Manfred Gerstenfeld Earlier today, Arutz Sheva published the English-language version of Manfred Gerstenfeld’s interview with Kenneth L. Marcus, President of the Louis Brandeis Center. The German-language version of this interview appeared several months ago. Dr. Gerstenfeld has been a long-term adviser on strategy issues to the boards of several major multinational corporations in Europe and North America. He is board member and former chairman of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and recipient of the LIfetime Achievement Award (2012) of the Journal for the Study of Anti-Semitism. The Arutz Sheva version of the interview begins as follows: “There is an essential paradox at the heart of the current resurgence of campus anti-Semitism. Universities should be centers of reason and tolerance, yet in the United States, they are the main source of anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism. “There are many ways to address this problem, but one of the most important approaches is based on civil rights law. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is the primary legal tool available to protect Jewish and Israeli university students against discrimination. It is critically important because young people are more vulnerable and more impressionable than others. Title VI prohibits discrimination in federally funded programs on the basis of race, color or national origin. “Historically, its main purpose was to dismantle racial segregation in schools, but it is now one of the most important laws for those of us who are actively combating anti-Semitism in higher education. “The key to the effective use of Title VI is that compliance is a condition of federal funding. Virtually every American university is heavily dependent upon federal money. If universities violate Title VI, they risk losing that money. Title VI is enforced by an important federal agency called the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR). It handles approximately 7,000 civil rights cases per year involving a wide range of discrimination issues.” Kenneth L. Marcus is President of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights under Law in Washington. He is a former Staff Director of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights and author of Jewish Identity and Civil Rights in America.[1] He explains: “Until 2004, OCR steered clear of anti-Semitism issues. It took the position that Title VI did not cover Jews, defining Judaism as a religion, rather than a race, color or national origin. Yet OCR properly defended the rights of many other groups including women, the disabled, Hispanics, Arabs and African Americans. When put in charge of OCR in 2004, I issued a series of policy statements announcing that OCR would henceforth protect Jews, Sikhs, and members of other groups that had both religious and ethnic or ancestral characteristics. “My immediate successors did not enforce the law according to these directives. I then put together a campaign to convince the Obama administration to adhere to this policy guidance. In 2010, the administration finally announced that they would fully enforce it. “The new legal approach requires federal officials and university leaders to understand two important points. The first is that anti-Semitism often comes under the guise of anti-Israel hostility. The second is that the First Amendment requires protection of students’ freedom of speech at public universities. At the Brandeis Center (www.brandeiscenter.com), we are working to educate officials on these principles. Anti-discrimination law and freedom of speech are not competing issues that must be balanced against each other. Both must be protected in full. “The Department of Education has however, never provided a definition of anti-Semitism for the purposes of enforcing Title VI. The Louis D. Brandeis Center has urged OCR to use either the EUMC Working Definition, which the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has endorsed, or else the very similar U.S. Department of State definition…. For the rest of the interview, continue here.
“There is an essential paradox at the heart of the current resurgence of campus anti-Semitism. Universities should be centers of reason and tolerance, yet in the United States, they are the main source of anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism. “There are many ways to address this problem, but one of the most important approaches is based on civil rights law. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is the primary legal tool available to protect Jewish and Israeli university students against discrimination. It is critically important because young people are more vulnerable and more impressionable than others. Title VI prohibits discrimination in federally funded programs on the basis of race, color or national origin. “Historically, its main purpose was to dismantle racial segregation in schools, but it is now one of the most important laws for those of us who are actively combating anti-Semitism in higher education. “The key to the effective use of Title VI is that compliance is a condition of federal funding. Virtually every American university is heavily dependent upon federal money. If universities violate Title VI, they risk losing that money. Title VI is enforced by an important federal agency called the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR). It handles approximately 7,000 civil rights cases per year involving a wide range of discrimination issues.” Kenneth L. Marcus is President of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights under Law in Washington. He is a former Staff Director of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights and author of Jewish Identity and Civil Rights in America.[1] He explains: “Until 2004, OCR steered clear of anti-Semitism issues. It took the position that Title VI did not cover Jews, defining Judaism as a religion, rather than a race, color or national origin. Yet OCR properly defended the rights of many other groups including women, the disabled, Hispanics, Arabs and African Americans. When put in charge of OCR in 2004, I issued a series of policy statements announcing that OCR would henceforth protect Jews, Sikhs, and members of other groups that had both religious and ethnic or ancestral characteristics. “My immediate successors did not enforce the law according to these directives. I then put together a campaign to convince the Obama administration to adhere to this policy guidance. In 2010, the administration finally announced that they would fully enforce it. “The new legal approach requires federal officials and university leaders to understand two important points. The first is that anti-Semitism often comes under the guise of anti-Israel hostility. The second is that the First Amendment requires protection of students’ freedom of speech at public universities. At the Brandeis Center (www.brandeiscenter.com), we are working to educate officials on these principles. Anti-discrimination law and freedom of speech are not competing issues that must be balanced against each other. Both must be protected in full. “The Department of Education has however, never provided a definition of anti-Semitism for the purposes of enforcing Title VI. The Louis D. Brandeis Center has urged OCR to use either the EUMC Working Definition, which the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has endorsed, or else the very similar U.S. Department of State definition…. For the rest of the interview, continue here.