Uncategorized
U. of Vermont agrees to improve antisemitism training, ending federal case and capping a tumultuous year
(JTA) – A year of strained relations between the University of Vermont and its Jewish community has led to the school resolving a federal antisemitism complaint and pledging to do more to protect its Jewish students — including from anti-Zionist rhetoric.
The university and the U.S. Department of Education announced Monday that they had reached a resolution to the complaint, which the department took up last fall after it was filed by students and pro-Israel groups. The complaint alleged that the institution had not properly responded to Jewish students’ allegations of antisemitic discrimination. Investigators determined that the university “received notice, but did not investigate” several claims of antisemitic behavior on campus, and that the steps it ultimately took did not adequately address students’ concerns.
Notably, the department’s office of civil rights determined that one of the ways the university’s Jewish students had been discriminated against was through “national origin harassment on the basis of shared ancestry,” reflecting a controversial argument promoted by pro-Israel groups that anti-Zionist rhetoric is harmful to all Jews because the Jewish people share Israel as an ancestral homeland. The resolution of the complaint also reflects a sharp change in course for the school, which had initially denied wrongdoing and blamed the accusations on an orchestrated external campaign — a response that upset the campus Jewish community.
“This complaint was overwhelmingly dealing with the antisemitism that masks as anti-Zionism, and what the resolution demonstrates is how seriously [the office] is taking that kind of antisemitism,” Alyza Lewin, president of the Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency after the ruling. A pro-Israel legal group that often involves itself in campus disputes, the Brandeis Center was one of the organizations that filed the initial complaint on behalf of mostly anonymous students.
The Department of Education responded to a JTA request for comment by pointing to its letter of resolution with the university. Its civil rights office has fielded several challenges to anti-Zionist rhetoric since the Donald Trump administration expanded the department’s mandate around antisemitism in 2019 under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. The office of civil rights is fast becoming a favorite tool for pro-Israel activists: It also announced this week it would open an investigation into allegations of a professor’s antisemitic behavior at George Washington University, a week after the university’s own investigation cleared the faculty member of charges brought by another pro-Israel group.
In the agreement, the University of Vermont pledged to revise its policies for reporting discrimination and to train its staff on how to specifically respond to discrimination complaints. The Department of Education will also review the university’s records regarding its response to last year’s allegations of antisemitism. One of the areas in which the university said it would train staff is on how to recognize “the Title VI prohibition against harassment based on national origin, including shared ancestry.”
Among the allegations: cases of unofficial student groups denying admission to “Zionist” students (including a support group for sexual-assault survivors); one graduate teaching assistant who had mused on social media about lowering the grades of Zionist students; and a group of students who’d reportedly thrown an object at the campus Hillel building (the complaint claimed it was a rock; Hillel staff told JTA it was a puffball mushroom). More than 20% of the university’s student body is Jewish, according to Hillel International.
Evan Siegel, a Jewish junior at the University of Vermont, poses in his off-campus housing in Burlington, October 13, 2022. Siegel was initially critical of his school for its handling of a federal antisemitism investigation, but praised its eventual resolution. (Andrew Lapin/Jewish Telegraphic Agency)
The agreement marked a sharp change from how the university first responded when the government announced its intent to investigate the complaint last fall. Back then, the university’s president, Suresh Garimella, issued a combative statement in which he said the university “vigorously denies the false allegation of an insufficient response to complaints of threats and discrimination.” He also issued a point-by-point refutation of the allegations in the complaint.
Garimella further charged that the complaint had been orchestrated by “an anonymous third party” that had “painted our community in a patently false light.” In addition to the Brandeis Center, the complaint was filed on behalf of students by the watchdog group Jewish On Campus, whose antisemitism-tracking methodology has been criticized by other groups.
Garimella’s combativeness at the time was an unusual move for the leader of a university accused of violating Title VI law, which prohibits discriminatory behavior at federally-funded programs or institutions, such as public universities. Groups like the Brandeis Center have increasingly leaned on Title VI in federal complaints to argue that pro-Israel students face discrimination. Title VI cases have become a central component of litigating multiple kinds of Israel discourse on campus, ranging from a pro-Israel student body president being targeted at the University of Southern California to a resolution passed by pro-Palestinian law student groups at the University of California, Berkeley.
In Burlington, where the university is located, some liberal Jews were initially dubious of the complaint. Felicia Kornbluh, a history professor on campus who often teaches American Jewish history, told JTA she was concerned about “playing into the narrative” of a conservative, pro-Israel agenda set by the Brandeis Center, whom she described as “allies of the Trump wing of the Republican party.” (The center’s founder, Kenneth Marcus, served as assistant secretary of education for civil rights under Trump.)
