free speech

Erwin Chemerinsky should address Palestine exception to free speech

This article appears at The Daily Cal

Erwin Chemerinsky, the new dean of Berkeley Law, has been making waves in campus politics regarding free speech issues. Chemerinsky is a major constitutional law scholar, an outspoken liberal and a free speech absolutist. He’s the perfect figure to defend the UC Berkeley’s administration from people who are angry about far-right provocateurs and hundreds of cops being on campus. At speaking events and in writing, he has mainly argued that the administration is following First Amendment requirements to not discriminate on the basis of political ideology.

At a recent administration-sponsored Faculty Panel on Free Speech, the audience applauded when professor john a. powell said “the defining issue of the country is white supremacy” and not free speech. It was refreshing to hear this after every other panelist (including Chancellor Carol Christ and Chemerinsky), all of whom were white, failed to even mention the issue.

Free speech does matter, but discussing it is useless without the pressing context of racism. “Free speech” alone cannot explain why the administration just spent $800,000 on an unsponsored, 15-minute appearance by the racist Milo Yiannopoulos. To explain that, we have to include an analysis of the growing far right movement that is trying to use Berkeley as a hunting ground. We have to contrast the city’s protection of racists to its rejection of thousands of anti-racist protesters, to whom it denied rally space Aug. 27. When we talk about free speech, we have to talk about the “Palestine Exception to Free Speech,” the administration’s temporary suspension of a Palestine-related course last year, and chilling posters on campus smearing Palestine scholars as “terrorist supporters.” Both the administration and Chemerinsky, however, disregard this context of racism.

Chancellor Christ has only once publicly mentioned “racism,” and that was only to describe how it makes “the issue of free speech even more tense.” The administration, by not discussing the serious threat posed by violent bigots and police militarization, gives legitimacy to the far-right’s facade of “free speech.” Chemerinsky unfortunately contributes to and legitimizes this distorted conception of free speech sans racism. This also means that suppression of anti-racist speech is left out of the conversation, which instead becomes exclusively about how the rights of racists and right-wingers are supposedly under attack.

Chemerinsky’s new book, Free Speech on Campus, exemplifies this flawed approach. His central thesis is that “all ideas and views should be able to be expressed on college campuses, no matter how offensive or how uncomfortable they make people feel.” He makes a strong case, going through a history of abolitionists, socialists and anti-war activists fighting for their right to speak freely about important causes, expanding the protections of the First Amendment  which later helped to protect the civil rights movement. His point is that liberal students should care about free speech because “social progress has come about, not as a result of silencing certain speakers, but by ensuring that previously silenced or marginalized groups are empowered to find their voice and have their say.”

The problem, however, is that the book’s comprehensive title, Free Speech on Campus, is not reflected in its content. Chemerinsky does not discuss the campaign against pro-Palestine activism, which Glenn Greenwald refers to as the “greatest threat to free speech in the West.” In a 2015 report on “The Palestine Exception to Free Speech” and a 2016 update, the Center for Constitutional Rights and the Palestine Legal detail hundreds of incidents of suppression of Palestinian human rights advocacy, the majority of which are on college campuses.

Chemerinsky focuses almost exclusively on calls to silence racist and right-wing speech. He makes only one mention of Steven Salaita, whose offer for a tenured position at the University of Illinois was withdrawn because of his critical tweets about Israel during its 2014 invasion of Gaza. That is one of only three mentions in the book of suppression of pro-Palestine advocacy. This is especially troubling because of Chemerinsky’s explanation of why many liberal students today are not free speech absolutists. He says the problem is that his generation grew up when anti-war activists were facing state repression of their speech, but the current generation “did not grow up at a time when the act of punishing speech was associated with undermining other worthwhile values.” However, Salaita is just one of hundreds of examples of the concerted, ongoing campaign to punish anti-racist speech. Chemerinsky fails to foreground or seriously discuss this major campus free speech issue and in doing so actually  contributes to the problem of non-association between speech and “other worthwhile values” like anti-racism.

Everyone opposed to white supremacy should defend the right to free speech, because we need it to build a strong movement . We should reject Christ’s use of “free speech” as a cover to militarize the campus and provide a $800,000 platform for far-right provocateurs, and we should criticize Chemerinsky’s inattention to the Palestine exception to free speech. Anti-racists need to develop and assert a fuller vision of the right to free speech.

