Are you looking for guidance on how to explain anti-Semitism to your colleagues and institutions? Do you want to better understand Title VI and VII? Do you want to learn how to effectively address and combat anti-Semitism in the workplace and on campuses? The American Jewish Medical Association will host a webinar with President Lewin to explain how anti-Semitism festers in university and workplace environments, providing a roadmap to approach issues that affected individuals may face. Register Now
American Jewish University President Dr. Jeffrey Herbst invited Brandeis Center Chairman Kenneth L. Marcus to join him in a conversation on August 1, 2024, about anti-Semitism on college campuses. On the AJU webinar “Using Law to Fight Antisemitism,” Marcus explained that Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is the single most important tool to combat anti-Semitism, since its scope was clarified (by him during the George W. Bush administration) to include the Jewish people. He explained that Title VI incentivizes best practices from universities at a time when “few institutions were doing all of the right things.” This information comes critically at a time when Jewish have been excluded, for example, from a sexual assault survivor club for demonstrating their support for Israel, as evidenced in the Brandeis Center’s SUNY New Paltz case and alluded to by Marcus. “You would expect these institutions, today, of all times, to be ready for a problem like this,” Chairman Marcus shared. He explained how university Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs have received significantly-increased funding following the murder of George Floyd, but Jewish students have received, at best, mixed treatment from DEI offices: “They don’t say ‘Jews have faced a history of persecution,'” Marcus continued. “They say ‘Jews are white’.” Marcus uses this framework to convey that DEI is often part of the problem when dealing with campus anti-Semitism, rather than the solution. If there is one thing a college campus can do to address anti-Semitism, Marcus suggests that schools adopt the IHRA definition, the only internationally-agreed upon definition of anti-Semitism. Watch Chairman Marcus and Dr. Herbst’s fascinating conversation below. Watch the full webinar below: Play videoTextBlockModalTitle × Your browser does not support the video tag. Authored by: Jonah Feuerstein
Published by Jewish News Syndicate on 8/2/24 Senior counsel Robin Pick said the university “has the opportunity to be a leader and a model for other universities in the fight against antisemitism.” The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law announced a settlement with the school on Thursday, following an early mediation process through the U.S. Department of Education to address a complaint about campus antisemitism. The student who filed the complaint reported incidents of harassment the university failed to address, including a tunnel filled with swastikas and someone screaming at her “Death to Jews! Death to Zionists!” Brandeis reported that the academic institution will implement a non-discrimination policy aligning with the 2019 Executive Order 13899 and North Carolina’s House Bill 942 (also known as the Shalom Act) which utilizes the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism. North Carolina State will also revise training for students and staff, and conduct a campus survey to assess the depth of anti-Jewish sentiment. Kenneth L. Marcus, founder and chairman of the Brandeis Center, called the settlement “a significant step forward in our efforts to combat antisemitism on college campuses.” He said the agreement “paves the way for meaningful change on both NCSU’s campus and on college campuses throughout the country.” Robin Pick, senior counsel at the Brandeis Center, stated that “by committing to combat antisemitism in accordance with Executive Order 13899 and North Carolina House Bill 942, which apply to training, education, recognizing, identifying and combating antisemitic hate and discrimination, NC State has the opportunity to be a leader and a model for other universities in the fight against antisemitism.”
