses an “absolute” right to terminate – or refuse renewal – of AQP’s contract disregards abundant legal precedent establishing that refusal to obey unlawful orders is itself an unlawful precondition for termination or non-renewal. LDB’s brief further contends that Unilever declined to refute facts that termination would cause “irreparable harm” to AQP and Zinger. “Unilever’s unlawful demand that Avi Zinger and AQP discriminate against customers based on their residence isn’t a ‘side show’ – it’s the main show,” declared Brandeis Center President Alyza Lewin. “By insisting Zinger violate Israel and U.S. anti-discrimination and anti-boycott laws and public policy, Unilever violated the Consent Decree and License Agreement it signed and unlawfully attempted to coerce AQP to violate laws both parties agreed to obey.” Read the rebuttal brief. Media coverage: Algemeiner, Jerusalem Post, Jewish Press, Washington Free Beacon LDB Urges Georgetown University President to Condemn anti-Semitic Rhetoric In advance of a speech on campus by notorious anti-Semite Mohammed El-Kurd, LDB urged Georgetown University to promptly and forcefully condemn any anti-Semitic speech, should El-Kurd repeat the hateful rhetoric he used recently on other campuses.. “The University should use its own voice to clearly and unequivocally condemn anti-Semitic speech that runs counter to the University’s values of inclusivity…and that threatens to create a hostile environment for Jewish students on campus.” Read more about LDB’s letter in The Algemeiner. LDB Joins Coalition Urging Universities to Withdraw MESA Membership LDB joined AMCHA Initiative, Academic Engagement Network and Scholars for Peace in the Middle East in urging a dozen U.S. universities to withdraw institutional membership from the Middle East Studies Association (MESA) after the organization endorsed an academic boycott of Israel. Failure to do so, the groups charge, would violate the intent and spirit of the Title VI funding that these universities receive from the U.S. Department of Education. “University leaders who are committed to the principles of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion should, as a first step, withdraw from any organization that embraces anti-Semitic or racist principles,” declared Kenneth Marcus, LDB founder and chair. “This includes, at a minimum, organizations that adopt anti-Semitic Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement policies or practices. This would be an important step for any university, but it is doubly important for any institution that accepts federal funds under Title VI.” Brandeis Center Urges Federal Court to Reverse Decision on Texas anti-Israel Boycott Law The Brandeis Center, joined by Hadassah, filed an amicus brief in a federal court of appeals, urging the Court to reverse a lower court’s decision that misinterpreted Texas’ anti-Israel boycott law by ruling that it violated a Palestinian contractor’s First Amendment rights. The Brandeis Center’s legal brief argues that Texas’ anti-BDS law targets discriminatory conduct, not speech, and discrimination is not protected by the First Amendment. LDB further points out that the judge failed to recognize longstanding precedent upholding the constitutionality of laws that prevent government employees and contractors from discriminating. As the brief states, “This Israel-exception to the States’ established authority to set conditions for government contracts has no basis in the law.” Read the amicus brief JNS coverage University of Illinois-Chicago Law Partners with LDB to Establish Law Student Chapter The Brandeis Center has partnered with the UIC Decalogue Society to establish a Brandeis Center law student chapter at the University of Illinois-Chicago Law. “We are excited to announce that we have created a committee within UIC Law Decalogue as a part of The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law,” proclaimed UIC Decalogue Society President Benjamin Blekhman. “We are thrilled to be partnered with such an outstanding organization and are grateful to have the opportunity to work together. As we move forward together, it will be with strong leadership, new ideas, and continued resolve to advocate for our community.” The Brandeis Center’s network of law student chapters at law schools across the country aims to foster a new generation of lawyers committed to advancing LDB’s work to promote Jewish civil rights and combat anti-Semitism on campus. Former U.S. Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism Cites LDB’s Survey on Campus anti-Semitism Former U.S. Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat anti-Semitism, Elan Carr, relied on the results of LDB’s groundbreaking survey of openly Jewish college students to demonstrate why the newly confirmed anti-Semitism Envoy should expand her portfolio to focus on combatting the rise in domestic anti-Semitism. Kenneth Marcus in Newsweek: Subway Shooter ‘Anti-Semitic Worldview’ Similar to Colleyville Attack Following a horrific shooting attack last month on a New York subway train that injured dozens, LDB Chairman Kenneth L. Marcus wrote about a central issue largely ignored by mainstream media coverage of the incident: the shooting suspect’s anti-Semitic ideology and the culture of hate that fomented it. As Marcus explained, the suspect was motivated by different forms of anti-Semitism that are increasingly prevalent in today’s society: “erasive anti-Semitism,” which denies the right of Jews to define their own identity, and “secondary anti-Semitism,” which blames Jews for others’ misfortunes. Speaking Engagements by LDB President and Chair Brandeis Center President Alyza Lewin and Chairman Kenneth Marcus were featured speakers at several webinars last month. LDB President Alyza Lewin spoke with Mosaic editor Jonathan Silver on ‘Talking to Your Children About Israel’ as part of the TIKVAH Fund’s Jewish Parents Forum. Lewin also addressed the CUNY Alliance for Inclusion on the topic of ‘Combating Anti-Semitism on College Campuses’ LDB Chairman, Kenneth Marcus, spoke about ‘Defining Anti-Semitism and Why It Matters: An In-Depth Exploration’ at an event hosted by DePaul College of Law’s Center for Jewish Law & Judaic Studies College newspaper issues ‘disgraceful’ apology for publishing piece condemning anti-Semitism Kenneth L. Marcus called out the “disgraceful” letter issued by University of Chicago newspaper Chicago Maroon, which apologized for publishing a student op-ed condemning anti-Semitism by SJP. The Maroon later withdrew the op-ed. Speaking to Campus Reform magazine, Marcus opined about how the incident was reminiscent of the “embarrassing” situation at Rutgers where students “shamed officials into abandoning their moral compasses.” He continued: “One should never apologize for taking a stand against anti-Semitism or racism. What requires an apology is the editors’ decision to apologize for doing the right thing and to undermine those students who continue to do so.” New and Recommended Reading LDB scholar in residence, Diane Kunz, suggests two readings for those interested in learning more about anti-Semitism and Israel. An article by David Hirsh and