Mukund Rathi is a law student at UC Berkeley.

California State University Long Beach Passes Motion to Divest from Corporations Aiding Oppression of Palestinians

CSU Long Beach becomes the 13th California campus to pass a boycott or divestment measure.

From the Daily 49er

The Associated Students, Inc. Senate passed in a (15,7,1) roll call vote a divestment resolution from companies that profit from Palestinian oppression.

One side of the gallery restrained their cheers and jitters, while the other side donned dispirited, reddened faces as the ASI Senate tallied their votes.

This resolution would encourage the university to divest from companies that receive monetary gain from Palestinian oppression. The ASI Senate also passed two similar resolutions the same day that encouraged the divestment from companies that profit from LGBTQ+ oppression and private prisons.

Now that all of the divestment resolutions have passed in the Senate, the university at large and its auxiliaries, such as the 49er Foundation and the 49er Shops, will decide whether or not they will support it.

Since the inception of the divestment resolution regarding Palestinian oppression, the Farber Senate chambers have been filled with Jewish and Palestinian people alike, as well as campus members interested in the outcome of the resolution, all voicing their thoughts on the controversy of the Israel and Palestine conflict taking place overseas.

The culmination of emotion before the vote was led by loud claps, cheers and snaps from the audience. Attendance at ASI’s last Senate meeting of the semester was at its highest due to the great controversy over the resolution. Students, faculty and others passionate about the topic sported t-shirts and held up signs advocating for their cause.

The victory, which passed 3 total votes over the span of one month, came amid efforts to suppress and intimidate student senators, covered by Palestine Legal and in the Daily 49er. Students hailed the vote as precedent for further action in support of social justice.

UC Berkeley Suspends and Reinstates Course on Palestine

During the fall semester of 2016, pressure on UC Berkeley administrators from off campus organizations resulted in the suspension of a student led course on Palestine – Ethnic Studies 198: Palestine: A Settler Colonial Analysis.

The cancellation of the course was a violation of free speech and academic freedom and raised a number of questions about governance and procedure at the university. This marks the second time  that an anti-Palestinian organization has attempted to cancel a student led course on Palestine at the UC system.

After strong pushback from students, faculty, lawyers, and academic associations, the course was formally reinstated on September 19th, 2016.

Relevant links regarding the issue are below:

Pressure letter led by AMCHA Initiative and other groups

Palestine Legal Letter

Statement by students of Ethnic Studies 198

Analysis by Academe Blog

Electronic Intifada Coverage

Middle East Studies Association Letter

California Scholars for Academic Freedom Letter

Palestine Legal Statement on Reinstatement of Ethnic Studies 198

SJP-West Welcomes University of California Regents’ Decision to Not Consider Harmful Re-Definition of Anti-Semitism

For Immediate Release

SJP-West Welcomes University of California Regents’ Decision to Not Consider Harmful Re-Definition of Anti-Semitism

Wednesday July 22, 2015

Contact: west.sjp@gmail.com

The UC Regents will not be considering adoption of the State Department definition of anti-Semitism at its meeting today, after an outcry from students, graduate student workers, Jewish community members, and civil rights organizations. The UC Office of the President (UCOP) announced instead that, “…the Board of Regents will consider at its September meeting a statement of principles against intolerance, including, but not limited to, anti-Semitism and other types of intolerance.”

As SJP-West illustrated in its June letter to UC President Janet Napolitano, the State Department’s definition of anti-Semitism dangerously conflates anti-Semitism with legitimate criticism of Israeli policy, mis-representing an issue of human rights as an ethno-religious matter. The Los Angeles Times recently editorialized in agreement with this position, highlighting the ways in which the State Department’s “overly broad and constitutionally dubious” definition would lead to confusion and conflation of pro-Palestinian speech with bigotry. While we reiterate our opposition to anti-Semitism as well as all forms of racism and bigotry, we believe that the State Department’s definition, if adopted, would ultimately harm not just efforts to advocate for Palestinian rights but also efforts to oppose anti-Semitism.