August 1, 2024, (Washington, D.C.): Brandeis Center lauds settlement under which North Carolina State University agrees to take meaningful action to combat anti-Semitism Washington, D.C., (August 1, 2024): Today, Kenneth L. Marcus, founder and chairman of the Brandeis Center, and Robin Pick, Senior Counsel at the Brandeis Center, issued the following statements in response to a recent settlement the Brandeis Center reached with North Carolina State University (NCSU) through the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Right’s (OCR) early mediation process. The settlement arises from a complaint filed with OCR alleging that NC State violated Title VI when it failed to address a hostile environment resulting from multiple incidents of harassment of a student based on her shared Jewish ancestry. Allegations by the complainant against NCSU include the following: During the complainant’s first week at school, she walked through a campus tunnel covered with swastikas. When she complained to the administration, they told her there was nothing they could do. The complainant was doxxed and harassed on social media for being Jewish and supporting Israel, with her name and face posted publicly. Classmates who knew that the complainant was Jewish, harassed and threatened her with violence as they sped past her, screaming out of a car window “Death to Jews! Death to Zionists!” In the face of a hostile anti-Semitic campus climate, the University has demonstrated a willingness to change course and combat anti-Semitism by implementing its non-discrimination policy in accordance with Executive Order 13899 and North Carolina General Statutes (including the new North Carolina House Bill 942 known as the SHALOM Act) which refer to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (“IHRA”) definition and its contemporary examples for identifying and combating ant-Semitism. Said Kenneth L. Marcus, founder and Chairman of the Brandeis Center: The Brandeis Center’s settlement with NCSU represents a significant step forward in our efforts to combat anti-Semitism on college campuses. This settlement paves the way for meaningful change on both NCSU’s campus and on college campuses throughout the country. The settlement agreement includes a commitment to abide by Executive Order 13899 and North Carolina Statutes, including North Carolina House Bill 942, which explicitly reference the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism and its contemporary examples for combating anti-Semitism. We commend the University for its commitment to include references to these important tools in the settlement agreement and in their revised anti-discrimination policy. Said Robin Pick, Senior Counsel at the Brandeis Center: By committing to combat anti-Semitism in accordance with Executive Order 13899 and North Carolina House Bill 942, which apply to training, education, recognizing, identifying and combating anti-Semitic hate and discrimination, NC State has the opportunity to be a leader and a model for other universities in the fight against anti-Semitism. The Resolution Agreement includes the following obligations: The University will revise, implement and disseminate its Non-Discrimination Policy in accordance with Title VI, Executive Order 13899, and North Carolina General Statutes (which include the newly passed SHALOM Act) and include language reflective thereof.Executive Order 13899 requires that both the IHRA definition and its contemporary examples be considered when identifying discrimination based on national origin and combating anti-Semitism; The SHALOM Act states that North Carolina adopts the Working Definition of Antisemitism adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance on May 26, 2016, including the contemporary examples of antisemitism set forth therein, as a tool and guide for training, education, recognizing, and combating antisemitic hate crimes or discrimination. The University will take a firm stand against anti-Semitism by issuing a non-discrimination statement to the campus community that includes links to Executive Order 13899, North Carolina House Bill 942, OCR’s May 7, 2024 Dear Colleague Letter which contains examples of anti-Semitic harassment, along with other resources to combat discrimination on campus. The University will revise its trainings for students, faculty and staff and include example(s) from Executive Order 13899 or OCR guidance of the different ways Jewish students may experience discrimination and harassment. The University will conduct a campus climate survey and assess whether additional engagement, communication, resources and/or training are needed to improve the campus climate, including for the University’s Jewish community. Additionally, NCSU leadership will meet with students and leaders of Jewish organizations each semester to discuss community needs and concerns for Jewish students.
