Litigation Is No Way to Fight Antisemitism

Litigation Is No Way to Fight Antisemitism Sharon Ann Musher (bio) In her 2017 testimony before the US House of Representatives on Judiciary, historian Pamela Nadell described present as a moment when "the volume antisemitism … is turned way up." Nevertheless, she opposed idea that "climate fear" so "severe, pervasive, or persistent" existed college and university campuses it "impinge[d] upon Jewish students' learning thriving." Drawing social scientific studies, experiences own campus (American University), impressions colleagues' encounters (bolstered by term president Association Studies), concluded antisemitic incidents were exception, rather than rule, higher education had not become hotbed some journalists pro-Israel groups claimed. Instead, contended such instances occurred, leaders quickly forcefully intervened, they did in response racist incidents, condemn them counsel distraught students.1 Studies campus, including ones cites, contradict one another. Some find be surging, while others contend students do feel threatened.2 The range institutions investigated affiliation those sampled help explain disparities. But even more significantly, different findings stem from varying ways researchers, sponsoring institutions, generations [End Page 219] understand antisemitism.3 Such conflicting ideas should debated classrooms, professional associations, media, but legislated, Anti-Semitism Act attempted President Trump's Executive Order (EO) succeeded doing. Based my work with Alliance for Academic Freedom, countering academic boycotts Israel-related resolutions associations since American Association's boycott Israel 2013, feeling pervasive academia suggests. Like other forms hate, racism Islamophobia, has been growing both our broader society.4 Over past few years, we have seen barred opportunities spaces "because assumption their Jewishness converts into agents Israeli government."5 We witnessed faculty members refusing write letters recommendation because wished study Israel.6 swastikas drawn public property, eviction notices posted dorm rooms perceived Jewish, spitting, shoving, hitting.7 Fueled right left, discrimination real underestimated.8 220] also needs approached sensitively. Learning requires freedom harassment intimidation, well exposure sometimes offend. act nor executive order was necessary specify schools would risk losing federal funding if respond based religion. Although Title VI Civil Rights 1964 originally specified protected race nationality, early 2000s, extended counter religious intimidation creates "hostile environment severe, persistent interfere limit ability participate benefit services, activities, offered schools."9 protects discriminatory acts, does bigoted speech. Even hateful statements symbols are safeguarded, long deface property threaten individual race, national origin, religion.10 EO, contrast, institutionalized controversial definition antisemitism, empowering government agencies investigate potentially speech addition actions. It espoused working developed 2000s measure rising Western Europe. cited contentious examples comparing policy Nazis, singling out Israel, creating double standard, claiming racist. State Department adopted 2010.11 International Holocaust Remembrance (IHRA) implemented six years later.12 It...