In addition to petitions and legal letters sent by SJP-West and other organizations, on July 7, 2015 SJP West, UAW-2865 (the labor union for Graduate Students and Workers of the UC schools), Jewish Voice for Peace, and various civil rights organizations along with UC students, faculty, and staff gathered in Oakland to protest outside the UC Office of the President. These groups asserted their disapproval of the possible adoption of the State Department definition of anti-Semitism at today’s meeting.

Robert Gardner, a current student at UCLA, expresses extreme relief at the fact that the UC Regents will not adopt this definition – for now. He explains, “Students shouldn’t be stigmatized as bigots because we oppose well documented abuses practiced against Palestinians by the Israeli government. This decision to drop consideration of the State Department definition is an important step because it shows that the Regents understand that our First Amendment right to engage in debate on campus is imperative to the integrity of the UC system. Moreover, it proves that when students come together and make their voices heard, we are able to overcome the pressures of powerful outside forces who seek to stifle and censor criticism of the Israeli government.”

Students report that administrators who fear controversy over Israel and Palestine try to restrict their activity. In the first four months of 2015 alone, Palestine Legal documented 60 cases of false accusations of anti-Semitism that were in fact incidents where students or faculty criticized policies of Israel. Statements made to the Jewish Daily Forward by one of the principal advocates of the State Department’s re-definition indicates that the definition is seen by some pro-Israel advocates as applying to nearly all forms of pro-Palestinian student speech that take place on UC campuses today.

Sophia Shalabi, a student at UC Irvine, notes that, “…refraining from the implementation of a definition that is strategically meant to silence Pro-Palestinian activists will allow students to continue advocating for the Palestinian voice that has been ignored by our administration.” Gardner predicted, “As we move forward within the upcoming academic year, Palestinian rights activists hope to engage in critical debate and continue to educate our fellow students about the Palestinian plight. This will now be a little bit easier.”

SJP-West is a coalition of Students for Justice in Palestine chapters across California. Find more at www.sjpwest.org.

 

San Diego State Professor under fire for “Palestine Map”

In September 2013, UCSD professor Ghassan Zakaria came under fire from the anti-Palestinian group “Stand With Us” for his use of a map that indicated historic Palestine but did not label any part of the territory Israel. Below is a press release issued by SDSU SJP in response to those events, as well as the following other resources. Although the issue is in many ways minor, it is important to document the ongoing attempts to attack Palestine in classrooms across the state, and the ongoing efforts by anti-Palestinian groups to bully university administrators.

1. Press release

2. SJP Letter to Provost

3. JVP Letter to Provost (below press release)

4. California Scholars for Academic Freedom Letter to Provost (below JVP letter)

5. Provost Response to Students

6. Associated Students’ draft legislation

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

SDSU Professor Under Pressure for Labeling Palestine as Palestine on a Map

San Diego, CA, September 11 – This week, San Diego State Arabic lecturer Ghassan Zakaria  came under pressure after he handed out a map to his students which labelled the territory of Palestine as Palestine and not as Israel.

This was brought to the attention of “Stand with Us” by a student in Zakaria’s class. Stand with Us is a Zionist organization, infamous for supporting Israel’s occupation of Palestine as well as Israel’s apartheid system which violates the human rights of the Palestinian people.

According to 10 News San Diego, Stand with Us then notified its members and encouraged them to write to the Arabic and Islamic Studies’ department chairman and program director, who replied that the map reflects the perspective of the people from the Middle East and North Africa.

The university then issued the following statement after inquiries from Team 10: “While SDSU encourages scholarly debate and discussion of varying opinions, presenting inaccurate information to students in not acceptable. SDSU’s Provost has conferred with the department chair, who spoke with the faculty member. This inaccurate portrayal will not reoccur.”

As a human rights organization and as a diverse group that represents a large number of SDSU students, Students for Justice in Palestine is displeased with the university’s reaction and with the pressure faced by professor Zakaria.

The map not only reflects the opinions of the vast majority of those who inhabit the region which the students are attempting to study, but it is also historically accurate and a valid opinion that must be defended like any other under the principle of academic freedom.

Students for Justice in Palestine has issued a letter to the university provost in defense of professor Zakaria’s academic freedom. The letter has been signed by the Afrikan Student Union, Amnesty International, the Muslim Student Association, the Arab Student Association, Mecha, Acha, Al-Awda and of course Students for Justice in Palestine.