Summer has not slowed the Brandeis Center (LDB) down. In August, LDB sued the U.S. Department of Education for unlawfully dismissing LDB’s Title VI complaint against the University of Pennsylvania only weeks after opening an anti-Semitism investigation. LDB also sued the Association of Legal Aid Attorneys (ALAA) Union for retaliating against Jewish and Non-Jewish members opposing its anti-Semitic practices. And LDB filed a brief opposing UC Berkeley’s motion to dismiss our lawsuit against UC Berkeley over its “longstanding, unchecked spread of anti-Semitism.” Brandeis Center Sues the U.S. Dept. of Education The Brandeis Center and its membership organization, Jewish Americans for Fairness in Education (JAFE), filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Dept. of Education Office for Civil Rights (OCR) for failing to follow its own procedures in dismissing the Brandeis Center’s November 2023 complaint against the University of Pennsylvania for fostering an environment of anti-Semitism on its campus – an abdication of its responsibility to thoroughly investigate instances of egregious anti-Semitism and other forms of discrimination that occur in potential violation of OCR’s anti-discrimination standards and the Administrative Procedure Act. “By failing to follow its own administrative procedures, in violation of its own stated mission of ‘vigorous enforcement of civil rights,’ the Office for Civil Rights and the Department of Education overall have not only shown a blatant disregard for the wellbeing of Jewish students at the University of Pennsylvania, but for the due process entitled to every American who seeks relief from discrimination in educational institutions,” declared Brandeis Center Chairman Kenneth L. Marcus. “Jewish students at UPenn and many other college campuses across the country increasingly continue to face an egregious amount of anti-Semitism, particularly after the Oct. 7 massacre. OCR’s decisions have crippled these students’ ability to seek remedy from these hostilities and allows certain colleges and universities to continue ignoring or even fostering anti-Semitism on their campus.” Brandeis Center Sues Association of Legal Aid Attorneys Union The Brandeis Center and law firm Lieb at Law filed a federal District Court complaint against the Association of Legal Aid Attorneys, UAW Local 2325 (“the ALAA”) and individual union officials for undertaking acts to expel and otherwise discipline two Jewish and one Non-Jewish ally from the union, in retaliation for their lawsuit opposing the ALAA’s anti-Semitic discriminatory practices manifested in the now infamous ALAA resolution attacking Israel soon after the October 7 terror attacks. The resolution opposed by the plaintiffs was so vile that several non-profit legal services providers employing ALAA’s members denounced it as anti-Semitic and unrepresentative of their values, including plaintiffs’ employer, the Legal Aid Society of Nassau County, as well as The Legal Aid Society and the New York Legal Assistance Group. “Zionism is integral to Jewish identity, but plaintiffs – proud unionists who have dedicated their professional lives to serving poor and disadvantaged clients – didn’t need to be Zionists, or in one case, even Jewish, to understand that anti-Semitism is antithetical both to their obligations as lawyers and to the mission of a union responsible for representing the interests of all its members,” proclaimed Brandeis Center Director of Corporate Initiatives and Senior Counsel Rory Lancman. Brandeis Center Opposes UC Berkeley’s Motion to Dismiss Suit LDB and its membership subsidiary JAFE filed an opposition brief in response to UC Berkeley motion to dismiss LDB’s lawsuit over the university’s “longstanding, unchecked spread of anti-Semitism.” “Defendants paint the suit as one alleging a series of discrete incidents. Wrong — it is a suit alleging defendants’ failure to respond in any meaningful way to a longstanding hostile environment,” wrote LDB in its opposition brief. UC Berkeley argued in June that the case should be tossed because the university had not had time to internally address some of the incidents cited as evidence of anti-Semitism in the suit, including a tent encampment and the blockade of a gate on campus. Prior to the school’s attempt to dismiss the suit, LDB expanded its complaint to include even more anti-Semitic activity on campus, which UC Berkeley still has not addressed. “Amazingly, the UC Berkeley regents have the nerve to claim that they shouldn’t be held accountable because they haven’t had enough time to investigate the situation,” said Brandeis Center Chairman Kenneth L. Marcus. “They got the facts and the law wrong,” stated LDB General Counsel L. Rachel Lerman, who added that it is “abundantly clear” the plaintiffs have valid claims and UC Berkeley is “mistaken” in its argument. With anti-Semitic activity on campus likely to escalate once classes resume next month, Lerman explained that the court cannot give the school even more time to pursue its ineffective strategies. Pointing to comments made by UC President Michael Drake in November 2023 stating that students have faced “outright violence,” Lerman said: “Usually you would expect an immediate response at that point.” Alyza Lewin Features in Touro University Webinar