former Brandeis intern Hilary Miller “Durban Antizionism: Its Sources, Its Impact, and Its Relation to Older Anti-Jewish Ideologies,” explores how the 2001 Durban Conference against racism became a platform for anti-Jewish hate and set the stage for today’s anti-Zionism. Kunz’s second recommendation, Israel’s Moment: International Support for and Opposition to Establishing the Jewish State, 1945-1949 by Jeffrey Herf, provides an account of the creation of the State of Israel and debunks much of the conventional wisdom about Israel’s founding. LDB Intern Davis Allen Covers IHRA in Iowa and Kansas; Receives Awards for Work in Holocaust and Genocide Studies In a blog post this month, LDB intern Davis Allen covered Iowa and Kansas laws making them the 23rd and 24th states to adopt the IHRA Working Definition of anti-Semitism. Iowa’s law is significant for how it codifies that the IHRA Definition should be used to assess the motivation behind illegal discriminatory conduct.Allen received two awards this semester for his work on Holocaust and Genocide Studies. The awards recognize his outstanding research and commitment to work in the field. His award-winning work has been featured so far in three conferences this academic year. Brandeis Center Welcomes First Director of Communications Reflecting the Brandeis Center’s rapid growth, the organization hired its first director of communications, Scott Piro, earlier this year. With decades of experience in public relations and corporate storytelling, Piro will focus on external communications to amplify LDB’s work and messaging with existing and even broader audiences, including the Brandeis Brief, LDB’s social media accounts and donor relations, and LDB’s website redesign and launch. Piro will also oversee LDB’s undergraduate communications and development internship program. “I’m overjoyed to join the Brandeis Center,” Piro shared. “Among all the vital activity fighting anti-Semitism by committed organizations, the Brandeis Center stands out for its ‘boots on the ground’ level of positive impact on Jewish college students’ lives. I have been waiting my whole life to share in this kind of impact.” Apply today for a JIGSAW Fellowship for the 2022-23 academic year We are currently accepting applications for our JIGSAW law school fellowship program for the 2022-23 academic year. LDB’s JIGSAW – Justice Initiative Guiding Student Activists Worldwide – fellows are a select group of law students, trained by Brandeis Center lawyers, to empower and assist undergraduates in combating anti-Semitism on campus. Interested candidates should send a cover letter, resume, transcript and writing sample to: info@brandeiscenter.com with the subject heading “JIGSAW Fellow Application.” Find out more on our website. Sign up for our monthly Brandeis Brief and other messages from us Forward this email to a friend Donate to the Brandeis Center The Louis D. Brandeis Center 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 1025, Washington, DC 20006You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. The Louis D. Brandeis Center is a nonprofit organization supported by individuals, groups and foundations that share our concern about Jewish college students. Contributions are tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. To support our efforts to combat campus anti-Semitism, please contact us at info@brandeiscenter.com
Algemeiner APRIL 26, 2022 1:29 PM Georgetown Urged to Take Stand Against ‘Disgraceful’ Law School Event Featuring ‘Antisemitic’ Speaker by Algemeiner Staff A view of Georgetown University. Photo: Mario Roberto Durán Ortiz via Wikimedia Commons A campus speaking tour by a notorious pro-Palestinian activist stoked further controversy this week at Georgetown University, which faced calls from Jewish students and national groups to denounce his antisemitic rhetoric before a planned Tuesday night appearance at the law school. The event — billed by Georgetown Law Students for Justice in Palestine as a session on “Law as a Tool of Dispossession” against Palestinians in Jerusalem — is set to feature Mohammed El-Kurd, whose recent appearances at several US colleges have been condemned by Jewish students. A poet and current columnist for The Nation magazine, El-Kurd has repeatedly trafficked in antisemitism, including accusing Israelis of harvesting the organs of Palestinians and having an “unquenchable thirst for Palestinian blood.” On Tuesday, Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, a legal advocacy group that protects Jewish university students, called on Georgetown President John J. DeGioia to “use this disgraceful event as a teaching moment to educate the University community about the world’s oldest form of hatred, antisemitism.” “The remedy for hate speech is neither to silence it nor to remain silent,” the Brandeis Center said in a letter. “Instead, the University should use its own voice to clearly and unequivocally condemn antisemitic speech that runs counter to the University’s values of inclusivity, ‘mutual reverence,’ ‘civility and mutual respect,’ and that threatens to create a hostile environment for Jewish students on campus.” The Center noted a recent controversy over Georgetown Law professor Ilya Shapiro, who was placed on administrative leave and rebuked by the law school’s dean after comments about a Supreme Court nominee that were deemed contrary to the school’s values. “Certainly the University’s previous stern treatment of actual or allegedly offensive speech necessitates its clear and unequivocal rejection of Mr. El-Kurd’s blatantly antisemitic and offensive rhetoric that maligns Jewish students and all Jews who support Israel,” the Brandeis Center argued. “Georgetown should not have a blind spot when Jews are the target.” Outcry over Tuesday’s planned talk had earlier come from the head of the Anti-Defamation League, which has previously documented what it describes as El-Kurd’s “unvarnished, vicious antisemitism.” “Mohammed El-Kurd has a long, ugly history of antisemitic incitement & conspiratorial rhetoric that goes far beyond reasoned criticism of Israel,” Jonathan Greenblatt, ADL CEO, tweeted Monday. “Outrageous & indefensible that @GeorgetownLaw invited him to bring his hate to their campus.” The StopAntisemitism group called on Georgetown to cancel the event, revealing a message received from an anonymous law student attesting that “many students voiced their concerns over this and the deans have done nothing.” The group pointed to audio it previously published of El-Kurd’s recent appearance at ASU, in which he can be heard telling students, “I suspect some apartheid lovers are here too” — and that “if you heckle me, you will get shot.” “Administrations like Georgetown’s state they’re against antisemitism yet allow Jew haters like Mohammed El-Kurd to freely spread hatred against Jews on their campuses,” StopAntisemitism said Monday. “Enough is enough — cancel El-Kurd’s speech ASAP!” On Monday, the National Review magazine reported that the law school’s dean of students defended tolerating El-Kurd’s appearance as part of a commitment to free speech, during a meeting with Jewish students over the controversy.
