RSS
Civil Rights Nonprofit Slams Pro-Hamas Briefs Defending Harvard Lawsuit Against Trump
April 20, 2025, Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University and Harvard Square scenes with students and pedestrians. Photo: Kenneth Martin/ZUMA Press Wire via Reuters Connect.
A new amicus brief filed in the lawsuit that Harvard University brought in April to stop the Trump administration’s confiscation of some $3 billion of its federal research grants and contracts offered a blistering response to previous briefs which maligned the institution’s decision to incorporate the world’s leading definition of antisemitism into its non-discrimination policies.
As previously reported by The Algemeiner, legal briefs weighing in on Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College v. United States Department of Health and Human Services, et al. have been pouring in from across the country, with dozens of experts, think tanks, and student groups seeking to sway the court in what has become a historic confrontation between elite higher education and the federal government — as well as a showdown between Middle American populists and coastal elites.
Harvard’s case has rallied a team of defenders, including some who are responsible for drawing scrutiny of alleged antisemitism and far-left extremism on campus.
Earlier this month, the Palestine Solidarity Committee (PSC) — which blamed Israel for Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel mere hours after images and videos of the terrorist organization’s brutality spread online — filed a brief which compared Zionists to segregationists who defended white supremacy during Jim Crow, while arguing that Harvard’s adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism — used by hundreds of governing institutions and widely accepted across the political spectrum — is an instrument of conspiracy and racist oppression.
“Adopting the IHRA definition, granting special status to Zionism, and penalizing pro-Palestinian student groups risks violating the Title VI rights of Palestinians on campus,” the filing said. “There is ample evidence that adoption of IHRA and other policies which limit speech supporting Palestinian rights are motivated by an intent to selectively silence Palestinians and students who advocate on behalf of Palestinians. Such action cannot be required by, and indeed appear to violate, Title VI [of the Civil Rights Act].”
The document added, “Though the main text of the definition is relatively benign, the illustrative examples — seven of the eleven which pertain to criticism of Israel — make clear that they are aimed at preventing Palestinians from speaking about their oppression.”
Similar arguments were put forth in other briefs submitted by groups which have cheered Hamas and spread blood libels about Israel’s conduct in Gaza, including the Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA), Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), and other anti-Zionist groups.
“Harvard’s incorporation of IHRA was an overdue and necessary response to the virulent and unchecked antisemitic discrimination and harassment on its campus,” the Brandeis Center said in its response to the arguments, noting that Harvard itself has determined that embracing the definition is consistent with its obligations under Title VI, which have been reiterated and stressed by the US Office for Civil Rights (OCR) guidance and two executive orders issued by President Donald Trump.
“Misunderstandings about what antisemitism means — and the form it takes — have long plagued efforts to address antisemitic conduct. Modern versions of antisemitism draw not only on ancient tropes, but also coded attacks on Zionism and the Jewish state, which often stand in for the Jewish people in modern antisemitic parlance,” the organization continued. “Sadly, this is nothing new: Soviet propagandists for decades used the term ‘Zionist’ or ‘Zio’ in this coded way. This practice has become commonplace among antisemites in academia who seek to avoid being labeled as racists.”
The Brandeis Center also argued that IHRA does not “punish or chill speech” but “provides greater transparency and clarity as to the meaning of antisemitism while honoring the university’s rules protecting free speech and expression.” The group stopped short of urging a decision either for or against Harvard, imploring the court to “disregard” the briefs submitted by PSC, JVP, and MESA.
As previously reported by The Algemeiner, Harvard sued the Trump administration, arguing that it bypassed key procedural steps it must, by law, take before sequestering federal funds. It also said that the Trump administration does not aim, as it has publicly pledged, to combat campus antisemitism at Harvard but to impose “viewpoint-based conditions on Harvard’s funding.”
