RSS
Jewish groups confront new questions: What counts as calling for genocide? And how should it be punished?
(JTA) – Just days after the presidents of three elite universities testified before Congress, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul sent a letter to the heads of her state’s public universities over the weekend instructing them that “calling for the genocide of any group of people” should “lead to swift disciplinary action.”
Meanwhile, Stanford University released a statement saying that “calls for the genocide of Jews or any peoples… would clearly violate” the school’s code of conduct.
The letter and statement were both in response to the congressional hearing, in which the presidents of the University of Pennsylvania, Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology declined to say outright that calling for the genocide of Jews would violate school rules.
Swift and widespread outrage followed the hearing, leading to the resignation of Penn’s president and placing pressure on the other two leaders.
The hearing had another effect: Nationwide, explicit acknowledgement by public officials and university leadership alike that calling for genocide is, in fact, unacceptable. The question for Jewish and pro-Israel groups — especially those long concerned with antisemitism on campus — is what that means and how it will change their approach to the issue.
What, exactly, counts as a call for genocide? Do popular pro-Palestinian chants that many Jews consider threatening — like calling for “intifada” — run afoul of the rules? And how should students be punished if those rules are broken?
One week after the hearing prompted those questions, some of the leading U.S. campus antisemitism watchdogs appeared reluctant to definitively answer them. They condemned chants such as “intifada” and “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” but demurred from explicitly calling them genocidal.
Representatives of two groups suggested that students who call for genocide should be suspended. One pro-Israel activist who spoke to JTA said the punishment should depend on “context,” acknowledging that he was using the very phrase that drove much of the backlash to the university presidents. A few others declined to state exactly how such students should be punished.
“Chants like ‘from the river to the sea’ and ‘globalize the intifada’ are deeply offensive and antisemitic and are unquestionably contributing to hostile environments for Jewish and Israeli students on campuses across the country,” a spokesperson for the Anti-Defamation League told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency Tuesday.
But the ADL stopped short of defining such chants as de facto calls for Jewish genocide, and its own website’s description of the phrases does not include the term “genocide.” The website does say that “intifada” refers to violence such as that of the second intifada two decades ago, when approximately 1,000 Israelis were killed in terror attacks.
Neither Hochul’s office nor Stanford’s public relations representatives responded to JTA’s questions about whether they considered such phrases to meet the definition of calling for genocide of Jews, nor how they would discipline them.
Julia Jassey, a recent college graduate and the CEO of the campus antisemitism watchdog Jewish on Campus, called those phrases “antisemitic in impact” but would not say whether students who use them should be disciplined.
“Practically, the impact of saying ‘From the river to the sea’ calls into question the existence, the legitimacy, the lives of the folks who are living there who are Jewish,” Jassey said. When asked whether those phrases should be subject to disciplinary measures, Jassey, like other campus antisemitism activists who spoke to JTA, said it was largely up to the universities.
“I think that university administrations have an obligation to be clear,” she said, adding that they should “condemn” such language whether it comes from students or faculty. “It’s really important to prioritize the impact,” she said.
The ADL statement on the phrases further said universities had “clear legal obligations” to “respond” to such language. But beyond noting that the response should include some form of disciplinary action, the ADL did not clarify what such a response should be.
The organization said it does push for universities to suspend any student group “that promotes calls for antisemitic violence.” That may be a reference to Students for Justice in Palestine, which defended Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel. The ADL and other Jewish groups called on campuses to withdraw recognition and funding from the group, and in recent weeks, several universities have suspended their SJP chapters.
While there have been a small number of reported incidents of swastikas and chants of “Gas the Jews,” along with others referencing Hitler on campuses this year, chants of “from the river to the sea” and “intifada” have been far more common.
Responding to video of a recent event held by the Columbia University chapters of SJP and the anti-Zionist group Jewish Voice for Peace at which protesters chanted “intifada,” the International Legal Forum, an Israel-based group, called the chant “a direct and unadulterated call for violence and genocide.” The group pushed Columbia to publicly condemn the activists and “ban these hate groups once and for all.” Columbia had suspended both groups for the remainder of the fall semester.
Those who chant those phrases object to the notion that they are calls for genocide. A spokesperson for JVP said that the group does not consider “from the river to the sea” to be antisemitic.