Contact: Scott Piro, 202-681-4845 Brandeis Center Joins AMCHA, AEN and SPME in Urging Universities to Withdraw MESA Membership Washington, D.C., (April 6, 2022) – The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights (LDB) joined three additional leading organizations in urging a dozen U.S. universities to withdraw institutional membership from the Middle East Studies Association (MESA) after the association endorsed an academic boycott of Israel. Failure to do so, the groups charge, would violate the intent and spirit of the Title VI funding that these universities receive from the U.S. Department of Education. All four groups collaborating – LDB and its partners, AMCHA Initiative, the Academic Engagement Network (AEN), Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME) – work to defend campus free speech while combating campus anti-Semitism. LDB Chair Kenneth L. Marcus commented: “University leaders who are committed to the principles of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion should, as a first step, withdraw from any organization that embraces anti-Semitic or racist principles. This includes, at a minimum, organizations that adopt anti-Semitic Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement policies or practices. This would be an important step for any university, but it is doubly important for any institution that accepts federal funds under Title VI. We congratulate Tammi Rossman-Benjamin for her leadership on this issue and welcome the opportunity to work with AMCHA, AEN, and SPME.” A dozen prominent universities – Columbia, GWU, Georgetown, Indiana Univ., NYU, UC Berkeley, UCLA, Univ. of Chicago, Univ. of Michigan, Univ. of Pennsylvania, Univ. of Washington and Yale – currently receive four-year federal Education Department grants between $1-2 million for Middle East Studies programs and foreign language instruction. Two other universities with federally-funded Middle East Studies programs – Univ. of Arizona and Duke – are among the seven universities that have thus far disassociated themselves from MESA following its decision to endorse an academic boycott of Israel. “An academic boycott of Israel, if implemented, would seek to derail the academic opportunities of students and faculty who desire to study in and about Israel, end the many formal partnerships your university has with educational and training institutions in Israel, and thwart extensive faculty research initiatives and collaborations at Israeli institutions and with Israeli scholars,” wrote the organizations in personalized letters to each of the 12 schools. “All of these boycott-compliant actions would directly and substantively harm your university’s students and faculty.” When applying for these coveted federal funds, each school touted its commitment to the study of Israel and Hebrew, including their numerous research partnerships with Israeli institutions of higher education and their popular Israel study abroad programs. All of these programs for which federal funding was requested would be threatened by an academic boycott of Israel. Under Title VI of the Higher Education Act, students are protected from discrimination based on their race, color, or national origin at federally funded post-secondary educational institutions. The Brandeis Center authored a white paper detailing the need to address widespread abuse of this program and led a multi-organization coalition that successfully urged reforms strengthening how Title VI is administered. The guidelines of the Palestinian Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) – endorsed by MESA – urge faculty to work toward shutting down study abroad programs in Israel and refuse to write recommendations for students who want to attend them; scuttle their colleagues’ research collaborations with Israeli universities and scholars; and cancel or shut down educational events organized by students or faculty featuring Israeli leaders or scholars, including those that promote coexistence and mutual understanding or that seek to “normalize” Israel by presenting it in anything but a negative light. “It’s also important to point out that the PACBI guidelines’ rejection of the normalization of Israel in the academy…also encourages the censuring, denigration, protest and exclusion of pro-Israel individuals,” wrote the four organizations. “Recent studies have shown that these PACBI-compliant behaviors are strongly linked to acts targeting Jewish and pro-Israel students for harm – including assault, vandalism, harassment and suppression of speech – and that the presence and number of faculty who support academic BDS are strongly correlated with every measure of campus anti-Semitism.” In addition to urging the universities to sever ties with MESA, LDB and these likeminded groups recommend each university publicly acknowledge and denounce the direct harm that an academic boycott of Israel would cause students and faculty on their own campuses and provide assurances that they will not allow their faculty to implement an anti-Israel academic boycott.