Brandeis Center President Alyza D. Lewin was among the featured panelists in Touro University’s Touro Talks 2024 Distinguished Lecture Series, “Antisemitism on College Campuses and Beyond.” Play View President Lewin’s conversation with U.S. District Judge, Honorable Roy K. Altman, Touro University President Dr. Alan Kadish, and ‘Touro Talks’ Director Nahum Twersky. videoTextBlockModalTitle × Your browser does not support the video tag. LDB Holds Capitol Hill Policy Briefing on Disturbing Trend: Retaliation Against Jewish Whistleblowers Exposing Campus Anti-Semitism The Brandeis Center hosted a July 10 Capitol Hill policy briefing titled “Retaliation Against Jewish Students and Parents: How Counter-complaints and Baseless Accusations are Being Weaponized to Silence Jewish Voices on Campus.” The event highlighted disturbing accounts of anti-Semitism alongside troubling and derelict administrative responses. Brandeis Center Board Member Tevi Troy served as moderator, and Brandeis Center Senior Counsel Mark Goldfeder, Staff Attorney Deena Margolies, and Staff Attorney Ben Alkon all presented as panelists. Emory and American University students, and the parent of a child enrolled in the Berkeley Unified School District shared their personal experiences with university administrators – who were indifferent to campus anti-Semitism and allowed baseless counter-complaints against the Jewish students to proceed. In her concluding remarks, Brandeis Center President Alyza D. Lewin explained that the experiences shared by the student and parent panelists are not isolated instances but are emblematic of a systematic effort to delegitimize and chill claims of anti-Semitism. She stressed the important responsibility universities have to recognize and dismiss such malicious complaints and highlighted the definition of anti-Semitism as a vital tool for distinguishing between good-faith political debates and anti-Semitism. Play Read more about the policy briefing from Brandeis Center Intern Nicole Hirschkorn and watch the recorded briefing here. videoTextBlockModalTitle × Your browser does not support the video tag. Brandeis Center Hires Senior Litigator Kami Z. Barker Accomplished trial attorney, disability policy advisor, and former intergovernmental lobbyist Kami Z. Barker joins the Brandeis Center as its newest senior litigator as part of its continued expansion. “The Brandeis Center is happy to welcome Kami and looks forward to seeing her contributions to fighting the onslaught of anti-Semitism in our educational systems,” said LDB Chairman Kenneth L. Marcus. “Kami is joining our team when the demand for our legal services is higher than ever,” said Brandeis Center President Alyza D. Lewin. “It’s my privilege to join the Brandeis Center’s fight to ensure that no one is forced to tolerate hate speech on campus or in the workforce,” affirmed Ms. Barker. In response to the growing demand for our services, the Brandeis Center continues to expand its team, initiatives, and policy-driven work. LDB will continue to hire legal and other staff throughout 2024. Professionals with strong experience and interest in joining LDB’s efforts to combat anti-Semitism are encouraged to watch the opportunities section of LDB’s website – and subscribe to the organization’s mailing list. Kenneth Marcus to Feature in American Jewish University Webinar July 30: “Using Law to Fight Antisemitism on College Campuses” Brandeis Center Chairman Kenneth L. Marcus will feature in an American Jewish University webinar on July 30, exploring the utility of using Title VI and other civil rights laws to fight anti-Semitism on college campuses. The event is free, and we encourage you to register for what will surely be an engrossing conversation between Chairman Marcus and AJU President Jeffrey Herbst. Brandeis Center Interns The Brandeis Center’s summer interns have been busy writing about the latest developments in the fight against anti-Semitism. Jonah Feuerstein authored two new blog posts chronicling the testimony of LDB clients before Congress. Nicole Hirschkorn authored two more posts, one detailing LDB’s latest policy briefing, and another covering the recently issued “Global Guidelines for Countering Antisemitism,” to which the U.S. is a party. Eli Goldstein authored the press release announcing the hiring of Kami Z. Barker. The Brandeis Center is Hiring The Brandeis Center is hiring for multiple full-time positions: New York Litigation Attorney Staff Attorney (New York; Washington, D.C.; or remote) Director of Development ( Washington, D.C.; New York; or remote) Executive Assistant (Washington, D.C. ǀ Telework) Duties, qualifications, and compensation are listed in the Opportunities section of our website. If you meet the qualifications and are passionate about our mission to advance the civil and human rights of the Jewish people and promote justice for all, we want to hear from you. Interested candidates should send resumes and cover letters by electronic mail to info@brandeiscenter.com. For the attorney roles, we suggest also including a writing sample and list of references.