But the complaint also landed in the aftermath of a contentious Burlington city council meeting at which, Kornbluh and others said, pro-Palestinian protesters became hostile to Jews. The meeting featured a council resolution to endorse the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions campaign against Israel, and resulted in a raucous scene where pro-Palestinian groups shouted down Jewish students singing prayers for peace. Kornbluh described the atmosphere there as “really scary,” and “a little like Nuremberg.” Vermonters for Justice in Palestine, a local activist group, held multiple rallies on campus in support of the administration after the antisemitism complaint was publicized.
Against this backdrop, Garimella’s dismissiveness left the university’s Jewish community frustrated and angry. During a Jewish Telegraphic Agency visit to Burlington after the president’s initial statement, Jewish students and faculty said they felt like university administration was not taking their concerns seriously.
“I feel like we’re not being supported here,” Evan Siegel, a Jewish junior who is involved with student government, told JTA while sitting in off-campus housing adorned with Jewish summer camp memorabilia. “And that sucks.”
Employed as a campus tour guide, Siegel wondered, “How am I supposed to give tours and be like, ‘UVM is the best,’ when my president is being an ass?”
Other Jewish students told JTA at the time they had no intention of supporting the university financially or otherwise after they graduated, and wouldn’t advertise the fact that they were alums.
Matt Vogel, executive director of Hillel at the University of Vermont, where one of the alleged antisemitic incidents had taken place, also reluctantly played a role in the drama of the last year, after hoping he would be able to keep his focus on Hillel’s student programming. As the fall semester was starting, he sent an email home to parents reading, “Antisemitism keeps me awake at night.” Throughout the semester, Hillel also became more active in calling out antisemitism on social media.
“Just by default, we’re at the center of it,” Vogel told JTA last fall in the Hillel building, as student volunteers chopped vegetables for that evening’s Shabbat dinner in the next room. “I’ve overheard a student saying, like, a Hillel sticker on their water bottle might turn into a political conversation about Zionism in the first two seconds.”
Matt Vogel, executive director of Hillel at the University of Vermont, prepares for Shabbat in his Burlington office, October 14, 2022. Vogel praised the university for ultimately resolving its federal antisemitism complaint in April 2023 after months of tension. (Andrew Lapin/Jewish Telegraphic Agency)
Soon, Kornbluh decided that the administration’s response to the allegations was unacceptable, and penned a local op-ed opposing it that was later shared by her faculty union in a show of solidarity.
“I was stunned by the tone and content” of Garimella’s letter, Kornbluh wrote in the piece. Accusing the university of “gaslighting,” she added, “I do know that one persistent rhetorical strategy of antisemites in Europe and the United States has been to say that there is no antisemitism.”
Garimella reversed course following weeks of criticism, a strongly worded letter from more than a dozen Jewish groups including the Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Committee and news of several high-profile antisemitic incidents nationally. In October, the university published a website intended to support Jewish students — accompanied by a new statement from Garimella, who now condemned antisemitism unequivocally.
“I have listened to members of our campus community who experience a sense of risk in fully expressing their Jewish identity,” he wrote. ”I want my message to be clear to the entire campus community: antisemitism, in any form, will not be tolerated at UVM.”
This time, Garimella pledged not only to investigate individual reports of antisemitism, but also to work to change the campus community’s approach to the issue. He committed to further anti-bias training and building a streamlined bias reporting system for students, and said the university’s diversity office would work to build and maintain “meaningful actions that ensure our Jewish students and community members feel support and care.”
After Monday’s resolution, Garimella was fully supportive of the findings of the Department of Education’s investigation.
“The resolution reflects an important step in UVM’s engagement with our students, faculty, staff, alumni, and the surrounding community,” he wrote in a message to the campus. “It also reflects numerous conversations we have had with our campus Jewish community and important local and national voices on the consequential and complex issue of antisemitism.”
In response to a JTA request for comment, a university spokesperson sent copies of the letters from the president and provost. (Throughout the year, the president’s office had declined multiple JTA interview requests.)
Jewish groups, including the university Hillel, celebrated the resolution. “The President and senior leadership’s new statements today represent tangible and accountable steps forward,” Vogel told JTA in a statement. “We hope this ensures that no Jewish student or any student at UVM experiences discrimination or harassment because of their identity.”
The Hillel building at the University of Vermont in Burlington, October 14, 2022. Hillel found itself at the center of a federal antisemitism complaint against the university. (Andrew Lapin/Jewish Telegraphic Agency)
Also celebrating the ruling was Jewish on Campus, a subsidiary of the World Jewish Congress and one of the groups that brought the initial complaint. “Today’s announcement is a victory for the safety and security of Jewish students,” Julia Jassey, the group’s CEO and a University of Chicago undergraduate, said in a statement.