Brandeis Brief: April 2022 Advocates for equality, coexistence, and peace all screamed for our hard work on the legal case against ice cream maker Ben & Jerry’s and parent company Unilever. Here’s more LDB news you may have missed this month: Our client, Avi Zinger of Ben & Jerry’s Israel, showed in a moving op-ed the harm from anti-Israel boycotts – undermining progress towards peace and coexistence. The Jewish Press editorial board recognized the Brandeis Center as having “entered the arena [of fighting anti-Semitism] in a meaningful way.” We published a vital new fact sheet explaining the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism’s impact on American law. In an op-ed for the Washington Times, Brandeis Center Founder and Chairman Kenneth L. Marcus explored efforts to combat anti-Semitism on the next battleground: Corporate America. In a piece for The Hill, LDB Scholar-in-Residence Diane Kunz explained the importance and impact of expanding the Education Department’s Civil Rights data-gathering about religious bias incidents in K-12 schools. LDB President Alyza Lewin led a webinar for the Canadian Antisemitism Education Foundation on how to counter anti-Semitism on campus. Brandeis Center intern Davis Allen authored a pair of deep dive blog posts about the momentum surrounding the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism and the impact on campus for Jewish students of the annual ‘Anti-Israel Hate Week.’ Read about these and other developments at the Center in this month’s Brief. As always, we thank you for your tax-deductible donations and acknowledge that without you our work could not be done. Brandeis Center Brings Suit Against Ben & Jerry’s and Unilever In a move as on-brand as Unilever’s anti-Israel boycott is off-limits, the Brandeis Center and its team of attorneys filed suit in federal district court against Unilever and its subsidiary Ben & Jerry’s for unlawfully terminating its 34-year business relationship with the manufacturer and distributor of Ben & Jerry’s in Israel. According to the lawsuit, what Unilever demanded Ben and Jerry’s Israel do – boycott certain parts of Israel while continuing to sell in other parts of the country – is illegal under Israeli law, as well as U.S. law and policy. When the company, also known as American Quality Products (AQP), refused to comply with Unilever’s unlawful demand, Unilever refused to renew its license. LDB followed up the suit’s announcement by filing a formal preliminary injunction motion on behalf of AQP’s owner, Avi Zinger, urging the court to prevent Unilever from terminating his license pending the outcome of litigation. According to the motion: “It is hard to imagine a clearer case of classic breach” of contract. Zinger’s case demonstrates that Unilever’s termination of AQP’s license is unlawful, because their only reason for termination is Zinger’s refusal to break the law. Our client, CEO of Ben & Jerry’s in Israel Avi Zinger, showed in a moving op-ed the real harm from anti-Israel boycotts – undermining progress towards peace and coexistence. Zinger explained: “Ben & Jerry’s claim that this is not a boycott of Israel is disingenuous. Under the law, no one can lawfully do what Ben & Jerry’s is demanding I do….Terminating my license solely because I refused to commit a crime is a violation of U.S. law. You cannot, as a condition of a contract, demand that a party do something illegal.” “The hypocrisy of the BDS movement is truly reprehensible,” stated Palestinian human rights activist Bassem Eid. “The truth is that BDS actually harms those it ‘claims’ to help. Today it’s ice cream, but tomorrow it could be medicine, or lifesaving Israeli technology that will be denied to the Palestinian people in the name of BDS. Media coverage highlighting the case announcement and preliminary injunction motion included: Financial Times, Wall Street Journal, New York Post, Haaretz, Algemeiner, Times of Israel and the Australian Jewish News. Jewish Press Editorial Board Recognizes LDB’s Work Fighting Anti-SemitismThe Jewish Press editorial board detailed the Brandeis Center’s work fighting Unilever’s anti-Israel boycott and anti-Semitism on campus at Brooklyn College, Stanford University, University of Illinois and USC. LDB is gratified to be recognized as having “entered the arena in a meaningful way.” LBD Fact Sheet Explains IHRA Definition’s impact on American law Much has been written about the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism and its included examples which explain when delegitimization, demonization or double standards applied to Israel are anti-Semitic. Less understood is the definition’s impact on American law. The Brandeis Center has meticulously assembled a clear explanation of the ways that interconnected American statutes and laws establish the IHRA definition as legally binding in the U.S. This new and invaluable resource will significantly help people and institutions – from students and parents to college administrators and faculty – understand the legal obligations U.S. universities must uphold to keep Jewish students, faculty and staff safe. LDB Urges the Education Department to Expand its Civil Rights Data Collection in K-12 schoolsBrandeis Center Scholar-in-Residence Diane Kunz authored an op-ed for The Hill discussing the need for the U.S. Department of Education to expand its Civil Rights Data Collection so that they will finally track anti-Semitic incidents as well as harassment of other religious groups. “Schools, local educational authorities and the federal government …need to understand precisely which religious groups are being victimized and which specific hate crimes students face to know how to effectively reverse the trend in religious harassment,” declared Kunz. Last month, the Brandeis Center formally urged the Education Dept. to close the data gap. LDB Chairman Kenneth Marcus Discusses anti-Semitism in the Corporate World and on CampusLDB founder and chairman Kenneth L. Marcus published a Washington Times piece clarifying the increasingly popular term ‘antiracist’ in campus and corporate trainings – and how the concept holds its own dangers. “Antisemitism is the canary in the coal mine,” explained Marcus, pointing to the Google diversity executive officer who said: “If I were a Jew I would be concerned about my insatiable appetite for war and killing in defense of myself.” Marcus emphasized that the problem is not limited to Google but instead pervades so-called “antiracist” training: “‘Antiracism’ depends upon a binary: whiteness versus people of color. In order to preserve this binary, antiracist trainers must diminish or erase the identities of people who don’t fit the narrative, including ‘white-adjacent’ Asians or ‘white-passing’ Jews. A prime example is Stanford, where Jewish staff have been cajoled by diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) staff to join a ‘whiteness accountability’ affinity group, created for ‘staff who hold privilege via white identity’.” Interviewed by the Jerusalem Post for an article about inherent anti-Semitism in many campus and corporate DEI programs, Marcus stated: “Some of the bias and hate incidents are appearing in the very institutions that are intended to address hate and bias…. In the DEI programs, we’re seeing anti-Jewish stereotypes, biases, defamations, separation of Jews from other groups, and so-called ‘erasive antisemitism,’ which is to say denial of what it means to have a Jewish identity.” Alyza Lewin Presents on Using the Law to Combat Campus Anti-Semitism Brandeis Center President Alyza Lewin spoke about how to use the law to combat anti-Semitism on campus at a webinar hosted by the Canadian Antisemitism Education Foundation and co-sponsored by dozens of other organizations. Over 200 viewers tuned in to hear Lewin share approaches used by the Brandeis Center in the U.S. that could serve as models for efforts to combat anti-Semitism on campuses around the globe. Interested parties who missed Lewin’s insights and experience on this vital topic can still watch the recorded program on YouTube, accessed via CAEF’s website. LBD Intern Davis Allen Pens Blog Posts on IHRA and Anti-Israel Hate WeekIn a blog post this month, LDB intern Davis Allen takes a close look at the IHRA Working Definition’s global adoption momentum as institutions and governments worldwide continue to embrace the definition, while anti-IHRA recent challenges at Florida State University and the University of Texas Austin were defeated. In the blog, Allen also covers recent webinars about IHRA by Canada’s former Attorney General and Minister of Justice – and LDB advisory board member – Irwin Cotler. Anti-Israel Hate Week is right now spreading hate and lies about Israel and Jews across the world’s college campuses until April 18. In another timely blog post, Allen reviews the history of this perennial anti-Israel harassment and notes that other world events could potentially supersize the anti-Semitic hate this year. He also explains how this hate-fest fuels anti-Jewish hostility on campus and highlights the ways that groups like SSI and Jewish on Campus are countering anti-Semitic disinformation.
