Story from Jewish Insider’s “Daily Kickoff” for September 22, 2023

Pressure is mounting on the University of Pennsylvania ahead of a conference featuring an array of anti-Israel speakers that is slated to begin today on the Philadelphia campus, Jewish Insider’s Matthew Kassel reports.

Four attorneys at the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law are claiming in a detailed letter to the University of Pennsylvania’s president, Elizabeth Magill, that she has failed in her legal responsibilities to address a controversial Palestinian literature festival held on the school’s campus and featuring several speakers who have voiced antisemitic rhetoric and called for the destruction of Israel.

“By tacitly condoning the inflammatory and false narratives about Israel and the denial of the Jews’ ancestral connection to the land of Israel — themes that speakers at this weekend’s festival repeatedly espouse — Penn is allowing the festival to create a hostile environment for Jewish students on its campus at a time when, even the university has acknowledged, antisemitic harassment, vandalism and assault are rising on college campuses,” the attorneys write in the letter, which was shared exclusively with JI.

Published by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency on 9/13/23; Story by Andrew Lapin

The number of student governments taking up resolutions to boycott Israel dropped sharply last year, even as anti-Israel activity on college campuses nearly doubled over the previous year, according to the latest tally by the Anti-Defamation League.

The antisemitism watchdog releases an analysis of anti-Israel activism on college campuses annually, as part of its regular reporting about antisemitism across the United States. In recent years, the group has strengthened its ties to Hillel to gather better information about what’s happening on college campuses, where Jewish and pro-Israel groups have long said they are concerned about whether Jewish students who support Israel can feel safe and included. Hillel’s policies prohibit partnerships with groups that oppose Israel in a number of ways — including supporting Israel boycotts or denying Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish and democratic state.

Overall, the ADL’s latest report says, a groundswell in activism among pro-Palestinian students has resulted in many instances when Israel was condemned or students who support Israel were harassed. In total during the 2022-2023 school year, the group documented and verified what it said were 665 anti-Israel incidents, up from 359 in the previous school year.

The results, the report concludes, point to the emergence of “a more radical activist movement that seeks to make opposition to Israel and Zionism a pillar of campus life and a precondition for full acceptance in the campus community, effectively causing the marginalization of Jewish students.”

The tally is based on reports of anti-Israel incidents that were received directly by the ADL; reported on in the media; posted by anti-Israel activists themselves; or compiled by other Jewish and pro-Israel campus groups such as the Israel on Campus Coalition, which is an umbrella group, or the right-leaning Amcha Initiative. The ADL report counted as “anti-Israel events” any student or university panels at which participants promoted the movement to boycott, divest from and sanction Israel, known as BDS, or suggested that Israel was an apartheid state. It also counted campus screenings of the Netflix film “Farha,” a Jordanian movie about a Palestinian refugee set during Israel’s 1948 War of Independence.

The report arrives at a time when the ADL is facing criticism from both the left and the right over whether it strays too much from its core mission, to monitor and respond to antisemitism. The group’s CEO says that anti-Zionism is a form of antisemitism. The latest report emphasizes that not all campus anti-Israel incidents “may be characterized as antisemitic” but concludes, “Collectively, they may contribute to a more hostile campus environment for Jewish students.”

The tally for the 2022-2023 school year includes nine instances of anti-Israel vandalism and no instances of physical assault — both slight decreases from the previous year’s tally, which had 11 instances of vandalism and one assault.

A major change came in the number of student and faculty organizations considering resolutions about whether to endorse BDS. In the 2020-2021 school year, 17 BDS resolutions were voted on and 11 passed. The following year, 2021-2022, student and faculty governments took up 20 resolutions. Last year, according to the ADL report, the number was three.

The report does not speculate about a reason for the change but notes that students initiated BDS campaigns that did not reach student governments at additional campuses.

The biggest change came in the number of protests, actions and events in which students promoted violence against Israel, condemned its existence or criticized students who identify as Zionists. The ADL tallied 629 such events, up from 303 the previous year.

A much smaller number of recorded events involved harassment of Zionist students. In one incident detailed in the report, a student affiliated with Students for Justice in Palestine shouted “Zio! Zio! Zio!” at an openly pro-Israel student who walked near an SJP table at the University of California, Davis.

Some events cataloged in the survey made national headlines, such as an anti-Israel commencement speech recently delivered by a graduating City University of New York law student; and The Mapping Project, a diagram of Boston-area Jewish institutions that anonymous activists claimed were financially supporting Israel (and that was swiftly denounced by top lawmakers and the BDS movement). The ADL included the latter when university chapters of groups such as Students for Justice in Palestine expressed support for it.