“JVP understands that to be an absolute right for anyone to be free from the river to the sea,” Sonya Meyerson-Knox, the group’s communications manager, told JTA weeks prior to last week’s hearing. “So Palestine will be free, Israeli Jews will be free. One person’s freedom does not take away another person’s freedom. Unless, of course, it’s in a supremacist state, which is what the Israeli government has been doing for 75 years.”
She likewise said after the hearing that the group also does not consider use of the term “intifada” to be equivalent to a call for violence, and does not believe students or university personnel should be penalized for using it. She added that her group does not endorse calls for violence and said, “No one on campuses is calling for the genocide of Jews and there is no evidence of this.” She repeated her group’s repeated accusation in the wake of Oct. 7 that Israel is committing “a genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.”
Meyerson-Knox said that JVP bases its guidelines on international law. “Resistance ‘by any means necessary,’ not so much. Popular resistance, absolutely,” she said. “There is a big difference there.”
When asked about the pro-Palestinian phrases, the general counsel for Hillel International, the umbrella group for campus Jewish centers, told JTA that students who chant “from the river to the sea” “need to be educated” on the fact that the phrase appears in Hamas’ charter.
“What’s relevant is whether it lands on Jewish students on the campus as an attack, a potentially genocidal attack, on the Jewish people, a plurality of whom now live in Israel,” the counsel, Mark Rotenberg, said.
Rotenberg added that a university “has a responsibility to not allow these kinds of endorsements of violence to be misunderstood,” comparing the chants to a student placing a noose in an area of campus “knowing that Black students will see it.”
He did suggest what administrations might do to a student or staff member who took such an action. “Universities will discipline, suspend and terminate the employment of people in the university community who engage in that kind of speech activity,” he said.
Watchdog groups devoted to the issue of campus antisemitism — some of which have spent years filing federal civil rights complaints that included objecting to the use of of pro-Palestinian language on campus — were somewhat vague as to how schools should discipline students who use them.
“The consequences that would be appropriate would be those provided for by school regulations or by law,” Gerard Filitti, general counsel for the pro-Israel legal group the Lawfare Project, told JTA. The Lawfare Project has filed federal civil rights challenges to college campuses via the Department of Education, including one at Columbia University from 2019 that the department re-opened in the wake of Oct. 7.
Asked what kinds of consequences would be appropriate, Filitti offered a range of options without saying which would best fit the offense.
“Whether that includes suspension, or a mandatory training about antisemitism, including anti-Zionism, or whether that includes expulsion, I think that is, to borrow a phrase that was spoken of last week, context-specific,” he said, referencing the university presidents’ answers to the question of whether calls for genocide of Jews violated their codes. He added that universities should consider “the whole range of remedies available as consequences under the codes of the schools.”
The Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, another pro-Israel legal group active in campus lawsuits, also did not offer thoughts on whether or how universities should discipline students who uttered those exact phrases.
The group’s president Alyza Lewin told JTA in a statement, “The very first step to ending the current harassment and preventing future harassment is for university administrators to understand Jewish identity so they can effectively recognize anti-Semitism.”
And a top figure at the Simon Wiesenthal Center, an antisemitism watchdog group that has called for all three presidents who participated in the hearing to resign, suggested that universities should “train the police” to respond to complaints of antisemitism.
When asked if students calling for “intifada” should be arrested, Rabbi Abraham Cooper didn’t rule it out.
“This is private property. Universities set their own rules for campus,” he told JTA. “They have protocols in place. It’s not for me to say right now what those protocols should be … But what it does mean is they’ve got a whole lot of discussing and a whole lot of reflecting to do, because whatever they have in place right now may be working for a lot of people but it’s not working for the Jewish students.”
—
The post Jewish groups confront new questions: What counts as calling for genocide? And how should it be punished? appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
RSS
US Jews Shouldn’t Give Up on America
Supporters of Israel gather in solidarity with Israel and protest against antisemitism, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian terror group Hamas, during a rally on the National Mall in Washington, DC, Nov. 14, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Leah Millis
In recent weeks, a growing chorus of prominent pro-Israel advocates have been urging Jewish Americans to leave the US and immigrate to Israel. Since the October 7 massacre, a surge in antisemitic attacks — coupled with shocking scenes of packed protests in US cities calling for violence against Jews — has heralded a discussion on the fate of Jewish Americans, and whether the era of prosperity and safety under which Jews have flourished has come to an end.