Responses and Solutions to Jew Hatred on Campus REGISTER HERE! As part of the Web Talk Series – Fighting Back, Responses to Jew Hatred – Alyza Lewin, President, The Brandeis Center for Human Rights Law, will address the topic of what can be done about Jew Hatred on Campus. Q&A will follow her presentation. Time Mar 24, 2022 02:00 PM in Eastern Time (US and Canada)
The Washington Times ~ By Kenneth L. Marcus | Wednesday, March 2, 2022 ~ OPINION: Florida legislation to ban antiracist indoctrination recently passed the House and is now headed to the state senate. It is not alone. Around the country, over 120 bills to ban such practices have been introduced in state legislatures, but most have been aimed at public schools or colleges. The Florida legislation is unusual in protecting not only public K-20 students but also corporate employees. Other states are considering bills that would target corporations that are government contractors, nonprofits or even beneficiaries of state subsidies or tax exemptions. It is not surprising that legislators are turning to business. Antiracist trainings are now pervasive in the corporate world. Sometimes derided as “wokeism” or conflated with critical race theory, “antiracism” is a political stance that views capitalism as a form of systemic discrimination perpetrated by white supremacists against people of color. “Antiracism” is hardly the opposite of racism. The opposite of racist is, quite simply, “not racist.” In a telling remark, antiracist intellectual Ibram X. Kendi argues that the claim of “not racist” neutrality is a “mask for racism.” In fact, the opposite is true. It is the claim of “antiracism” that is the mask for racism. This can be seen in the excesses of corporate antiracism, many unearthed by the Manhattan Institute’s Chris Rufo. The allegations are drearily similar but nevertheless appalling. American Express trained employees to deconstruct their racial and sexual identities, then ranked themselves on a hierarchy of “privilege.” AT&T taught its workforce that “racism is a uniquely white trait” and that white employees “are the problem.” Coca-Cola trained workers to “be less white,” i.e., “less ignorant,” “less arrogant” and “less oppressive.” CVS told employees that “to be born in [the United States] is to literally have racist ideas rain on our head consistently and constantly.” Disney taught that white employees must “work through feelings of guilt, shame, and defensiveness to understand what is beneath them and what needs to be healed.” Raytheon urged staff to “identify everyone’s race“ and give “those with marginalized identities … the floor in meetings or on calls, even if it means” other employees must “silence” themselves. Walmart separated workers into racially segregated affinity groups and taught staff that the United States is a “white supremacy culture” in which white people engage in “white supremacy thinking” and “internalized racial superiority.” Antisemitism is the canary in the coal mine. Last year, Google, which reportedly trained staff to believe that America is a “system of white supremacy,” had to reassign diversity lead Kamau Bobb, for an old blog entry in which he had written, “If I were a Jew I would be concerned about my insatiable appetite for war and killing in defense of myself.” The problem is not limited to Google. Antiracism depends upon a binary: whiteness versus people of color. In order to preserve this binary, antiracist trainers must diminish or erase the identities of people who don’t fit the narrative, whether supposedly “white adjacent” Asians or “white-passing” Jews. A prime example is Stanford, where Jewish staff have been cajoled by diversity, equity and inclusion staff to join a “whiteness accountability” affinity group, created for “staff who hold privilege via white identity.” Unsurprisingly, this move has blended seamlessly with antisemitic stereotypes about Jewish power and criminality. As Ruth Wisse has explained, people organize against Jews as part of a political struggle. Antiracism is just such a struggle. Antiracism training is hardly the only option available to managers who want to combat racism or facilitate diversity and inclusion. Civil rights compliance training teaches how to comply with anti-discrimination laws. Its goal is to prevent unlawful discrimination. Diversity management training teaches how to manage human differences in order to advance organizational goals. Its purpose is to help organizations to advance their missions in light of human resource constraints, such as the difficulties that some managers face in recognizing talent when it appears in workers who look differently than they do. Antiracism training, by contrast, teaches people to confront whiteness and undermine white supremacy. Its goal is neither legal (combating unlawful discrimination) nor managerial (facilitating workplace diversity) but rather political (pursuing social justice by dismantling supposed systemic racism). Some commentators argue that the problem with putting “social justice” above profits is that it will cause businesses to go out of business. The bigger problem is that it will make them forget what such training should accomplish, to wit: eliminating discrimination and facilitating organizational success. The irony is that much of this activity is already illegal. It violates federal employment law by creating hostile environments, segregating employees by race or treating workers differently based on race. Regardless, businesses should clean up such practices without waiting for regulators, legislators or litigators to force their hands. In order to defeat racism, we must defeat antiracism too. In doing so, we can refocus our attention on combating discrimination and facilitating inclusion. • Kenneth L. Marcus is founder and chair 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.
