In Face of Campus Furors, Jews Debate Limits of

Free Speech

by Leah Burrows, Advocate Staf

May 11, 2011

Source: Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME)

(SPME Editors Note: Richard Cravatts of Boston University and Tammi Rossman
Benjamin of the University of California at Santa Cruz are on the SPME Board of
Directors.)
At Temple Emanuel in Newton last Thursday, a panel of activists painted a picture of
growing anti- Israelism and anti-Semitism on college campuses around the
country.They showed footage of vehement anti-Israel and anti-Zionist speakers,
shouting into megaphones on campus quads.
They showed cartoons published in student newspapers portraying Israelis as
Nazis.They played video of keffiyehclad protestors holding signs equating Zionism
to racism on campus thoroughfares.
The panel which included representatives from Boston and Brandeis Universities,
the Israeli consulate and the Zionist Organization of America urged the hundreds
of people gathered in the synagogues social hall to put aside political differences
and unite behind Jewish students.
Solving this has to be a bi-partisan issue, said Ilana Snapstailer, director of
academic affairs at the consulate general of Israel to New England. Solving antiSemitism on campus is not left or right, Democrat or Republican. Its an issue for
everyone to get behind.
But organizations and activists seem split on two issues regarding anti-Semitism on
campuses the extent of the problem and, more importantly, how to fix it.
The challenge facing the universities and the Jewish community is that antiSemitism today often masquerades as anti-Israelism or anti-Zionism, said Richard
Cravatts, founding director of BUs publishing and digital media program, after
Thursdays event.
Much of what is being said on campuses is not criticism of Israel. It is hatred of
Jews for being Jewish, Cravatts said.

But where is the line between free speech and harassment? That was the question
that recently divided the American Jewish Committee and the Zionist Organization
of America how can you protect Jewish students and First Amendment rights at the
same time?
Last year, the two organizations had worked together on this issue.The AJC and the
ZOA, along with a dozen other organizations, sent a letter to US Education Secretary
Arne Duncan, urging the Department of Educations Office for Civil Rights to reverse
its 2004 decision excluding Jewish students from Title VI of the Civil Rights Act,
which protects against discrimination based on race, color or national origin by
agencies that receive federal funding such as state universities.
Initially, Jews were excluded from Title VI protection because they were considered
members of a religion, not an ethnic group.
But in October, the Department of Education issued a letter that classified certain
anti-Semitic harassment such as Jew baiting and swastikas as punishable under
Title VI. This meant that if a university did not protect students against the
harassment, it could lose federal funding.
The decision was celebrated by Jewish groups, including the AJC and ZOA, but that
unity did not last long.
Two weeks ago, Kenneth Stern, the AJCs specialist on anti-Semitism and extremism,
in partnership with the Association of American University Professors, issued a letter
that warned against using Title VI as a form of censorship against groups critical of
Israel.
Title VI is a remedy when university leadership neglects its job to stop bigoted
harassment of students; it is not a tool to define politically correct campus speech
even objectionable statements can have content worthy of debate, the letter
states.
In response, the Zionist Organization of America issued a letter chastising the AJC
for speaking out against a policy that they said protects Jewish students.
No one is asking colleges and universities to censor free speech, said Susan
Tuchman of the ZOA. But we are calling on college administrators to exercise their
own free speech and publically condemn this kind of behavior.
Title VI is needed, Tuchman said, because administrators have all too often ignored
the harassment of Jewish students on campus.
The only Title VI complaint filed so far as a result of anti-Semitism claims that
officials at the University of California-Santa Cruz have routinely ignored or denied
students requests for help.
But, in order to prove a Title VI violation, students or faculty have to demonstrate
anti-Semitic behavior and harassment. The Santa Cruz complaint offers several
examples of speech that could be classified as anti-Semitic but in a context that
may not be considered harassment.

For example, the complaint states that the university sponsored several
conferences and seminars featuring scholars who equated Zionism with racism,
claimed Israel committed crimes against humanity and said that Jews exaggerated
the Holocaust.
These statements could qualify as anti-Semitic under the working definition of antiSemitism, but Stern questioned whether it counts as harassment. Tammi Benjamin,
a professor at UC-Santa Cruz, argued that conferences like this contributed to
overall hostility toward Jews on campus, but Stern warned against legal action just
because we didnt like what four professors said in a symposium.
Stern agreed that the Title VI should be used when administrators drag their feet,
but said legal action should be a last resort. Even then, complaints should be very
specific, he said.
Im concerned that people are bringing in things that were purely political speech
in a concerted effort to chill that speech, Stern said.
Censoring debate can be as harmful to the Israel cause as hateful and bigoted
speech, Stern said. Students should be exposed to ideas, even bigoted ideas, and
they should wrestle with those ideas, he said.
Legally, there are no easy answers, according to Jeff Robbins, a First Amendment
lawyer at Mintz Levin in Boston. Robbins serves on the board of the American Jewish
Committee, the Anti-Defamation League and the David Project.
Free speech and personal safety often clash against one another, Robbins said.
Courts often side with a persons right to free speech, but there are limitations.
Freedom of speech protects ones right to be a moron to a considerable degree,
said Robbins, but may not protect your right to be a bully or threaten people.
http://www.thejewishadvocate.com/news/2011-0506/Local_News/In_face_of_campus_furors_Jews_debate_limits_of_fre.html