The Trump administration has proposed that Harvard reform in ways that conservatives have long argued will make higher education more meritocratic and less welcoming to anti-Zionists and far-left extremists. Its “demands,” contained in a letter the administration sent to interim Harvard president Alan Garber — who subsequently released it to the public — called for “viewpoint diversity in hiring and admissions,” the “discontinuation of [diversity, equity, and inclusion, or DEI, initiatives],” and “reducing forms of governance bloat.” They also implored Harvard to begin “reforming programs with egregious records of antisemitism” and to recalibrate its approach to “student discipline.”
On Monday, the attorneys general of Iowa, Kansas, Georgia, Florida, and 12 other states said the Trump administration took appropriate action to quell what they described as Harvard University’s flagrant violation of civil rights laws concerning its handling of the campus antisemitism crisis as well as its past history of violating the Constitution’s equal protection clause by practicing racial preferences in admissions.
“Harvard both admits that it has a problem with antisemitism and acknowledges that problem as the reason it needs a multi-agency Task Force to Combat Antisemitism. Yet when the federal government acted to rectify that acknowledged violation of federal law through a negotiated practice, Harvard cried retaliation,” the attorneys general said in their own brief. “Its characterization of its refusal to follow federal nondiscrimination law as First Amendment speech is sheer chutzpah.”
They continued, “There is strong evidence of Harvard’s discriminatory animus, and the First Amendment does not shield it from consequences. This court should deny summary judgement and allow the federal government to proceed with enforcing the law. Perhaps if Harvard faces consequences for violating federal antidiscrimination law, it will finally stop violating federal antidiscrimination law.”
Trump addressed a potential “deal” to settle the matter with Harvard last Friday, writing on his Truth Social platform, saying a “deal will be announced over the next week or so” while praising the university’s legal counsel for having “acted extremely appropriately during these negotiations, and appear to be committed to doing what is right.” He added, “If a settlement is made on the basis that is currently being discussed, it will be ‘mindbogglingly’ HISTORIC, and very good for our Country.”
To date, Harvard has held its own against the federal government, building a war chest with a massive bond sale and notching a recent legal victory in the form of an injunction granted by a federal job which halted the administration’s restrictions on its international students — a policy that is being contested in a separate lawsuit. Garber has reportedly confirmed that the administration and Trump are discussing an agreement that would be palatable to all parties.
According to a report published by The Harvard Crimson on Thursday, Garber held a phone call with major donors in which he “confirmed in response to a question from [Harvard Corporation Fellow David M. Rubenstein] that talks had resumed” but “declined to share specifics of how Harvard expected to settle with the White House.”
The Crimson added, “He also did not discuss how close a deal could be and said instead that Harvard had focused on laying on steps it was already taking to address issues that are common ground for the University and the Trump administration. Areas of shared concern that have been discussed with the White House included ‘viewpoint diversity’ and antisemitism.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Civil Rights Nonprofit Slams Pro-Hamas Briefs Defending Harvard Lawsuit Against Trump first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Israeli Foreign Minister Says ‘No Place’ for Macron Visit if France Continues With Palestinian State Recognition
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar attends a press conference with German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul (not pictured) in Berlin, Germany, June 5, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Christian Mang
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar on Thursday urged his French counterpart to drop France’s plan to recognize a Palestinian state, saying that French President Emmanuel Macron is not welcome to visit the Jewish state if Paris “persists in its initiative and in efforts that harm Israel’s interests.”
According to a statement from his office, Saar spoke with French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot, calling on him to reconsider France’s initiative to recognize a Palestinian state.
He warned that such a move would “undermine stability in the Middle East and harm Israel’s national and security interests.”
As long as France proceeds with its planned unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state this month, Saar said that there would be “no place” for Macron to visit Israel.
“Israel seeks good relations with France, but France must respect Israel’s position when it comes to matters essential to its security and future,” the top Israeli diplomat said during their conversation.
Macron plans to recognize a Palestinian state at the United Nations General Assembly this month as part of its “commitment to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East,” even though nearly 80 percent of French citizens reject the move.