Wall Street Journal ~ A Ben & Jerry’s refrigerator at a store in the Israeli-occupied West Bank. The ice-cream maker said last year that it would stop selling its products in the West Bank and parts of East Jerusalem. PHOTO: RONEN ZVULUN/REUTERS By Ginger Adams Otis, March 3, 2022 10:50 am ET An Israeli ice cream manufacturer has filed a breach of contract lawsuit against Ben & Jerry’s, claiming his license wasn’t renewed because of where he sells his products. Avi Zinger filed a suit in New Jersey federal court Thursday, listing the Vermont ice cream brand and its parent, Unilever PLC, UL -2.27% as defendants. The lawsuit alleges the company declined to renew the license for Mr. Zinger’s American Quality Products LTD because he refused to stop distributing Ben & Jerry’s products in the Israeli-occupied West Bank and parts of contested East Jerusalem. Mr. Zinger, 69 years old, is seeking an injunction against the company that will permit him to keep making and distributing Ben & Jerry’s ice cream in Israel until his lawsuit is resolved. Mr. Zinger’s suit is also seeking unspecified damages to be determined at trial. Ben & Jerry’s announced last year that it would no longer sell its products in the Israeli-occupied West Bank and parts of contested East Jerusalem once its current licensing agreement expires at the end of 2022. Such sales were “inconsistent with our values,” said a statement posted on its website when the decision was announced in July 2021. Unilever didn’t immediately respond Thursday to requests for comment. A Ben & Jerry’s spokeswoman declined to comment. Mr. Zinger’s company has been licensed to sell the brand for 34 years. In his suit, he said Ben & Jerry’s “repeatedly promised” they would extend his five-year license when it expires this December. On July 19, 2021, his suit said, Mr. Zinger was told in a letter that Ben & Jerry’s wouldn’t be renewing his license. That same day, the lawsuit said, the company issued its public statement that it would stop selling in West Bank settlements at the end of 2022. Attorneys for Mr. Zinger said he is being forced to choose between his livelihood and the law. If he complied with Unilever’s policy, Mr. Zinger would be in violation of Israeli’s nondiscrimination law and its law prohibiting boycotts against Israeli, as well as U.S. laws prohibiting the same, the suit stated. “The only reason for a nonrenewal was plaintiffs’ refusal to carry out [the] unlawful demand,” the suit said. Ben & Jerry’s, founded in 1978 by Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield and acquired by Unilever in 2000, has long touted values such as human rights and economic justice. As part of its acquisition by Unilever, Ben & Jerry’s and its independent board retained the right to make decisions about its social mission. Around 700,000 Jewish settlers live in areas in East Jerusalem and the West Bank captured by Israel in the 1967 war. The settlements are largely treated the same as the rest of Israel and supported by the government. Pro-Palestinian activists have long campaigned to get companies to boycott Israeli settlements. Both areas are considered occupied territory by the international community. A Ben & Jerry’s refrigerator at a store in the Israeli-occupied West Bank. The ice-cream maker said last year that it would stop selling its products in the West Bank and parts of East Jerusalem. PHOTO: RONEN ZVULUN/REUTERS By Ginger Adams Otis Follow
Algemeiner ~ By Dion J. Pierre | February 24, 2022 ~ Clocktower Quad at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina. Photo: Warren LeMay/Wikimedia Commons. Duke University’s student government voted on Wednesday to recognize Students Supporting Israel (SSI) as a registered campus club, months after it was controversially denied that status. While the Student Government (DSG) Senate previously granted SSI recognition in November, this decision was vetoed by DSG’s president days later, after the pro-Israel club shared and criticized an Instagram post by a student who accused SSI of promoting “settler colonialism.” The Senate later sustained the veto with 37 votes in favor, 10 abstentions, and 8 absent senators. The veto, which the president justified by claiming that SSI “singled out” the student, was decried by Jewish groups at Duke and nationwide as evidence of rising antisemitism and anti-Zionist sentiment on campus. Responding to these concerns, Duke University President Vincent E. Price promised to provide alternative means of support for SSI, but many Jewish advocacy organizations, including the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law — who warned that the university could face “potential legal liability” over SSI’s unequal treatment — contended that nothing short of full recognition would rectify the situation. SSI’s national office on Wednesday applauded DSG for doing “the right thing” by reinstating the pro-Israel club. “While much can be said about the events of the past four months, in this message we want to highlight one of the most important things that this process showed us: the strength of the pro-Israel community when it stands united,” SSI national said. Also commenting on the news, Alyza Lewin, president of the Brandeis Center, noted that DSG had inordinately scrutinized SSI’s application for recognition “from the start.” “They were subjected to intense questioning in the application process unlike any other groups,” Lewin said. “They were asked to appear, in-person, at their application hearing to answer questions, when other groups are approved without any in-person appearance. And then, and most egregiously, they were singled out and their recognition was revoked, all because they support Israel.” Lewin argued that DSG violated SSI members’ right to free speech and subjected them to discrimination because of the “Zionist component of their Jewish identity.” “We are pleased the university finally did the right thing and righted this egregious wrong without our needing to take legal action,” she continued. “But this type of discrimination must not happen at Duke or any other university. We were honored to support the Duke SSI students who exhibited remarkable strength and conviction, standing up for themselves and what’s right.” Duke University did not respond to The Algemeiner’s request for comment in time for publication.
BRANDEIS CENTER PRESS RELEASE Contact: Nicole Rosen 202-309-5724 Brandeis Center Commends Duke’s Decision to Reinstate SSI Washington, D.C., February 24: President of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, Alyza D. Lewin, issued the following statement today in response to Duke University’s student government’s unanimous decision, late last night, to officially reinstate the Duke Students Supporting Israel (SSI) chapter: “I commend the university for finally correcting the injustice that was done when SSI was singled out for discriminatory treatment and its recognition was revoked. It’s important to note that SSI was treated differently from the start. They were subjected to intense questioning in the application process unlike any other groups. They were asked to appear, in-person, at their application hearing to answer questions, when other groups are approved without any in-person appearance. And then, and most egregiously, they were singled out and their recognition was revoked, all because they support Israel. These behaviors directly violated the SSI students’ right to free speech, and discriminated against them on the basis of the Zionist component of their Jewish identity. We are pleased the university finally did the right thing and righted this egregious wrong without our needing to take legal action. But this type of discrimination must not happen at Duke or any other university. We were honored to support the Duke SSI students who exhibited remarkable strength and conviction, standing up for themselves and what’s right. At the Brandeis Center, that is our role. We educate students of their rights under the law, and stand ready to use the law when necessary to ensure Jewish students are not discriminated against.” The Brandeis Center provided strategic and legal guidance to the students throughout this situation and was prepared to take legal action on behalf of the students against the university if it had not taken appropriate corrective action. The Brandeis Center also warned Duke President Vincent Price that formally recognizing the Duke chapter of SSI was the “only way to ensure the University’s compliance” with federal law. “The DSG’s action were discriminatory, and require action by the University,” the Brandeis Center alerted Price back in December and again in January. “A university violates Title VI when its student government rejects a Jewish student organization’s request for recognition based on standards that are not applied to non-Jewish groups.” In November, only days after the Duke University Student Government (DSG) voted to recognize campus group SSI, DSG president Christina Wang vetoed the recognition. Wang claimed SSI inappropriately “singled out an individual student on their organization’s social media account.” The incident in question involves SSI’s response to a Duke student’s tweet that read, “My school promotes settler colonialism.” SSI retweeted the student’s post with the following response, “To Yana and others like her, please allow us to educate you on what ‘settler colonialism’ actually is and why Israel does not fall under this category whatsoever,” and they invited the Duke community to an “SSI 101” event to discuss. According to the Brandeis Center, Duke’s behavior violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of national origin and shared ethnicity. The Brandeis Center explained how from the moment Duke SSI applied for recognition, it was subjected to special scrutiny not applied to other non-Jewish groups. First, student representatives from Duke SSI were forced to endure extensive questioning before the student government vote. Second, once a prospective student group fulfills all application requirements, as Duke SSI did, the student government usually approves the group’s recognition unanimously. In the case of SSI, however, student senators voiced opposition when a formal vote was held on the question of recognition. Third, up until this incident, the presidential veto had never been used to revoke a formal recognition. In fact, when Duke’s Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) posted a photograph of students affiliated with another pro-Israel group on campus (DIPAC) with the antagonizing caption, “Because y’all are a bunch of racist clowns,” and tweeted, “So I’m going to repeat myself again, f**k DIPAC and every Zionist on campus,” SJP’s recognition was not even challenged, let alone revoked.