Amnesty International has also submitted its own letter condemning the pressure faced by professor Zakaria. Hilal Haider, president of Amnesty International and a former student of Zakaria states: “The map was specifically crafted for students to know what areas speak Arabic.  If it were a standard geographical map, of course Israel would be listed, as well as Palestine.”

Jewish student, Eleña Horvitz also wrote a letter to the provost. She writes: “Zionist interpretation and portrayal of the Middle East does not accurately represent the beliefs and opinions of all Jewish students or the Jewish population as a whole. As a Jewish student, I would like to believe that my university would not readily accept a racist, nationalistic portrayal of Israel but rather that faculty should be allowed to express their perspectives freely without fearing the threat of censorship or losing their jobs.”

SJP describes itself as an organization of diverse students, faculty, staff and community members, organized on democratic principles to promote justice, human rights, liberation and self-determination for the Palestinian people.
 Jewish Voice for Peace Letter to Provost

JVP letter

 

California Scholars for Academic Freedom Letter to Provost

CSAF Letter to Hirschman

SJP-West Statement on Dismissal of Title VI Claims at 3 UC Schools

Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) chapters on the West Coast celebrate the U.S. Department of Education’s (DOE’s) dismissal of Title VI claims against three University of California schools, UC Berkeley, UC Santa Cruz, and UC Irvine, alleging that activism supportive of Palestinian human rights creates a hostile educational environment for Jewish students. These accusations were only the latest episode in a long series of attacks against Palestine solidarity activists that aim to intimidate, censor, and smear speech in support of Palestinian freedom and equality.

In an attempt to stifle Palestine solidarity activism, these Title VI complaints repeated the tired claim that supporting Palestinian human rights or voicing criticism of Israel’s policies is inherently anti-Semitic. As such, the Jewish community on campus was incorrectly portrayed as uniformly supportive of Israeli state policies in order to support the argument that pro-Palestine speech creates a hostile environment for the Jewish community. In fact, SJP chapters have a long track record of opposing all bigotry, including anti-Jewish bigotry, on campus.

We view this attempt to use the Civil Rights Act to limit students’ ability to speak out for the rights of oppressed groups as a perversion of the spirit of the law and the cause of equality and justice that undergirds it. We are pleased that the Department of Education dismissed all three cases, finding that the allegations either lacked merit or were examples of speech “that a reasonable student in higher education may experience.” These findings echo the department’s 2007 conclusions from UC Irvine, which stated that “speeches, articles, marches, symbols, and other events at issue were not based on the national origin of the Jewish students, but rather based on opposition to the policies of Israel.” The dismissals finally lift a threat that has been hanging over our universities since 2004, when the first complaint to the DOE was made against UC Irvine.

Such complaints, and the years-long DOE investigations, contributed to a devastating chilling effect on student activists and organizations, and led to unwarranted scrutiny of constitutionally protected speech by administrators worried about federal investigation. We welcome the dismissal, but hope that DOE will take steps to make sure that such investigations are handled more expeditiously in the future.

These dismissals represent the sixth major victory for SJP’s speech rights on campus in the 2012-2013 academic year:

  • In 2012, Felber v. Yudof, a federal lawsuit filed on similar legal grounds, was settled out of court with no meaningful ramifications, after a federal judge ruled that the complained-of speech activities were constitutionally protected.
  • Recommendations for broad censorship and monitoring of SJP speech made by the Campus Climate Advisory Council have also been effectively stopped.
  • The UC Student Association (UCSA) voted overwhelmingly to condemn California Assembly Resolution HR-35, which endorsed the Campus Climate reports. The UC Berkeley Graduate Student Association and over 1,000 students and recent graduates joined the UCSA in opposing HR 35.
  • Student senates at UC Berkeley, UC Davis, UC Santa Barbara, and UC Irvine, as well as the UCSA passed resolutions condemning Islamophobic and anti-Palestinian comments made about SJPs and Muslim Students Associations (MSA) by UCSC Lecturer Tammi Rossman-Benjamin.
  • Sadia Saifuddin was confirmed to the position of UC Student Regent without opposition, despite efforts to stop the nomination based on her support for divestment.