Avi Zatz, the only University of Vermont student on the initial complaint who has made their identity public, is himself an employee of Jewish on Campus. Citing antisemitism in Vermont, Zatz recently transferred to the University of Florida — in a state that may soon pass legislation that, critics say, could harm Jewish studies on all its public campuses.
“I can’t have hoped for a better resolution,” Zatz, a junior, told JTA from his new school in Gainesville, Florida. While he said he was still glad to have left Vermont, he added, “I finally feel a sense of closure.”
Kornbluh, for her part, said the resolution was “a start,” but criticized the university for not voicing a stronger commitment to Jewish studies or meeting with Jewish faculty.
Reached by phone from Madrid, where he is studying abroad this semester, Siegel said he was “proud, determined, ready for more” following the university’s agreement.
“This resolution was really, in a respectful way, a slap in the face to the university to do better,” he said. “I, for one, am ready to get back on campus and continue my work as hard as I can.”
—
The post U. of Vermont agrees to improve antisemitism training, ending federal case and capping a tumultuous year appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
As Australian Jews call for action on antisemitism, prime minister unveils moves to curb hate speech
(JTA) — Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has announced a slew of changes meant to curb antisemitism, including a crackdown on hate speech by extremist clerics.
The announcement comes four days after two gunmen killed 15 people at a Hanukkah celebration on Bondi Beach in Sydney. Many Australian Jews said they had feared such an attack after years of surging antisemitism and what they said had been an inadequate government response.
Albanese acknowledged the criticism during an address in Canberra, Australia’s capital.
“More could have been done, and I accept my responsibility for the part in that as prime minister of Australia, but what I also do is accept my responsibility to lead the nation, and unite the nation,” he said.
“Anyone in this position would regret not doing more, and any inadequacies which are there,” Albanese added. “But what we need to do is to move forward.”
The new policies would heighten penalties for speech that incites violence, including online; increase the government’s latitude to block or rescind visas for those who spread hate; and penalize organizations whose leaders engage in hate speech.
As is the case in England, where two of the largest police forces announced on Wednesday that they would begin arresting people who use protest slogans seen by many as antisemitic, Australian authorities said they aimed to tip the scales against the kinds of speech that had long been treated as just shy of criminal.
“There have been organizations which any Australian would look at and say their behavior, their philosophy and what they are trying to do is about division and has no place in Australia,” Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke told reporters at Albanese’s press conference. “And yet for a generation, no government has been able to successfully take action against them because they have fallen just below the legal threshold.”
Albanese also pledged to enact a 13-point plan that his antisemitism envoy proposed earlier this year and announced a task force to ensure that Australian schools respond adequately to antisemitism. The moves follow a pledge made in the immediate aftermath of the Bondi Beach attack to tighten access to guns, which one of the alleged attackers had obtained legally.
Albanese’s announcement comes as Sydney is in the midst of days of funerals for the victims, who included rabbis, a Holocaust survivor and a 10-year-old girl. While some local officials have attended the funerals, he has drawn criticism for staying away. Burke was heckled when he visited a vigil at Bondi Beach, with some in attendance shouting, “Blood on your hands!”
Prior to the shooting, Australian Jews were distressed by a string of arson and vandalism attacks on Jewish sites, as well as rhetoric in pro-Palestinian demonstrations seen as stoking antisemitic violence. Officials attributed some of the most searing attacks to criminals working indirectly on behalf of Iran, and Albanese ejected the Iranian ambassador in retaliation earlier this year.
Now, Albanese’s new moves have drawn criticism and concern from some on the left, including a progressive Jewish group, about their implications for free speech. But the main body representing Australian Jews, which on Sunday called for “decisive leadership and action now,” said it wanted more.
The Executive Council of Australian Jewry said in a statement that it would reserve a fuller judgment until after the funerals were over and more information was available but indicated that it was not satisfied. Albanese said it could take months to draft legislation to match his commitments.
“We will need to see the details before making an assessment as to whether the measures are likely to live up to their billing,” the council said. “This suite of measures can only be regarded as a first step, but it is an essential one.”
The post As Australian Jews call for action on antisemitism, prime minister unveils moves to curb hate speech appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
I’m a 25-year-old semi-Zionist. Here’s what that means this Hanukkah.
I do not look Jewish. I do not wear a kippah. I wasn’t even truly connected to this identity until after Oct. 7. This isn’t to say I never felt Jewish; when I was a kid, I used to light LED Hanukkah “candles” with my father while giving my grandfather a “Chag Sameach” phone call. I used to hope for chocolate coins and Hot Wheels cars for my ever-growing collection. As an adult I have a much different hope. I hope for peace, for all Jews, everywhere.