Brandeis Brief: March 2022 The calendar’s shortest month is jam-packed with news from the Brandeis Center: The U.S. Dept. of Education opened an investigation into Brooklyn College based on an important anti-Semitism complaint we filed, highlighting the new harassment Jewish students face – being vilified as “privileged white oppressors.” The Brandeis Center provided strategic and legal guidance to Duke Univ.’s Students Supporting Israel chapter – helping lead to its unanimous reinstatement by Duke’s student government. News sources interviewed the Brandeis Center for legal insights into anti-Zionist activity on the campus of SUNY New Paltz and a bipartisan congressional letter calling for the Education Dept.’s long-awaited campus guidance to thwart anti-Semitism. We pressed the Dept. of Education to increase K-12 public school tracking of religious harassment to the same level it tracks for students’ race, national origin, sex, color and disability. In an op-ed for the New York Daily News, Brandeis Center founder and chairman Kenneth L. Marcus explained how Whoopi Goldberg’s Holocaust remarks threw the issues at Brooklyn College into stark relief. Campus Reform interviewed the Brandeis Center about our work exposing anti-Semitism in Stanford’s D.E.I. program – and The Society for Human Resource Management included our insights about anti-Semitic bias in the workplace in an article read by thousands of HR professionals. A Brandeis Center alum’s op-ed called for the creation of a domestic anti-Semitism Czar position. And our spring semester intern covered a webinar focused on Amnesty International’s most recent biased and one-sided report. Read about these and other developments at the Center in this month’s Brief. As always, we thank you for your tax-deductible donations and acknowledge that without you our work could not be done. The Brandeis Center’s founder and chairman – and former Assistant U.S. Secretary of Education for Civil Rights – discussed the organization’s complaint filed with the EEOC, alleging anti-Semitic discrimination from Stanford Univ.’s D.E.I. program. Brooklyn College to Jewish Students: ‘Get Your Whiteness in Check’ U.S. Opens Investigation Over Anti-Semitic Harassment The Dept. of Education’s Office for Civil Rights accepted the Brandeis Center’s complaint on behalf of Jewish students at Brooklyn College. The students allege professors accused them of inflicting racial oppression and their peers openly discussed violence against them. Jews who spoke up about anti-Jewish hostility or an imposed status of “white, privileged oppressor” were told to “get your whiteness in check,” by faculty and staff. “We can’t allow [schools] to pit one group against the other and suggest that calling out discrimination against some means tolerating it against others. That’s…impermissible under the law,” declared Denise Katz-Prober, director of legal initiatives at the Brandeis Center. The complaint is similar to one the Brandeis Center filed in 2020 against the Univ. of Illinois, in that it uses Title VI of the Civil Rights Act to determine that Jews on campus were discriminated against on the basis of national origin. The so-called “Marcus rule,” named after Brandeis Center founder and chairman Kenneth L. Marcus from his time as Assistant U.S. Secretary of Education for Civil Rights, established that Title VI protects Jews, Muslims and Sikhs from discrimination based on national-origin, despite its not mentioning religion. Read LBD’s Title VI complaint and press release about it. News coverage included JNS and Inside Higher Ed. Brandeis Center founder and chairman Kenneth L. Marcus authored an op-ed for the New York Daily News discussing what the Brooklyn College case and Whoopi Goldberg’s recent Holocaust remarks have in common: “Goldberg’s comments, while deeply incorrect, reflect current orthodoxies infecting schools, universities and major corporations. In rejecting her mistakes, we must reexamine the ideology that sustained them. At Brooklyn College, Jewish students should be given the same opportunities as all other students, including the right to define their identity and express their perspective. Racism means what it has always meant: treating people differently because of their race. It must be eradicated wherever it is and whomever it targets.” Students Supporting Israel Chapter Reinstated at Duke University After months of Duke’s student government singling out its Student Supporting Israel chapter with discriminatory treatment – including revoking its recognition – it unanimously reversed the decision on February 24. Among the influential factors in changing the chapter’s fate was continuous strategic and legal guidance to Duke SSI students from the Brandeis Center – and our willingness to take legal action against the university if it had not taken corrective action. The Brandeis Center also warned Duke Univ. President Vincent Price that formally recognizing Duke’s SSI chapter was the “only way to ensure the university’s compliance” with federal law. “I commend the university for finally correcting the injustice that was done when SSI was singled out for discriminatory treatment and its recognition was revoked,” declared Alyza Lewin, president of the Brandeis Center. “It’s important to note that SSI was treated differently from the start….discriminated against…on the basis of the Zionist component of their Jewish identity. This type of discrimination must not happen at Duke or any other university. We were honored to support the Duke SSI students who exhibited remarkable strength and conviction, standing up for themselves and what’s right. At the Brandeis Center…we educate students of their rights under the law, and stand ready to use the law when necessary to ensure Jewish students are not discriminated against.” Jewish SUNY New Paltz Students Said Excluded From Sexual Assault Awareness Group Over Support for Israel (The Algemeiner) Jewish students who cofounded a sexual assault awareness group were kicked out for expressing support for Israel. After the campus newspaper broke the story, the group defended its position to exclude the Jewish students. “Jewish students who refused to shed a critical part of their Jewish identity were cast out as pariahs from the