While we do not expect that attempts to silence and intimidate SJPs will cease, we are confident that the anti-Palestinian groups that filed these claims can neither successfully silence us nor present the campus community with a viable argument for Israel’s policies of occupation and discrimination. We therefore reaffirm our commitment to speak out for justice in Palestine and will continue to work towards the day that the UC system cuts its financial ties to corporations that profit from the oppression of the Palestinian people.

 

 

 

US Dept. of Education Dismisses Title VI Claims Against UC Berkeley, UC Santa Cruz, and UC Irvine

It is a great day to be a Palestine campus solidarity activist. The US Department of Education has dismissed legal claims filed by some pro-Israel students claiming that the Pro-Palestinian activism at UC Berkeley, Santa Cruz, and Irvine provided a hostile and anti-semitic enviroment for Jewish students on campus. What does Title VI mean?

As explained by Electronic Intifada’s Nora Barrows-Friedman:

“The complaint was filed under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which protects students against discrimination based on race or ethnic background. Israel-aligned groups and individuals have claimed that Jewish students face anti-Semitism, harassment and intimidation because of activism by Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and Muslim student groups, and have filed claims with the Department of Education alleging violations of Title VI.”

This particular Title VI claim against UC Berkeley has been fought and brought back over a long period of time, as Barrows-Friedman points out:

“The Title VI complaint at UC Berkeley was filed by Zionist students last year after a suit against the University of California’s governing body, the Regents, was thrown out by a judge because of a significant lack of evidence. The original complaint attempted to make connections between Students for Justice in Palestine and the Muslim Student Union and Hamas, and compared the climate on UC Berkeley campus to that of the Holocaust. However, despite the suit being thrown out, the students re-filed the complaint as a Title VI claim with the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights.”

Is is also important to note that these claims conflated being pro-occupation with being Jewish. The only Jewish students that these claims acknowledge are those who are pro-occupation. The use of civil rights law to stifle Palestinian solidarity activism on California campuses has seen a major defeat today. To read up more on this wonderful victory check out the links below:

 

Dismissals:

Read the DOE’s letter to UC Berkeley

Read the DOE’s letter to UCSC

We will post DOE’s letter to UCI as soon as it is made public.

 

News:

–Nora Barrows-Friedman’s piece on Electronic Intifada

–Los Angeles Times article on the dismissal of Title VI claim at Berkeley

–UC Berkeley News Center article on the dismissal

–UC Santa Cruz News Center article on the dismissal

 

Solidarity statements:

–Center for Constitutional Rights statement celebrating the dismissal

–ACLU statement celebrating the dismissal

–CAIR statement in support

 

Students Respond to California Legislators’ Censorship

July 8, 2013

SJP West (Students for Justice in Palestine)

For Immediate Release:

Billions of US tax dollars and millions of University of California tuition dollars are invested in documented human rights violations in Palestine and Israel–including but not limited to acts of collective punishment, contributing to the illegal separation wall that annexes Palestinian land, operating in illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank, and discriminating based on race, ethnicity and religion. Over the past year, seven UC campuses brought measures to divest from these documented human rights violations in Palestine before our student senates, including UC Berkeley, UC Davis, UC Irvine, UC Riverside, UC Santa Barbara, UC Santa Cruz, UC San Diego. These divestment measures–which achieved a majority of ‘yes’ votes in 5 of 7 campuses–represent a growing movement around the state towards accountability to international human rights law and a basic standard of justice.

Yet over the past year, the California State Legislature has taken an increasingly anti-democratic stance against students organizing for universal rights and justice across the state. On May 31, over 30 legislators from the California State Senate and Assembly signed a letter to the University of California Board of Regents and Chair condemning and discouraging divestment measures on our campuses. This is not the first time members of the California State Legislature has tried to silence student democracy: last summer, the State Assembly passed the HR 35 resolution, which labeled criticism of Israel’s illegal and discriminatory policies against Palestinians as “anti-Semitic” and recommended broad censorship measures of UC students and faculty advocating for Palestinian rights and justice.