The well-intentioned efforts of those telegraphing the dangers associated with staying in America represent a justified concern, steeped in public scenes and statistics confirming the cultural, political, and academic corrosion infecting American institutions.
While encouraging a return to our ancestral homeland will remain a cornerstone of the Jewish American project, particularly in Modern Orthodox communities, approaching aliyah through the prism of fleeing antisemitism in America rather than fulfilling the ultimate mitzvah of living in the Holy Land discounts the importance of having a robust Diaspora, and dismisses the established idea that upholding western civilization rests on preserving US exceptionalism.
Eric Cohen, Executive Director of the Tikvah Fund, addressed some of these sentiments in an interview last month. Indeed, Cohen correctly notes, “As goes America, so goes the West and arguably the world,” and further cites that US Jews hold a unique role in restoring America to its place as protector of Western interests and values.
Historically, Jewish Americans, both individually and collectively, have been crucial to advancing US support for Israel, and explaining to Americans why a democratic Israel benefits the United States. More than 75 years after the US officially recognized Israel, stories surrounding US Jewish businessman Eddie Jacobson talking to his old friend, President Harry Truman, and having him agree to meet Chaim Weizmann upon the Zionist leader’s visit to America, was the beginning of this bond.
Last month, mobilization efforts in New York’s 16th Congressional District helped unseat, albeit belatedly, antisemitic Squad Rep. Jamaal Bowman — both for his assault on Israel, Jews, and many other values antithetical to those of his constituents. Another radical progressive, Congresswoman Cori Bush (D-MO), may soon find a similar fate in her primary race next month, as polls show the lawmaker trailing the more moderate Democrat, St. Louis County prosecuting attorney Wesley Bell.
In both cases, Jewish voters helped lead grassroots campaigns and devoted critical resources to assist in centering the far-left lurch of the Democratic Party. Last fall’s slaughter in Israel and domestic developments here in the US have reawakened a segment of the Jewish population who are looking more seriously at the positions of politicians, with many concluding that the anti-Jewish animus that they have long tied only to the far-right is wedded to outdated assumptions.
At the same time, blue-state metropolises such as New York and Los Angeles have become epicenters where steady drumbeats of pro-Hamas sympathizers chanting for the destruction of Israel — and violence against Jews — are prompting some US Jews to make their home in other parts of the country.
Prescriptive approaches to conserving America’s future may entail retooling Jewish sensibilities to meet existing challenges. That areas where Jews face the most significant threats from the political left are primarily governed by elected officials who resist punishing antisemitic perpetrators suggests that the US Jewish center of gravity could soon shift from left-wing bastions such as Brooklyn to more conservative neighborhoods like Boca Raton.
Moreover, a strong America stands to benefit the security of the entire free world — including in Israel, and for Jews in other parts of the Diaspora.
Maintaining Israel’s qualitative military edge is rooted in the US retaining its strategic footprint in the region and assisting Israel in deterring its detractors. A diminished US security posture that rejects Israel may also compel the countries in the region to form alliances with unsavory actors, such as China and Russia. Jewish Americans have a responsibility to revive America out of its decline and abet in stemming the inevitable terror such descent spreads to Jews in Israel.
My daughter, who graduated high school in June, recently remarked that should the US become uninhabitable for Jews, America ceases being America. Defending US exceptionalism is inextricably linked to preserving the security of our allies across the globe, including Israel. Jewish Americans must assert their energies and unite in repelling the destructive ideologies that seek to destroy the foundational Judeo-Christian tenets upon which our country was founded. Perpetuating a narrative that embraces America’s irreparable doom ignores the country’s indispensable role as a bulwark for liberty that stretches beyond our borders and demotes much of the good that remains at the core of the American spirit.
Irit Tratt is an American and pro-Israel advocate residing in New York. Follow her on X @Irit_Tratt.
The post US Jews Shouldn’t Give Up on America first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Columbia University Jewish Alumni Say Administrators Are ‘Main Culprit’ of Campus Antisemitism
The “Gaza Solidarity Encampment” at Columbia University, located in the Manhattan borough of New York City, on April 25, 2024. Photo: Reuters Connect
Columbia University’s Jewish Alumni Association blasted school officials as the “main culprit” of antisemitism on campus after newly released text messages showed administrators sneering at testimonies of anti-Jewish discrimination.