Litigating the bounds of campus anti-Israel activity has become an intense focus of many Jewish and pro-Israel groups. Since the Trump administration expanded the federal definition of campus antisemitism in 2019, legal organizations like the Brandeis Center have filed numerous complaints with the U.S. Department of Education alleging that universities’ failure to properly curb anti-Israel activity on campus amounts to a violation of Jewish students’ civil rights; some of these cases have resulted in federal investigations and even settlements with the schools. The ADL’s survey on campus anti-Zionism partially relies on data reported by some of these pro-Israel activist groups, including the AMCHA Initiative and the Israel on Campus Coalition.

Multiple recent surveys, including one in 2021 from the ADL and Hillel, have found that that a substantial proportion of  college students say they have experienced or witnessed antisemitism, sometimes because of their real or perceived support for Israel.

Brandeis Center Founder and Chairman Kenneth L. Marcus was a featured speaker during the Combat Antisemitism Movement’s May 2, 2023 online symposium: “A Winning Tool: How the IHRA Definition Has Transformed the Fight Against Antisemitism.”

.

The event highlighted the vital importance of the IHRA working definition of antisemitism — and promoted its continued growth and implementation. Along with Chairman Marcus, the forum featured representatives of entities that have adopted the definition — from the U.S. (Representative Josh Gottheimer from New Jersey; Tennessee Governor Bill Lee) to Australia (Glen Eira City Councilmember Margaret Esakoff) to Europe (Vice President of the European Parliament Nicola Beer; Mayor of Tirana, Albania Erion Veliaj). These officials shared why they chose to adopt the IHRA Definition and how this positively impacted their work and society as a whole.

.

Chairman Marcus spoke about how all U.S. colleges and universities are, in fact, bound by the IHRA Definition, whether or not they have chosen to formally adopt it. That is because higher education institutions that accept federal funding (which includes almost all U.S. colleges and universities) sign assurances that they will comply with applicable federal legislation, regulations, and executive orders. These include not only Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but also Executive Order 13899, which since 2019 has included the IHRA Definition (including its examples) and directs campus administrators to consider the definition when evaluating claims of anti-Semitic bias.

View Chairman Marcus’s address below.

Letter from 15 U.S. Senators to Education Secretary Miguel Cardona highlighting concerns about taxpayer-funded anti-Semitism in Middle East Studies programs – March 8, 2023

Fifteen U.S. Senators accused the Biden administration of allowing “taxpayer-funded antisemitism” on college campuses, arguing that the prevalence of these events and programs violate federal law and are making Jewish students feel less safe on campus.

Dept. of Education Office for Civil Rights — Remarks from Assistant Secretary Catherine E. Lhamon, January 4, 2023

Recognizing the “rise in reports of anti-Semitic incidents,” Assistant Secretary Catherine E. Lhamon emphasized on January 4, 2023, that current Dept. of Education Office for Civil Rights (OCR) guidance “affirms OCR’s commitment to complying with” former President Donald Trump’s “Executive Order 13899 on Combating Anti-Semitism.” As Brandeis Center Chairman Kenneth L. Marcus has explained in Newsweek, it is both important and commendable that the Biden administration is drawing public attention to the continuing application of the Executive Order, which incorporates the IHRA Working Definition of Anti-Semitism and its guiding examples relative to Israel, to OCR investigations. As Assistant Secretary Lhamon reminds OCR’s stakeholders, the Order remains an active part of OCR’s current policy guidance.

After backlash from the Jewish community in response to George Washington University’s (GW) promotion of professor and Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) activist Ilana Feldman to interim dean of the Elliott School of International Affairs, the university released a letter confirming their “clear and unambiguous” rejection of BDS, condemning antisemitism and guaranteeing that Feldman “will not be a candidate for the permanent position.” While GW’s statement is an encouraging step in the right direction, the university must follow through with swift action by appointing Feldman’s replacement, in order to assure Jewish and pro-Israel students that the university will confront the increasing antisemitism and harassment these students are facing at GW.