Our campaigns for justice have been supported by a multitude of groups with actual concerns for these human rights, including but not limited to Arab, Asian, Black, Chicana, Christian, Filipino, Latina, Muslim and indigenous student unions, groups representing justice for queer, working-class, and impoverished people, as well as Jews and Israelis who believe in realizing universal human rights for the Palestinians. To allege that “all sides” are not being heard and that divestment and human rights are “divisive” to our campuses is a cynical erasure of the coalitional unity that all of our campaigns maintain and of the multi-million dollar lobbying apparatus and multi-billion dollar industry involved in US support for Israel’s illegal policies.

The Legislature’s letter was anti-democratic and left us with no time to respond, coming during graduation and the end of the school year for most UC students. We now feel compelled to offer our response. In an effort to demonstrate the duplicitous and deceptive actions of the Legislature, we offer the following signed letter in the words of the Legislature itself (original letter included at the bottom), with alterations when appropriate:

 

July 8 2013

Dear Chair Varner and University of California Board of Regents:

As university students across the State of California, we denounce the California State Legislature for attempting to stifle student movements to divest from companies complicit in documented human rights violations in the occupied territories of Palestine.

We are concerned with the divisive impact on our university campuses caused by the California State Legislature and encourage efforts to engage the community in a more balanced and civil discussion on this issue. We are greatly embarrassed by the statement issued in May 2010 by the UC Regents’ Chair and Vice Chair in conjunction with the UC President, firmly rejecting the notion of divestment from companies complicit in documented human rights violations against the Palestinian people.

The statements and resolutions such as HR 35 that have been sent or passed by various bodies of the California State Senate and Assembly fail to foster dialogue and understanding among those with different opinions. We fear that such campaigns deepen the amount of power levied against the occupied Palestinians by the occupying Israeli military, drawing Palestinians and Israelis further away from universal justice and human rights. We believe that the California State Senate Legislature’s time and resources would be better invested not meddling in student democracy and encourage the legislature to work together in a productive manner.

We believe in free speech and encourage our state legislators to embrace a “true marketplace of ideas,” where all voices on this important issue are adequately weighted. There are so many voices across all of our campuses that have come together in unity around the call for human rights in Palestine. We believe that young leaders in the UC system have tremendous opportunities and motivation to build a better tomorrow. We believe that the acts of the California State Legislature are stifling that potential. We are empowered to advance initiatives that foster peace, justice and reconciliation; unfortunately, the California State Legislature appears to be creating an antagonistic environment for students who support human rights, universal justice and those opposed to the blatant obstruction of these ideals.

Once again, we are shocked and appalled by our elected officials for standing firm in their refusal to divest from to the violation of universal justice and human rights and present this letter as our response to their divisive and conflict-ridden resolutions and statements.

Sincerely,
Students and citizens of California, including:

UC Berkeley Black Student Union
UC Berkeley CalSERVE Board of Directors
UC Berkeley International Socialist Organization
UC Berkeley Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano/xicana de Aztlán
UC Berkeley Pilipino Academic Student Services
UC Berkeley Students for Justice in Palestine
UC Davis Students for Justice in Palestine
UC Irvine Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán
UC Irvine Students for Justice in Palestine
UC Los Angeles Amnesty International
UC Los Angeles Students for Justice in Palestine
UC Los Angeles Muslim Students Association
UC Riverside Students for Justice in Palestine
UC San Diego Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán
UC San Diego Socialists
UC San Diego Students for Justice in Palestine
UC Santa Barbara Students for Justice in Palestine
UC Santa Cruz Committee for Justice in Palestine
Cal Poly Pomona Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán
CSU Fullerton Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán
CSU Fullerton Students for Justice in Palestine
CSU San Marcos Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán
La Mission College Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán
San Diego State Amnesty International
San Diego State Arab Student Association
San Diego State Muslim Student Association
San Diego State Students for Justice in Palestine
San Francisco State General Union of Palestine Students
Santa Monica College Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán
Stanford International Socialist Organization
Stanford Muslim Student Awareness Network
Stanford National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
Stanford Students for Palestinian Equal Rights
Stanford Students Say No To War
USC Students for Justice in Palestine

Joined by more than 800 California residents who have signed JVP’s letter.