While in the audience of a May 31 alumni event, Columbia University Associate Deans Josef Sorett, Susan Chang-Kim, Matthew Patashnick, and Cristen Kromm exchanged text messages mocking and dismissing concerns of Jewish students. The messages, which called Jewish students “privileged” and “difficult to listen to,” have intensified discussions over whether the Ivy League campus has become a hotbed of antisemitism.
The newly released batch of text messages, which were publicized by the US House Committee on Education and the Workforce, incensed the Columbia Jewish Alumni Association. The organization stated that the university needs a “cultural shift” to create a safe environment for Jewish students.
“The further this unfortunate saga unfolds, the more it is clear that antisemitism runs deeper at Columbia than protests and encampments. When faculty talk, students listen,” the Columbia Jewish Alumni Association wrote in a statement.
“We know that administrators and professors are the primary culprits of Jewish students feeling threatened at Morningside Heights [the location of the school’s New York City campus] and that reality will not change until those responsible for this crisis are held accountable,” the alumni continued. “Columbia’s epidemic of antisemitism requires a cultural shift to fix it, one that involves honest conversations around how this crisis came to be, who perpetuated it, and what needs to change to ensure that the events of last spring are not repeated in the fall semester.”
On June 12, the Washington Free Beacon first reported that Columbia administrators belittled Jewish students and alumni in a group chat. The report set off a firestorm of outrage, resulting in the House Education and Workforce Committee demanding Columbia administrators hand over the entirety of the message exchanges. On Tuesday, the committee released the full chat log to the public.
While listening to the panel of Jewish alumni and students speak, Chang-Kim stated that their testimonies were “difficult to listen to” but that she was “trying to be open minded to understand but the doors are closing.” Chang-Kim referred to one speaker as a “problem!!!” for “painting [Columbia] students as dangerous.”
The deans then disparaged a testimony from Brian Cohen, head of Columbia Hillel. Cohen stated that many Jewish students at Columbia felt safer spending time in the Kraft Center for Jewish Life than their own dorms following Hamas’ Oct. 7 terrorist attacks on Israel, after which antisemitism on college campuses spiked to unprecedented levels.
Patashnick stated that Cohen was “taking full advantage of the moment” and that he saw the “huge fundraising potential” in the midst of the controversy over campus antisemitism. Signaling her agreement, Kromm gave Patasnick’s text a like and responded, “You named it.” Pataschnick continued, saying that Cohen was “laying the case to case to expand physical space!” and “[Jewish students] will have their own dorm soon.”
Columbia University offers residential living arrangements for African American, Latino, and LGBT+, students, according to its official website. The university has also offered special graduation ceremonies for various racial and sexual minority groups.
Chang-Kim continued, dismissing Jewish students as “privileged.” Kromm agreed, expressing concern over the well-being of Jewish students who do not support Israel.
“Comes from such a place of privilege … hard to hear the woe is me, we need to huddle at the Kraft center. Huh??” Chang-Kim wrote.
“Yup. Blind to the idea that non-Israel supporting Jews have no place to come together,” Kromm wrote.
The Kraft Center for Jewish Student Life is a hub for Jewish students on Columbia’s campus. Its namesake, Robert Kraft, ceased his financial support for Columbia University in April, citing “virulent hate” against the Jewish community on campus.
Kromm continued, stating that Jewish students have more “support” than other groups at Columbia, despite widely reported antisemitic incidents rocking the campus since Oct. 7.
“If only every identity group had these resources and support,” Kromm said, adding that Jewish students need to “share resources!!!”
Kromm fired off a pair of vomit emojis as speakers described an op-ed published by Columbia campus rabbi Yonah Hain lamenting the growing support for Hamas on campus.
Chang-Kim then wrote, “I’m going to throw up.” The timestamp on these texts align with the testimony of the daughter of a Holocaust survivor who shared how her own daughter was “hiding in plain sight” on Columbia’s campus following the Oct. 7 attacks on Israel.
“Amazing what $$$$ can do,” Kromm wrote in response.
Columbia University has become a poster child for antisemitism in higher education following the Oct. 7 slaughters by Hamas in southern Israel. Jewish students and alumni have expressed outrage, accusing the administration of showing cold indifference to antisemitic incidents on campus. Anti-Israel activists have disrupted Columbia’s classes and held unsanctioned protests on campus. Several Columbia student groups have outright banned “Zionist” students, a mandate that would exclude the vast majority of Jewish people.