The Brandeis Center hosted a Capitol Hill policy briefing on July 10, 2024, titled “Retaliation Against Jewish Students and Parents: How Counter-complaints and Baseless Accusations are Being Weaponized to Silence Jewish Voices on Campus.” The event highlighted disturbing accounts of anti-Semitism alongside troubling investigations into Jewish parents and students by campus administrators. Brandeis Center Board Member Tevi Troy served as moderator, and Brandeis Center Senior Counsel Mark Goldfeder, Staff Attorney Deena Margolies, and Staff Attorney Ben Alkon all presented as panelists. Brandeis Center experts opened the briefing by explaining what retaliatory complaints look like – how they are different from genuine grievances – and gave a brief history of the recent surge in counter-complaints. Congressional staffers in attendance heard firsthand accounts from three university students and one high-school parent who experienced retaliatory complaints aimed at chilling their accusations of anti-Semitism. Emory University student Sophie Ravina shared her experience of being harassed and threatened online after posting a video showing Emory peers engaging in openly anti-Semitic behavior. Although Ms. Ravina’s post focused on the anti-Semitic activity and not at all on the identity of her peers, several perpetrators chose to frame her post as “Islamophobic.” University administrators, instead of addressing the anti-Semitism to which Sophie was responding, demanded that Ravina take down her post. Ilana Pearlman, a parent in the Berkeley Unified School District, reflected on her experience grappling with the school district’s poor handling of anti-Semitism. Rather than holding anti-Semitic students and teachers accountable for their actions, BUSD instead chose to reassign Jewish students away from classrooms where they were being harassed. BUSD parents who voiced concerns about the unaddressed anti-Semitism were accused of “using Israel Defense Force drones over classrooms for surveillance,” and faced doxing and threats by other parents. American University students Naomi Hazan and Lauren Cayle described their experience receiving retaliatory complaints after they posted flyers around campus to raise awareness about the plight of Israeli hostages in Gaza. When they were harassed by fellow students as they put up the posters, they wisely recorded the perpetrators for their own security and to provide administrators evidence of students violating the student code of conduct. Instead of addressing the anti-Semitism and policy violations captured on video, the university subjected Hazan and Cayle to baseless disciplinary proceedings, despite possessing exculpatory evidence, for lawfully recording their harassers. Ms. Cayle stated that “I have never been one to hide my Jewish identity….I have always lived loud and proud, but now…fear follows me like a shadow” due to the hostile environment fostered by American University. Brandeis Center President Alyza D. Lewin concluded the briefing by stating that these testimonies are not isolated instances, but rather a systematic effort to delegitimize and chill claims of anti-Semitism. She stressed the importance of universities recognizing and dismissing these malicious complaints and highlighted the IHRA working definition of anti-Semitism as a vital tool for distinguishing between good-faith political debates and anti-Semitism. The Brandeis Center previously filed civil rights complaints with the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights (OCR) against the Berkeley Unified School District (BUSD) and American University for severe and pervasive anti-Semitism. In May 2024, OCR opened an investigation into BUSD just days after LDB expanded its complaint with even more evidence of how hostile and threatening an environment it has become for Jewish students. If you or your child is experiencing discrimination perpetuated or unaddressed within an educational institution, the Brandeis Center is ready to provide support. Contact us to get legal help. Watch the full hearing below. Play videoTextBlockModalTitle × Your browser does not support the video tag. Authored by: Nicole Hirschkorn
The Department of Education has opened 48 cases tied to antisemitism at colleges and universities since Oct. 7, most related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Kenneth Marcus, Founder and Chairman of the Brandeis Center is at the forefront of many of these legal cases. AJU President Jeffrey Herbst will join in conversation with Marcus and explore the utility of using Title VI and other laws to fight antisemitism on campuses, the tension between free expression and safety, and how Jewish students and their families should approach the challenges they face. Reserve your spot for this free, virtual event here. Register Now
Play Ahead of his testimony at the U.S. House Committee on Ways & Means hearing: “Crisis on Campus: Antisemitism, Radical Faculty, and the Failure of University Leadership,” Brandeis Center Chairman Kenneth L. Marcus appeared on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” program. videoTextBlockModalTitle × Your browser does not support the video tag.
Play Full Hearing Recording – Brandeis Center Chairman Kenneth L. Marcus’s Opening Statement Begins at 1:03:07 videoTextBlockModalTitle × Your browser does not support the video tag. Ken Marcus Testimony 061324 FINALDownload