Download the PDF of the letter here, and view it below:

Students Respond to CA Legislature Censorship by StanfordSPER

In new letter, Civil Rights groups ask Federal Government to take steps to protect student speech

via Alex Kane, Mondoweiss

Prolonged federal investigations of Palestine solidarity activism on campuses are chilling students’ constitutional rights to organize and speak out, a coalition of civil rights groups has charged in letters to the U.S. Department of Education (DOE). The civil rights and advocacy groups are asking the federal government to take a number of steps to remedy what they say is the problem of investigations that are having a chilling effect on students’ speech.

The letters (read them here), sent to the DOE civil rights division in San Francisco and the DOE’s assistant secretary for civil rights, are a response to the spate of Title VI civil rights complaints that have been filed by Jewish students who advocate for Israel. These complaints allege that campuses have allowed an anti-Semitic environment to flourish, but they mostly concern Palestine solidarity activism. The Title VI complaints have sparked federal inquiries on a number of California campuses.

“The numerous complaints and continued threats of complaints…have resulted in universities increasing pressure on students advocating for Palestinian rights, often applying campus rules unequally and obstructing their activities to avoid accusations that the university is enabling an anti-Semitic environment by allowing students to express their views,” the groups, including the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), the National Lawyers Guild and Jewish Voice for Peace say.

The detailed letters charge that the investigations are based on complaints that conflate political speech critical of Israel with anti-Semitism. The groups also state that the investigations have been prolonged–”well beyond the OCR’s internal benchmark of 180 days”–and have not allowed students most affected by these complaints to voice their concerns.

The civil rights groups’ statements request that the DOE take a number of steps to remedy the problems they bring up. Among the recommendations are that the DOE issue a letter stating that student political speech is protected under the First Amendment and that “advocacy for Palestinian human rights and criticism of Israeli government policies are not anti-Semitic.”

“The abuse of civil rights laws to silence political views tramples on the First Amendment, and is already causing a tangible, detrimental impact on Arab, Muslim, and other students who espouse particular views of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” said CCR Cooperating Counsel Liz Jackson in a statement.“That contravenes the spirit of Title VI and of our Constitution. And it wrongly conflates Jewish identity with uncritical support for Israel.”

The civil rights groups’ statements are a forceful rebuke to the DOE’s practice of opening up civil rights investigations based on the Israel-related complaints of Jewish students who charge that activities like mock checkpoints and Israel Apartheid Week are anti-Semitic. The letter recommends that the DOE “direct [civil rights] field offices not to investigate complaints where the facts alleged, even if true, constitute pure political speech or expressive activity.”

In 2010, after lobbying led by groups like the right-wing Zionist Organization of America, the DOE shifted policy to allow Title VI complaints to be filed from religious groups with shared ethnic characteristics. Title VI is the section of the Civil Rights Act that prohibits institutions that receive federal funding from discriminating based on race, color and national origin. The DOE’s 2010 decision opened the gates for the current complaints from Jewish pro-Israel students.

Despite the fact that no campus has been found to be in violation of Title VI as a result of any of these complaints, civil rights groups charge that they are still having an impact on activism and speech on campus.

Currently, there are three cases in California that are being investigated in response to a Title VI complaint being filed. For instance, the University of California, Berkeley campus is being investigated as a result of a complaint filed by students who were affiliated with Tikvah Students for Israel. The UC Berkeley investigation started out as a lawsuit in 2011, which was ended after the school and the students reached an agreement in which the university said it would consider changes to policy on campus protests. The judge in the original lawsuit stated that “a very substantial portion of the conduct to which [the complainants] object represents pure political speech and expressive conduct, in a public setting, regarding matters of public concern, which is entitled to special protection under the First Amendment.”

On the same day the agreement with UC Berkeley was reached, the same students filed a Title VI complaint with the San Francisco Division of the DOE’s Office for Civil Rights. The complaint alleges that mock checkpoints and Israel Apartheid Week create “a disturbing echo of incitement, intimidation, harassment and violence carried out under the Nazi regime and those of its allies in Europe against Jewish students and scholars … during the turbulent years leading up to and including the Holocaust.”

The prolonged nature of the civil rights investigations is causing “harm,” the letter from the CCR and others state. “The courts have long recognized that even government scrutiny – let alone full-blown investigations such as those at issue here – has a marked potential to chill speech and other expressive activities.”