group they themselves founded for support. So where does that leave the Jewish victim of sexual assault?” stated Alyza Lewin, president of the Brandeis Center. “It is blatant discrimination and it must stop.” Ted Lieu Spearheads Bipartisan Congressional Letter Calling on Education Dept. to End Delays Investigating Antisemitism Complaints (Jewish Journal) U.S. Rep. Ted Lieu led a bipartisan effort to end the Dept. of Education’s delay implementing guidance meant to protect Jewish students on campus, which has persisted through the Trump and Biden administrations. Nearly 40 member of Congress publicly agreed with the Brandeis Center’s recommendation to the Education Dept: it should use its authority to focus university leaders on anti-Semitism; act with greater urgency, especially on pending cases; and complete the promised regulatory action. “It was great to see [Ted Lieu’s] letter and the fact that so many members of Congress joined him in expressing concern what Jewish students are facing on campus,” said Kenneth L. Marcus, founder and chairman of the Brandeis Center and former Assistant U.S. Secretary of Education for Civil Rights. “It’s really important – even during this period when the regulation is pending – for the Education Dept., the Justice Dept., and even the White House, to send clear signals that Jewish students can’t be forgotten in the rush to deal with other issues.” Brandeis Center intern Davis Allen authored a blog post about the bipartisan, Congressional action aligned with our organization’s recommendation. Brandeis Center Urges Education Department: Close the Data Gap Between Religious Minorities and Other Groups A submission by the Brandeis Center to the Dept. of Education aims to close disparities in collection data gathered by American public schools – so that attacks on religious minorities are properly tracked. The Education Dept. only began tracking religious harassment during the 2015-16 school year, at the Brandeis Center’s urging, as part of the process it uses to collect harassment and bullying data on sex, race, color, religion, national origin and disability. Its initial report lists a staggering 10,848 religious-motivated incidents in a single year. Yet unlike the other categories – where the Education Dept. subdivides offenses into the different groups targeted – it still does not classify religious offenses by type of faith. The discrepancy leaves the Dept. of Education with a severe blind spot about dangers facing religious minorities, hindering its ability to develop an effective response. It cannot say how many anti-Semitic or anti-Muslim attacks occur in public schools, the way it can pinpoint anti-Black racism or anti-Hispanic discrimination based on national origin. Addressing this problem, the Brandeis Center formally submitted comments in response to the proposed regulations governing Civil Rights Data Collection for the 2021-22 school year: “Often the college students who harass or bully other college students harassed or bullied their peers during their K-12 years. Therefore, it is vital for CRDC to [track] religion/perceived religion issues to the same detailed extent as it covers other categories of bias incidents. Collecting this information will significantly contribute to safer K-12 environments for all students.” SHRM: “Employers should educate HR and DEI personnel about anti-Semitism” The Society for Human Resource Management shared insights from the Brandeis Center’s Kenneth L. Marcus with its 300,000 HR and business executive members in 165 countries in its article Combatting Antisemitism in the Workplace. The article recognized that anti-Semitic practices have expanded beyond Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) programs on college campuses – and are now infiltrating workplace DEI programs, too. “We’re seeing this increasingly, and it is particularly problematic for those of us who are committed to civil rights for everyone,” said Marcus, founder and chairman of the Brandeis Center and former Assistant U.S. Secretary of Education for Civil Rights. Brandeis Center alum: “Create a domestic anti-Semitism coordinator.” Hilary Miller, a former Brandeis Center intern, pointed out that while Deborah Lipstadt should be confirmed as the next U.S. special envoy to monitor and combat anti-Semitism, “the role she could play domestically is limited….The special envoy’s mandate is aimed at addressing ‘acts of anti-Semitism and anti-Semitic incitement that occur in foreign countries.'” Miller strongly encouraged the U.S. to follow the examples of the U.K., Germany, Canada and other countries in creating a domestic anti-Semitism coordinator to face this concerning rise of anti-Jewish hatred. Professor Abraham Bell Challenges Amnesty International UK Report That Claims Israel is an “Apartheid” State Davis Allen (Brandeis Center intern) On February 3, the UK Lawyers For Israel Charitable Trust hosted a webinar titled “Amnesty International’s Latest Attack on Israel.” Professor Abraham Bell, a frequent Brandeis Center partner, explained that Amnesty’s recent report alleging Israel is responsible for apartheid has been dismissed outright by the Biden administration and others as “absurd”. He identified flaws in the report’s allegations and discussed Amnesty International UK’s wider agenda. Read Davis Allen’s blog and watch UKLFI’s webinar. Our friends at the London Centre for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism have issued a call for papers and panels for its “21st Century Antisemitism” conference. Submission deadline: March 1, 2022. More information here. Co-founders Lesley Klaff, Alvin Rosenfeld and Dina Porat sit on our Academic Advisory Board. Co-founder David Hirsh is a friend to our organizaiton. The Louis D. Brandeis Center is a nonprofit organization supported by individuals, groups and foundations that share our concern about Jewish college students. Contributions are tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. To support our efforts to combat campus anti-Semitism, please contact us at info@brandeiscenter.com Donate Here The Louis D. Brandeis Center 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 1025, Washington, DC 20006 You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list.