June 2023 Brandeis Brief

Marcus Frames Importance of IHRA to Biden’s Upcoming Anti-Semitism Plan

News outlets published a trio of timely op-eds by Brandeis Center Chairman Kenneth L. Marcus explaining why it is crucial that the Biden administration’s expected anti-Semitism plan include only one definition of anti-Semitism, that is, the IHRA working definition of antisemitism, to the exclusion of all others. This point was made more urgent by reports indicating that the White House might embrace the controversial Nexus Document as well as the IHRA Definition.

Marcus responded to reports that the latest version of the White House anti-Semitism strategy “highlights” the IHRA Definition but still “favorably” mentions the diluted Nexus Document. As the Brandeis Center Chairman explained in if this account is true, it will put the Jewish community in a bind.”

Writing in the Jewish Journal, Marcus stated: “While many in the Jewish community may celebrate a Biden endorsement of IHRA, it will be regrettable if the price is that the White House recognizes a lesser standard [the Nexus Document] as well. Until the White House plan is officially released, it is not too late for the Biden administration to withdraw support for Nexus. If President Biden is sincere in his many statements of opposition to anti-Semitism, he should insist on this immediately.” eJewish Philanthropy and allIsraelnews amplified the JJ and JI pieces, respectively.

In another piece for the Washington Examiner, Marcus declared: “What the plan omits is even more important than what it includes. Look to see whether the Biden plan tries to legitimize the controversial definitions that have been offered as left-wing alternatives to the IHRA, such as the Jerusalem Declaration, the Nexus Definition, or any number of others. These diluted forms would frustrate effective enforcement, undermine international unity, and prevent meaningful comparisons among jurisdictions. While the IHRA definition has been adopted by dozens of U.S. allies, these counterfeits have, fortunately, garnered no significant support internationally. For the Biden administration to legitimize any of them would break the international consensus and undermine anti-discrimination efforts.”

The New York Sun – on the same day as the Examiner – published yet another op-ed by Marcus on this urgent subject: “To legitimize the [Nexus or Jerusalem] definitions meant to mask antisemitism from the left…would be viewed as a betrayal of the Jewish community, including Mr. Biden’s center-left supporters, and undermine his entire plan,” asserted Marcus.

In Newsweek, Marcus Slams UN’s One-Sided Criticism of Israel During Latest Terror Attacks

In a timely Newsweek op-ed, Brandeis Center Chairman Kenneth L. Marcus addressed the illegalities under International Humanitarian Law of Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIK’s) indiscriminate rocket attacks against Israel.

Responding to the one-sided condemnations of Israel issued by prominent U.N. officials, Marcus corrected misinformation about the concept of “proportionality” and the legality of military versus civilian targets.

“In international humanitarian law, the principle of proportionality bans any attack which will foreseeably cause incidental civilian injury, damage, or death which would be excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage,” wrote Marcus. “As the Louis D. Brandeis Center explained in a recent white paper on “International Humanitarian Law in Asymmetric Warfare,” this well-established principle doesn’t ban all military actions resulting in the incidental loss of civilian life, often referred to as “collateral damage.” In necessary military responses, collateral damage, while tragic, is often unavoidable. Moreover, under international law, collateral damage violates the proportionality principle only if it is excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage.”

Download the Brandeis Center’s essential white paper on this topic and comment or share our two-part Instagram reel to amplify its message on social media.

Brandeis Center Sues UC, Berkeley for Failing to Provide Public Records

The Brandeis Center filed a lawsuit against UC Berkeley for failing to satisfy its legal obligations, under California law, to provide public records on request. The documents at issue relate to the exclusionary bylaws at Berkeley Law that prevent most Jewish Americans from addressing many student organizations at Berkeley Law.

“We want a full understanding of what the situation is before we do anything about it,” stated Brandeis Center General Counsel L. Rachel Lerman to Berkeley student newspaper The Daily Californian. “It is part of civil rights to be able to get access to government documents and that’s what California promises us and has very strong rules about that….After we made three requests it reached a point where we felt we had to do something.”

Santa Barbara student newspaper Daily Nexus syndicated the story, and Lerman also spoke about the lawsuit with the top legal trade news source for California attorneys.

Rachel Lerman Explains why Brandeis Center is Investigating Santa Ana School District

“We suspect that Santa Ana’s curricula embraces the discredited anti-Semitic ideologies that were contained in the rejected first draft of California’s Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum….If that turns out to be the case, then Santa Ana is taking a very ugly road and one which they may come to regret.”

Marcus and Alyza D. Lewin Address Congressional Breakfast for Jewish American Heritage Month

Brandeis Center Chairman Kenneth L. Marcus and President Alyza D. Lewin spoke at a Congressional Breakfast hosted by Combat Antisemitism Movement (CAM) in honor of Jewish American History Month.

In a panel titled “Implementing the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism: The Mainstream Tool to Combat Contemporary Antisemitism,” Marcus highlighted the importance of having an internationally recognized, gold-standard definition of anti-Semitism. “Where there’s a question of identifying what is and what is not anti-Semitism, there is no substitute for IHRA,” asserted the Brandeis Center Chairman.

President Lewin spoke about the challenges faced by Jewish Americans on campus. In a panel titled “Understanding Threats to Jewish-American Life: Challenges of Antisemitism Today,” Lewin explained how contemporary anti-Semitism has become pervasive on American university campuses, targeting Jewish students who receive little support from administrators. “What we really want is to make sure that Jews in America and around the world are able to celebrate our ancestral and ethnic heritage – freely and with pride,” professed Lewin. “We should be able to fully engage in society without having to hide who we are.”

Brandeis Center Director of Policy Education Emma Enig covered the event, which highlighted the accomplishments of the Jewish community – and the sharp rise in American anti-Semitism – in an insightful blog post. She detailed how more than a dozen elected officials came together to discuss Jewish American achievements, interfaith relations, and security threats against the Jewish community.

Chairman Marcus was a featured speaker at another CAM event, “A Winning Tool: How the IHRA Definition Has Transformed the Fight Against Antisemitism.” In his remarks, In his remarks Marcus pointed out that U.S. colleges and universities are bound by the IHRA Definition, whether or not they have formally adopted it. As Marcus further explained, higher education institutions that accept federal funding sign assurances that they will comply with applicable federal laws, regulations and executive orders, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Executive Order 13899, which incorporates IHRA.