Soon I realized that neither the law nor the facts were important for the Republican Inquisitors of the Education Committee.
Earlier this month, I testified to the Education Committee of the House of Representatives and labor on the topic of anti -Semitism on the campus. It was the eighth similar hearing that took place under the leadership of the Republicans in two years. The first, as many recalls, represented Harvard presidents, Pennsylvania in Pennsylvania, and eventually led to Harvard presidents, and Pen lost work. The Committee is still in this. But, as in the real show, which has passed too long, hearings, never particularly instructive, now the tired trails prevail. At the moment when it turned out that the hearings jumped on the shark when the representative Rick Allen (R-GA) offered the biblical exegesis:
“Jerusalem is the Center of the Universe. A Lot of People Think Washington is, but, uh, that’s where it’s gonna hapen. UH, UH, UH, The Word of God, UH, UH, Genesis 12: 3 States, ‘I’ll Bless Those Who Bless You,’ Talking About Israel and Whover Curses You, I’ll, I’ll Curse … In fact, in John 4:22, Jews, and so, you know, this is a serious question.
Under the “Doctor Paul”, he apparently referred to the University of Depoul Robert Manuel. Dr. Manuel was summoned, together with the presidents of the Haveford and California College, a political state university in San Louis -Bispora to show the words of anti -Semitism of the ivy. The Democrats invited me to provide a certain legal perspective.
Have a federal law on this topic and I sought to offer it. But it became clear that the law did not matter to the Republicans in the Committee. Important outside the eternal salvation for the representative Elena, this is whether participants can perform at the first hearing to Stefanik Eliza Stefanics in which she On the grilled presidents As for whether violating the genocide of Jews, “violated a free conversation policy and discrimination. At this hearing, including Stefanic herself, caused similar issues-in some cases, they raised really the same questions-the presidents, speaking as compassionate prosecutors in full interrogation. They were fired, and the hearing called several headlines.
In my testimony, I explained that while anti -Semitism, such as racism, sexism and homophobia, should be condemned, the vast majority of anti -Semitic speech is constantly protected by the first amendment – just like the most racist, sexist and homophobic speech. For example, the Supreme Court defended the right Nazis to go in the jumpswith ku -wucks –the chant racist and anti -Semitic slogansand the Baptist Church of Westbara To display homophobic posters At a military funeral. This means that the school that honors its students can not simply close the speech because it is anti -Semitic.
Title of VI Law on Civil Rights Requires the schools receiving federal remedies to respond to anti -Semitic discrimination, but it is only a level that pursuing persecution, specially aimed at the person because he is a Jew, or if the speech is not oriented, it is’ so ‟Heavy, widespread and objectively offensive“It denies students equal to education because they are Jewish. These are very high standards, rarely meet.
And since the VI title connects the schools, not the students, even if the student participates in discrimination, the school itself is responsible only if it is “intentionally indifferent“When asked. If the school officials knew about the incident and ignored it, it would be intentional indifference. But the investigation of complaints and the response is less cruel than the members of the congress may not be purposeful indifference. Again, it was found that very few colleges violated the VI headline.
Current Issue
What does this mean for the issue of anti -Semitism on the campus – alleged attention in the committee? This means that it is necessary to distinguish not only between anti -iianism and anti -Semitism, but also between anti -Semitic speech, which is a constitutional protected, and anti -Semitic discrimination that is not. And this, in turn, requires careful consideration of all facts and circumstances of any incident, hearing all parties, determination of what happened, and respond to any of the broad reasonable ways. The colleges have committees that consider such complaints. The Civil Rights Department of the Education Department (which the secretary of Trump has halved) was also instructed to do this duty. And people who are dissatisfied with these places can sue the federal court.
However, the Committee on Education and Labor is obviously not a place to evaluate what happened in any particular incident. In none of the eight hearings, the Committee brought the complainants and accused, or entertained conflicting testimony of trying to find out what happened and why – or even tried to draw a constitutional line between an anti -Semitic speech and anti -Semitic discrimination.
Instead, the Republicans of the Committee consider all charges of anti -Semitism as if it were proof of discrimination. The same members would be the first to insist the correctness of sexual harassment in the campus cannot be considered harassment; Rather, the accused must be allowed a fair hearing to determine what really happened and why. But when it comes to anti -Semitism, no facts, no law is important. Any charge of anti -Semitism is considered true, even if it shows a little more on his face than Israel’s criticism.
Thus, the chairman of the committee Tim Walberg (R-MI) asked if the slogans, “resistance is not terrorism” and “from Gaza to Lebanon. Israel will soon leave”, were protected by Gaveard’s campus. Joe Wilson’s representative (R-SC) insisted that the “Free Palestine from the River to the Sea” is the code of Israel’s death, death in America. We know that anti-Zianism is anti-Semitism.
All these statements are supposedly protected by speech. It is possible that if they were aimed at a particular student because he was Jewish to chase him, they could become discrimination. But you like the publication on Instagram not focused on anyone, in particular. And if such statements were drafted at a rally protesting against the war in Israel, they are not discrimination, but a protected speech on public concern. Also is not anti-synism. Of course, the one who is anti -Semite may be critical of Zionism, but critics of Zionism should not be anti -Semitic; After all, many Jews. According to the same, those who criticize Hamas can be Islamophobic, but it is certainly possible to criticize Hamas without being Islamophobic and anti -Polesie. Again, many Palestinians do.
However, these differences were not of interest to the national committee members. What do they really care? Several members said the quiet part is aloud. Glen Grotman (R-WI) wanted to find out what percentage of teachers in each college voted for Donald Trump. Joe Wilson’s spokesman has long criticized Dei and asked the “percentage of conservatives” and “Republican percentage” at the college faculties because I, unfortunately, were concerned about them or very little. ” These hearings have never been about anti -Semitism; It is about attacking universities because Republican members consider them too liberal.
I suggested in my Entrance remarks What the closest precedent for these hearings was in the Nemerian House Committee. This committee is also a purposeful academy because it considered it too liberal. And it was also not interested in the facts and law, but in the shame of witnesses, the cooling of speech and admiration for the guerrilla strengthening. The chairman Walberg rejected the analogy in the final remarks, insisting that “any proposal is that McCarthy is as dramatically false.” I believe the story will make another conclusion.
More than Nation
Four experts on state education in the USA told a nation about how to dismantle the Education Department in the coming years.
In his desire to disrupt the revenge on Harvard, the administration may not eventually suffer from the university’s punishment – but it will harm thousands of young people.
During the great impact in New York, California and Texas, two agencies have recently agreed to work together with ways threatening thousands of Americans.
From the moment the law of McCoran-Wolter was passed in 1952, the nation caused anxiety regarding the danger he represented by politically active immigrants.
If you need to personally watch the 2026 FIFA World Cup, follow Canada and Mexico. The US is not safe for visitors.