Israeli officials have condemned the initiative, calling it a “reward for terrorism” and warning that it would undermine future diplomatic talks.
Saar has criticized France’s recent actions, accusing it of consistently undermining Israel on the international stage.
More recently, tensions escalated after his French counterpart asserted the Palestinian Authority (PA) had ended its “pay-for-slay” program — a claim the Israeli diplomat firmly rejects as false.
The PA, which has long been riddled with accusations of corruption, has also maintained for years a so-called “pay-for-slay” program, which rewards terrorists and their families for carrying out attacks against Israelis.
Under the policy, the Palestinian Authority Martyr’s Fund makes official payments to Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails, the families of “martyrs” killed in attacks on Israelis, and injured Palestinian terrorists. Reports estimate that approximately 8 percent of the PA’s budget is allocated to paying stipends to convicted terrorists and their families.
Abbas had announced plans to reform the system earlier this year, but the PA has continued to issue payments, with top officials saying they will not deduct any of the funds.
“You speak of the war, but your moves against the State of Israel not only undermine stability and will not bring peace — they prolong the war. And it is no coincidence that Hamas praised them,” Saar said in a post on X, responding to Barrot in a heated public exchange.
“The rest is empty words and illusions. Back in Paris and at conferences, you may believe and promote these illusions. Here, we will not buy them,” the Israeli diplomat continued.
Dear Jean Noël,
I was astonished to read your claim that the Palestinian Authority allegedly “ended” the pay-for-slay payments. The facts on this matter are clear and unequivocal (and I am sure they are also known to French intelligence): The PA simply replaced the old system… https://t.co/r1sxS9nf55
— Gideon Sa’ar | גדעון סער (@gidonsaar) September 3, 2025
During his conversation with Barrot, Saar also argued that PA President Mahmoud Abbas has avoided holding elections for nearly 20 years due to his limited support among Palestinians, making him an unreliable interlocutor.
Western powers have been negotiating with the PA on conditions for Gaza governance after Hamas is removed from power, while the PA continues to pledge reforms — a strategy experts say is unlikely to succeed given its lack of credibility and ongoing support for terrorism against Israel.
According to a poll by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PCPSR), if an agreement is reached to end the war in Gaza, only 40 percent of Palestinians “support the return of the PA to managing the affairs of the Gaza Strip,” while 56 percent oppose it.
US officials have also condemned France’s initiative to recognize a Palestinian state, arguing that the move would do little to advance peace.
On Thursday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Washington has warned other countries that recognizing a Palestinian state would only create more problems.
“We told all these countries, we told them all, we said if you guys do this recognition stuff it’s all fake, it’s not even real, if you do it you’re going to create problems,” Rubio said during a press conference in Ecuador.
“There’s going to be a response, it’s going to make it harder to get a ceasefire and it may even trigger these sorts of actions that you’ve seen, or at least these attempts at these actions,” the US official continued, referring to Israel’s plans to consider annexation in the West Bank.
Dear @jnbarrot,
Listen to @SecRubio words.
You know it’s true.
Don’t whitewash “pay for slay”.
Don’t whitewash PA crimes! pic.twitter.com/EMJeGDZivE— Gideon Sa’ar | גדעון סער (@gidonsaar) September 4, 2025
RSS
Sen. Tom Cotton Urges FBI to Investigate Palestinian Youth Movement Leader Who Called for Targeting F-35 Program
US Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) speaks during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, March 11, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Julia Nikhinson
US Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) has called on the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to investigate a pro-Hamas activist who urged supporters to sabotage the US supply chain for the F-35 fighter jet, one of America’s most advanced military assets and a critical component of Israel’s defense.
In a letter sent to FBI Director Kash Patel on Wednesday, Cotton warned that Aisha Nizar, a leader and organizer of the Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM), “directly endangered US national security” when she addressed a Palestinian conference in Detroit last week. Durin the event, Nizar told attendees that targeting “nodes” in the F-35 production process could have “a huge impact” on the program.