 

GW has an Israel problem and its Jewish students are suffering the consequences. In a New York Times Op-Ed, Blake Flayton, a progressive student, described being marginalized on campus due to his cultural, ethnic and political connection to “the homeland for the Jewish people.” In 2019, a couple of anti-Israel GW students shared a snapchat that included a graphic referencing the Jewish holiday of Rosh Hashana. In the snapchat, one student asked, “What are we going to do to Israel?” To which the second replied, “We’re going to f–ing bomb Israel bro, f– outta of here, Jewish pieces of sh-t.”   In March, after two of the 18,000-plus AIPAC Policy conference attendees tested positive for coronavirus, GW quarantined their 30 student delegates, none of whom had identifiable risk. The incident incited a wave of antisemitism on campus where anti-Israel students yelled “Oh! Yahood!…you produced it! You produced it! You started it!” to a student wearing a kippah. On social media, GW students tweeted that they were going to get coronavirus because some “Zionists [sic] mom tried to speak to the manager of pandemics” and because a “[white] supremacist” is bringing it to GW.

 

When GW promoted Professor Feldman despite her history of demonizing Israel and marginalizing Israel’s supporters, the university appeared inexcusably tone-deaf to the increasing hostility and discrimination that Jewish and pro-Israel students are experiencing at GW.

 

Feldman frequently glosses over terrorism when discussing the Arab-Israeli conflict. In footnote 14 in Feldman’s 2015 book, she blames the second intifada on Ariel Sharon’s “deliberately provocative visit” to the Temple Mount, despite Palestinian Authority leaders admitting that Yasser Arafat planned the second intifada before Sharon’s visit. She demonizes Israeli efforts to provide humanitarian aid to Gazans and laments the international condemnation of Gazans’ electing Hamas in 2006, calling the election a way that “Gazans disqualified themselves from the victim category.”

 

Hamas’ founding covenant unequivocally calls for Jewish mass-genocide. Article 7 of the Hamas charter states that “Hamas has been looking forward to implement Allah’s promise whatever time it might take.” Then specifies that “The Day of Judgment will not come about until Moslems fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: ‘O Moslem, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.’” Similarly, Article 15 of the Hamas charter explains: “In order to face the usurpation of Palestine by the Jews, we have no escape from raising the banner of Jihad. . . We must spread the spirit of Jihad among the [Islamic] Umma, clash with the enemies and join the ranks of the Jihad fighters.”  The clear expression of Hamas’ violent goals, however, does not warrant Feldman’s condemnation.

 

Feldman’s activism hasn’t been limited to her papers and books.  In 2016, Feldman urged the American Anthropology Association (AAA) to adopt an academic boycott of Israel in her effort to turn the world’s largest scholarly and professional anthropologist organization into a platform for anti-Israel activism. The Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) guidelines that Dr. Feldman promotes, demand that university administrators boycott academic and cultural institutions connected to Israel, whether or not the institution supports current Israeli policy. The guidelines direct administrators to assume that “Israeli cultural institutions, unless proven otherwise, are complicit in maintaining the Israeli occupation” since their “silence or actual involvement” “divert[s] attention from Israel’s violations.” The boycott guidelines also demand the boycott of “individuals” who “explicitly represent” Israel or “complicit institutions.” In effect, the guidelines single-out and deny scholars affiliated with any Israeli cultural or academic institution a voice in the international academic community.  The BDS vote failed in the AAA, but a similar resolution to divest from companies that do business with Israel passed just two years later through the student government at GW, where Feldman teaches.

 

Students worry whether, as interim Dean of the Elliott School of International Affairs, Feldman will respect GW’s commitment to an inclusive community. GW’s Provost issued a statement noting that as interim Dean, Feldman will be “required to comply with all University policies or actions, including those on BDS, and foster an atmosphere that allows all voices to be equally heard.” This is an important guaranty by the university.

 

GW students, like Blake Flayton, already feel marginalized and “pushed to the fringes” for expressing their Zionism and support for the Jewish homeland. While GW students can be optimistic about the university’s direction laid out in its recent statement, they will not feel comfortable as long as Feldman remains the Dean. The university can and should demonstrate its commitment to confronting the discrimination facing Jewish and pro-Israel students on campus by prioritizing the appointment of Feldman’s successor.

 

 

 

The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights’ Findings and Recommendations on Campus Anti-Semitism, principally authored by LDB President Kenneth L. Marcus during his tenure as the Commission’s Staff Director, announced that campus anti-Semitism is a “serious problem” warranting closer attention and provided several recommendations that remain important today.

OCR elaborated upon its 2004 guidance letter in this official correspondence with the Institute for Jewish & Community Research, emphasizing its commitment not to turn its back on harassment of Jewish American students.

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) announced for the first time in 2004 that it would investigate certain anti-Semitism claims in this landmark guidance letter authored by LDB President Kenneth L. Marcus during his tenure as acting head of OCR.