Published 6/8/24 by the Washington Examiner; story by Peter Cordi The Department of Education has opened over 100 civil rights investigations into universities and school districts since tensions boiled over on campuses following the Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attack on Israel. California had the most investigations into its schools of any state. Of the 103 Title VI investigations relating to tensions surrounding the Israel-Hamas war, the vast majority involve antisemitic conduct. There have also been lawsuits alleging anti-Palestinian bias at some schools. According to the Anti-Defamation League, there was a 400% uptick in antisemitic incidents in the wake of the onset of the war while 2023 saw a record number of such incidents. Anti-Muslim incidents have also increased. There have been 28 states with similar investigations since Oct. 7, and California and New York are head and shoulders above the others, with 21 and 15 opened, respectively. Pennsylvania had eight, Illinois had seven, and Massachusetts and New Jersey had six each. Ohio, Georgia, Washington, Minnesota, Michigan, and Maryland each had three investigations. Kansas, Florida, Louisiana, Arizona, North Carolina, and Indiana had two. Nevada, Montana, Virginia, Missouri, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Wisconsin, Vermont, Hawaii, and Texas each had one. Examples of conduct prompting civil rights investigations Since Oct. 7, the number of incidents of antisemitism on campuses has increased. There have been several reports of Jewish students being physically assaulted or blocked from entering a public area, and numerous cases of antisemitic slurs being hurled at students. Kenneth Marcus, founder and head of the Brandeis Center, pointed out to the Washington Examiner one especially notable instance in Ohio State University’s campus community where a student was asked, “Are you a Jew?” When the student acknowledged that he and his friends were Jewish, two men allegedly “punched one of the Jewish students and threw him into the street.” Yael Lerman, director of StandWithUs legal department, identified three trends aside from antisemitic speech being seen on campus since Oct. 7 in an interview with the Washington Examiner. Besides physical violence or threats and barrier of entry, Lerman said “retaliation or false claims” have been the subjects of multiple university disciplinary proceedings in which Jewish or Zionist students have allegedly been falsely accused of misconduct. She additionally noted that the kind of conduct seen at high schools generally differs from what is seen on college campus, with more “classic antisemitism” such as slurs and tropes reported at high schools, but the “anti-Zionist strand” is seen more in higher education. While the vast majority of conduct resulting in civil rights lawsuits and subsequent investigations has involved acts of antisemitic speech or violence, there have also been several lawsuits, especially following the breaking up of anti-Israel encampments, alleging anti-Muslim or anti-Palestinian bias. An April lawsuit against Columbia University alleged that Arab students, particularly those wearing keffiyehs and hijabs, were targets of harassment including being called terrorists and receiving death threats. The lawsuit also claimed “discriminatory treatment” of Palestinian students “protesting peacefully” because the school allowed the police to break up the anti-Israel encampment. The City University of New York School of Law was also sued in April over the alleged removal of student fliers “supporting Palestinian lives and liberation,” increased surveillance and police presence at the school in response to anti-Israel “activism,” and the “last-minute” cancellation of a campus event about Gaza. Legal advocacy groups such as the Brandeis Center, the ADL, Palestine Legal, and the Center for Constitutional Rights typically handle cases such as these, but individuals have also filed complaints on their own or someone else’s behalf. Lerman called it “unprecedented” to see pro bono cases being eagerly taken on in this capacity and pointed to Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP as one major firm involved in high-profile Title VI lawsuits. Civil rights investigations most likely to generate accountability Lerman explained that the complaints filed by “broader” advocacy groups “generally speaking … will be more likely to have the evidence and witness necessary for [the Office for Civil Rights] to make a finding,” as opposed to investigations based on “quick complaints drawn up by concerned community members.” She noted that the ones specifically filed by StandWithUs, including at Middlebury College in particular, are “all equally egregious because we don’t file Title VI complaints unless we think they’re worthy of full investigation.” Marcus, who was appointed as assistant secretary of education for civil rights during the Trump administration, echoed a similar sentiment and called on the Office for Civil Rights to “take action on every one of our complaints” because “they all describe untenable situations that shouldn’t be permitted at federally funded institutions.” “I’m concerned that until we actually see universities starting to lose their federal funding, we’re not going to actually see significant change in how these schools address antisemitism,” Lerman said. “We need to start seeing some of the schools lose their federal funding in order for real change to start happening.” The latest in California Of the 14 related Title VI civil rights investigations opened up by the Department of Education in the month of May, six were in California. No other state had more than one. Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) has acknowledged the rise in antisemitism and anti-Muslim discrimination in the wake of Oct. 7 through a number of actions, including publishing a plan to combat antisemitism in the Golden State, highlighting efforts to address anti-Muslim bias, and calling on the state’s education leaders to take additional steps to protect students. Newsom has also authorized the expansion of funds to bolster security at religious institutions, traveled to Israel to meet with Israeli leaders and victims of the Oct. 7 attack, and convened with both Jewish and Arab leaders in his own state. “Antisemitism, Islamophobia, hatred and bigotry in all forms have no place at the CSU,” Amy Bently-Smith, director of strategic communications and public affairs at California State University said in a statement. “Any act of hatred or discrimination creates a hostile environment that can interfere with a student’s right to access, benefit from, and feel safe in their education programs or an employee’s right to access, benefit from, and feel safe in the workplace. Hostile environment harassment and discrimination is prohibited by the law and CSU policy.” The Washington Examiner reached out to the California Department of Education, the California Justice Department, and the University of California for comment.