In April, activists commandeered a central portion of Columbia’s campus and erected a “Gaza solidarity encampment.” The encampment featured signs which explicitly endorsed Hamas and called for the eradication of Israel. Several ultra-rich Columbia alumni pulled back their donations to the university in response to the growing and palpable anti-Israel sentiment on campus.
The post Columbia University Jewish Alumni Say Administrators Are ‘Main Culprit’ of Campus Antisemitism first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
‘Your Nazism Knows No Bounds’: Popular LA Restaurant Draws Backlash After Denying Service to Jewish Man
Protesters outside of Mauro’s Cafe in Los Angeles after a patron wearing a kippah said he was denied a cup of coffee. Photo: Screenshot
A popular restaurant in West Hollywood, California drew protests and widespread backlash online after it allegedly denied service to a Jewish man wearing a kippah.
Mauro Cafe is a small Italian restaurant and cafe in Los Angeles County often frequented by celebrities. On Sunday, a man wearing a kippah said he attempted to order a cup of coffee from the restaurant but was refused.
Video of the man walking into the restaurant before coming out and saying he was denied service because he looked Jewish went viral on social media this week.
West Hollywood cafe owner throws out Jewish customer and REFUSES to serve him after seeing he was wearing a kippah.
Mauro Cafe in Melrose refused to allow the man to buy coffee with one waitress telling him to “get off the property.”
@growthfactororg pic.twitter.com/BXDqPpSBYP
— Oli London (@OliLondonTV) July 2, 2024
“The owner, she says I cannot buy a coffee,” the man said in the video after walking out. When asked why he was refused service, he responded, “Because I look like I am Jewish.”
Although the owner of the restaurant, who has been identified as Evelyne Joan, appeared to turn the patron away, employees of the restaurant later bought him a coffee, according to the video.
The incident sparked backlash among Los Angels’ Jewish community, prompting some to protest against antisemitism and discrimination more broadly outside of Mauro Cafe.
Jewish Americans protest outside a cafe in West Hollywood after the owner REFUSED to serve a Jewish customer and threw him out because he was wearing a Kippah.
The owner of Mauro Cafe stood outside as Jews protested against her antisemitic business chanting “Shame.”
@idan_bg pic.twitter.com/6P0ExiWcVE
— Oli London (@OliLondonTV) July 2, 2024
“Your Nazism knows no bounds,” one protester yelled.
“The owner of Mauro Cafe, Evelyn [Joan], does not demonstrate for any of the atrocities committed within walking distance of Israel!” another demonstrator said, calling out Joan for only protesting against the Jewish state.
“Apologize!” the activists demanded.
Social media users quickly noted that Joan has a history of protesting against Israel and Jewish sites. The nonprofit organization Jew Hate Database revealed that she participated in the violent anti-Israel demonstration outside of Adas Torah synagogue in the heavily-Jewish Pico-Robertson area of Los Angeles late last month.
In video posted to social media, Joan can be seen holding a microphone while preventing Jews from accessing the synagogue and shouting “Free Palestine” and “Shame on you!”
Demonstrators swarmed the synagogue to protest the sale of Israeli real estate taking place inside the building. The protests quickly descended into violence as anti-Israel protesters were caught on video shoving, punching, and screaming at those attempting to defend the synagogue.
The violence received widespread condemnation. US President Joe Biden slammed the protests as “antisemitic and un-American.”
Outside of Mauro Cafe, activists chastised Joan for her participation in the protest. “When it comes to Jews she runs and blocks their place of worship!” they said, referring to the anti-Israel demonstrators who waved Palestine flags and donned keffiyehs while blocking entry into the Adas Torah synagogue.
Prominent figures on social media decried the restaurant’s apparent anti-Jewish discrimination this past weekend. “Imagine if a white business didn’t serve a black customer. Lead story of every single news program. Mauro Cafe. Run by racist dirtbags,” tweeted conservative political commentator Dave Rubin.
The incident came almost three months after the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) released a report showing antisemitic incidents in the US rose 140 percent last year, reaching a record high. Most of the outrages occurred after Hamas’ Oct. 7 atrocities in southern Israel, during the ensuing Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.
The post ‘Your Nazism Knows No Bounds’: Popular LA Restaurant Draws Backlash After Denying Service to Jewish Man first appeared on Algemeiner.com.