And the Berkeley investigation has had an impact on students, the civil rights groups say. Specifically, the letter to the San Francisco Division of the DOE states:

A graduate student active with one of the groups targeted by the lawsuit against UC Berkeley (Students for Justice in Palestine) was told by his adviser that his public status as a Palestinian rights activist would hinder his career.

An Arab Muslim student stated that he declined to get involved with the second group targeted by the Berkeley lawsuit (the Muslim Student Association), for fear that it would jeopardize his chances of getting into graduate school.

Pro-Palestinian students frequently express anxiety about being falsely branded as antiSemites.

Several students declined to have their names appear on declarations to OCR regarding the UC Berkeley complaint, for fear that they would be improperly smeared as anti Semites or otherwise targeted.

UC Student Petition Against HR-35 Surpasses 1,000 Signatures

Download the press release here

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 9, 2013

UC STUDENT PETITION SUPPORTING UCSA’S RESOLUTION AGAINST HR-35 SURPASSES 1,000 SIGNATURES

Students voice their united opposition to California Resolution HR-35 and thank the UC Students Association for vocally opposing it while taking a morally consistent stand against racism. HR-35 proposes broad bans on student speech supporting Palestinian rights and criticizing discriminatory Israeli policies.

Today a petition signed by UC students and recent graduates who support the University of California’s Student Association (UCSA) resolution regarding HR-35 surpassed 1,000 signatures. Signers applauded UCSA “for standing up on behalf of the UC community and defending [their] right to advocate for human rights,” and for representing the “majority viewpoint at the UC which opposes racism in all forms, whether it be anti-Jewish acts by anti-Semites or anti-Palestinian policies undertaken by Israel in its discriminatory and illegal occupation.” The petitioners thanked the UCSA for its robust rebuke of State Assembly bill HR-35.

HR-35 is a non-binding resolution passed through the California State Assembly over the summer. The bill inappropriately labels criticism of Israeli state policy as anti-Semitic and recommends broad forms of censorship of students and faculty at the UC to prevent criticism of Israel.

Attorney Liz Jackson, cooperating counsel with the Center for Constitutional Rights characterized HR-35 as “an anti-democratic attempt to intimidate and silence students from expressing pro-Palestinian views.” Jackson explained, “HR-35 mislabels advocacy for Palestinian rights as inherently anti-Semitic. This is a complete distortion of students’ human rights advocacy. To argue that such speech should be restricted, as HR-35 does, is to decimate the principle of free speech and it is plainly unconstitutional.”

HR-35 is part of a well-documented pattern of intimidation against those speaking out in support of Palestinian rights on UC/CSU campuses, noted in a recent letter from civil rights groups to the UC Administration. Its passage comes shortly after the release of a controversial Campus Climate report that recommends similar forms of censorship of pro-Palestinian students, ranging from limiting the pro-Palestinian speakers allowed on campus to “enforcing balance” when pro-Palestinian speakers do come to campus.

Both the climate report and HR-35 have been widely criticized and opposed by civil rights groups such as the National Lawyers Guild and Center for Constitutional Rights, community organizations such as Jewish Voice for Peace and the Council on American Islamic Relations, and academic groups such as the California Scholars for Academic Freedom and the Middle East Studies Association. The ACLU of Northern California recently warned of the “chilling effect” that related federal lawsuits targeting Palestine human rights activists are having on UC students’ constitutionally protected speech rights.

UC Berkeley student Ley Cerezo added that “HR-35 inevitably encourages a climate of fear in a student body whose dedication to activism ought not to be censured nor even reserved for mere toleration, but celebrated in a system of public universities. Just as we speak out against the many injustices sustained by various bodies of government, so too do we continue our opposition to any illegitimate limitations on our speech.”

Today’s petition, signed exclusively by current and former UC students in the space of a few weeks, demonstrates the breadth of public opposition to censorship and attacks on the pro-Palestine community. Students say that as a new year starts and students return to campus, they look forward to collecting more signatures and building public awareness of threats to pro-Palestinian advocacy.

Read full petition here: https://sites.google.com/site/ucstudentsagainsthr35/ and find a link to this press release and other relevant backgroud information at www.ucsjp.posterous.com.