When I was a child, I treated the existence of our homeland as a constant, something unshakeable, “There’s a Jewish homeland just like there’s a homeland for everyone else, just like there are Jews everywhere,” I thought. But since Oct. 7, I’ve realized just how fragile our existence is. I understand the concerns with Israel; I firmly believe that Benjamin Netanyahu and Itamar Ben-Gvir committed a genocide in our name and used our trauma to justify it. But I don’t think dismantling the country is a way to solve the problem.
This is why I describe myself as a “semi-Zionist.”
I believe that Jews have a claim to the land of Israel, that it is our ancestral homeland, and that yes, Jews were always in the region and had been in the region prior to 1917. I believe that we still have a right to Israel now, and that we always will.
Here’s why I’m “semi.” As a child I was taught that the ideal Jewish values are resilience, peace, and rationality. There is nothing resilient about denying food to starving people. There was nothing peaceful about laying waste to most of Gaza, and the acts of settler violence in the West Bank. And there is nothing rational about using the memory of a truly horrific atrocity to justify a campaign of hatred and fear. The very ideals of Zionism have been twisted by despicable people to turn from resilience to conquest.
It would be easy to blame antisemitism, including the terrorist attack at a Hanukkah celebration in Australia, on the actions of the Israeli government and their atrocities. What’s harder is thinking deeply and honestly about our own prejudices, who we blame, and what we do with our hate.
My hope for this Hanukkah is peace for everyone, everywhere, all Jews, and all people regardless of their faith. I hope for a time when the candles lit on Hanukkah are for celebration and not for mourning a senseless tragedy. I hope for a time when we can share our homeland with Palestinians instead of murdering them, because it is their homeland too. I hope for a time when Jews across the world can live freely without being persecuted for our beliefs or murdered just for existing.
But most of all, I hope for more Jews to have quiet Hanukkah nights like the ones I had, with fathers laughing about jokes their sons don’t understand, children pretending to like the taste of kugel, and lights that guide us toward a safe future.
The post I’m a 25-year-old semi-Zionist. Here’s what that means this Hanukkah. appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Ben Shapiro denounces Tucker Carlson at Heritage, urges policing of conservative movement
(JTA) — Ben Shapiro walked onto a Heritage Foundation stage Wednesday and used it to draw a line against Tucker Carlson and a strain of conservatism Shapiro warned is drifting toward conspiracy theories and antisemitism.
For a talk that lasted about an hour, Shapiro, one of the most prominent Jewish voices on the American right, denounced Carlson by name, arguing that the former Fox News host no longer belongs inside the conservative movement and urging the institution hosting him to enforce what he called “ideological border control.”
“A conservatism that treats Tucker Carlson as a thought leader is no conservatism,” Shapiro said. “If conservatives do not stand up and draw lines, conservatism and the dream of America itself will cease to exist.”
The speech was as notable for its venue as for its content. It was hosted by Kevin Roberts, Heritage’s president, who has come under fire in recent months for publicly defending Carlson after Carlson interviewed Nick Fuentes, a white nationalist and Holocaust revisionist. Roberts’ comments triggered resignations and criticism from Jewish leaders and former Heritage affiliates. Two more trustees of the foundation resigned this week over Roberts’ support for Carlson.
Despite the directness of Shapiro’s message, and his explicit call for Heritage to police the boundaries of the conservative movement, Roberts did not respond to the criticism or address antisemitism on the right during the event.
In his opening remarks, Roberts praised Shapiro as a “patriot,” a “man of faith” and a “trusted counselor,” and described Shapiro’s book as “a truly good book,” without mentioning Carlson, Fuentes or the controversy that has engulfed the organization. When Roberts moderated the discussion that followed, he pivoted to policy topics including immigration, housing affordability and elections, again avoiding any reference to Carlson or antisemitism.
Roberts also did not acknowledge the resignations or public criticism that followed his defense of Carlson, At the conclusion of the event, he broadly aligned Heritage with Shapiro’s message, telling the audience, “Count on Heritage to fight with you.”
In his speech, Shapiro accused Carlson of abandoning free-market principles, rejecting constitutional governance and advancing conspiracy theories that echo antisemitic tropes, particularly around Israel and Jewish influence. He cited Carlson’s repeated criticism of Israel, his suggestion of “nefarious Israeli influence in American government,” and his hostility toward Christian Zionists.
Shapiro also criticized Carlson for repeatedly platforming figures with extremist or antisemitic records, including Fuentes, whom he described as “America’s foremost Hitler apologist,” as well as Russian ideologue Alexander Dugin and revisionist historian Darryl Cooper. “None of this comports with traditional American values,” Shapiro said.
Shapiro framed the moment as a test of the conservative movement’s credibility. “Conservatism means something,” he said. “And if we refuse to stand for it and defend it, it will disappear.”
The post Ben Shapiro denounces Tucker Carlson at Heritage, urges policing of conservative movement appeared first on The Forward.