“We need to be surgical. We need to be strategic … Because there are many different points of these supply chains of death that we can intervene in and we must intervene in,” Nizar said at the People’s Conference for Palestine.
The F-35 program is widely regarded as a cornerstone of US and allied air power, and Israel is the only country in the Middle East authorized to operate the jets. Cotton argued that calls to undermine the program represent not just anti-Israel activism, but also a direct assault on American workers and defense readiness.
“Nizar’s statements constitute direct incitement of violence against US national security interests by advocating for actions against the men and women who build the F-35,” Cotton wrote. He urged the FBI to “immediately examine Nizar’s actions and take any necessary actions to mitigate the threat.”
PYM has emerged as one of the most radical anti-Israel, pro-Hamas groups in the US since the war in Gaza started, organizing raucous protests targeting Jewish and pro-Israel events across the country.
Nizar has previously faced legal trouble over her role in disruptive protests amid the Israel-Hamas war, including a demonstration that shut down the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco. Cotton, an outspoken supporter of the US-Israel strategic alliance, said her ties to PYM, which he has accused of harboring antisemitic views and benefiting from questionable tax-exempt donations, warrant closer scrutiny.
“The defense supply chain is a key to our military’s ability to fight and win wars. We must protect that supply chain from all enemies, foreign and domestic,” he concluded in his letter.
RSS
Israeli Military Says It Controls 40% of Gaza City, Plans to Expand Operation in Coming Days
Palestinians inspect the site of an Israeli strike on a tent, outside Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City, Sept. 4, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Khamis Al-Rifi
Israel controls 40 percent of Gaza City, a military spokesperson said on Thursday, as thousands of residents defied Israeli orders to leave in order for soldiers to target Hamas terrorists without civilians in harm’s way.
In Gaza City, Israeli forces have advanced through the outer suburbs and are now a few kilometers (miles) from the city center.
“We continue to damage Hamas’s infrastructure. Today we hold 40 percent of the territory of Gaza City,” Israeli military spokesperson Brigadier General Effie Defrin told a news conference, naming the Zeitoun and Sheikh Radwan neighborhoods. “The operation will continue to expand and intensify in the coming days.”
“We will continue to pursue Hamas everywhere,” he said, adding that the mission will only end when Israel‘s remaining hostages are returned and Hamas’s rule ends.
Defrin confirmed that army Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir told cabinet ministers that without a day-after plan, they would have to impose military rule in Gaza. Far-right members of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government have been pushing for Israel to impose military rule in Gaza and establish settlements there, which Netanyahu has so far ruled out.
Israel launched the offensive in Gaza City on Aug. 10, in what Netanyahu says is a plan to defeat Hamas terrorists in the part of Gaza where Israeli troops fought most heavily in the war’s initial phase.
The campaign has prompted international criticism because of the humanitarian crisis in the area and has provoked unusual levels of concern within Israel, including accounts of tension over strategy between some military commanders and political leaders.
The Israeli military has said it is operating on the outskirts of Gaza City to dismantle terrorists’ tunnels and locate weapons.
Much of Gaza City was laid to waste in the war’s initial weeks in October-November 2023. About a million people lived there before the war, and hundreds of thousands are believed to have returned to live among the ruins, especially since Israel ordered people out of other areas and launched offensives elsewhere.
Israel, which has now told civilians to leave Gaza City again for their safety, says 70,000 have done so, heading south. Palestinian officials say less than half that number have left and many thousands still lie in the path of Israel‘s advance.
The war began on Oct. 7, 2023, when Palestinian terrorists led by Hamas attacked southern Israel, killing some 1,200 people, most of them civilians, and taking 251 hostages into Gaza.
Israel responded with a military campaign aimed at freeing the hostages and dismantling Hamas’s military capabilities and political rule in neighboring Gaza.
Prospects for a ceasefire and a deal to release the remaining 48 hostages, 20 of whom are thought to still be alive, appear dim.