This is a Trump-Bragg free post. Thank us later.
I hosted Rep. Mike Lawler and Ritchie Torres at AEI to talk about a bill they plan to introduce — the COLUMBIA Act. Yes, they mean that Columbia, though the bill is directed at all institutions. Short and sweet: The bill would empower the Department of Justice under Title VI (that punished discrimination etc) to appoint an antisemitism monitor at universities “of concern.”
Lawler and Torres were so great that we turned the event into a podcast.
If you’ve been despairing at our political class, watching events in New York and at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and asking, “Could this circus get any worse?” I’ve got good news: There are still great members of Congress serving their districts and this country. They’re not confused about good vs evil, Israel vs Hamas, or anti-Zionism. They know hypocrisy when they see it, call out members of their own parties, don’t make excuses for haters, and are using their power for good. If that sounds corny and dumb, that’s because we have become so used to the idea that people are elected to tweet and “own the libs” and “fight the ‘fascists’” that we don’t even recognize leadership anymore.
A few key points: Both Torres and Lawler note that antisemitism on college campuses didn’t start on October 7. They namecheck the BDS — boycott, divest, sanctions — movement as a key antisemitic driver long before Hamas butchered 1200 Israelis. Torres calls bullshit on his colleagues who are keen to protect the first amendment only when it is being used to attack Jews. Lawler — a Catholic — calls bullshit on his colleagues who suggest that defining antisemitism in law will “ban the bible.” They both call out Chuck Schumer for failing to take up the House-passed Antisemitism Awareness Act, which codifies a Trump administration Executive Order, maintained by Biden, (how often has that happened?) extending Title VI Civil Rights Act protections to victims of antisemitism and putting the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism in law.
If you’ve noticed that social media and “intersectionality” and insane academics are the principle drivers of Gen Z’s lurch to somewhere left of Joe Stalin, you’re not alone. Check out the highlights below, or listen to the pod. You’ll be as impressed as we were.
PS This week, my piece in The Dispatch went at International Criminal Court Prosecutor Karim A.A. Khan's announcement that he has requested indictments against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. Admirers and detractors alike fail to appreciate that this hastily rolled-out pursuit of so-called "supranational justice" may constitute the final nail in the coffin for an ill-conceived and fundamentally illegitimate court. The ICC, thanks to Karim Khan, is ratifying the more paranoid predictions of its opponents, and is now back in the crosshairs of American lawmakers. Amen to that.
PPS I don’t often recommend a read in the NYT, but this is an op-ed, so no cooties: Jamie Kirchick’s A Chill Has Fallen Over Jews in Publishing
HIGHLIGHTS
Congressman Torres, what did Hamas’s attack on Oct. 7 reveal to you about the antisemitism in higher education?
RT: So for me, October 7th did not change the state of antisemitism in higher education. It revealed a trend that has been a long time in the making, and I've become convinced that there is a deep rot of antisemitism at the heart of American higher education as evidenced by the encampment movement. And I've come to conclude that Title VI enforcement has fundamentally failed in relation to combating antisemitism. The Office of Civil Rights within the Federal Department of Education is simply too disconnected from what is happening on college campuses and too chronically under-resourced to be an enforcement mechanism.
And so the purpose of the Columbia Act is to provide an enforcement mechanism where none exists, to empower the Federal Department of Education to appoint a monitor at the expense, not of the taxpayer, but the college or university, and to have someone who's on the ground, who's seeing the facts on the ground with their own eyes and who can provide an enforcement mechanism where none exist.
Congressman Lawler, where was the antisemitism pre-Oct. 7 coming from?
ML: To Ritchie's point, the issue of antisemitism is not a post-October 7th phenomenon. This is something that has been going on on college campuses for years. The BDS movement has been given so much oxygen on college campuses, as we're seeing currently. And you look back to last year's CUNY law school graduation speech where the student spouted off a whole litany of antisemitic propaganda. And I introduced a number of bills in the aftermath of that, starting with the Stop Antisemitism on College Campuses Act, which would go after the federal dollars of these institutions of higher learning that promote or sanction antisemitic events on their campuses. I introduced that right after that law school graduation speech.
Last year, Ritchie and I, and Josh Gottheimer and Max Miller and a number of other members worked on the Antisemitism Awareness Act. This is a bill that was in the works long before October 7th, but we introduced it after October 7th and fought for the last six plus months to get a vote on it. And just two weeks ago, we were able to get a vote on the Antisemitism Awareness Act, which would require the Department of Education to adopt the IHRA working definition of antisemitism and its contemporary examples for its Title VI discrimination enforcement cases
How do we begin to combat campus antisemitism?
ML: Again, to Ritchie's point, it's about enforcement. It's about providing the Department of Education with the tools necessary to ensure that antisemitism does not run rampant on these college campuses.
These college administrators, these presidents have failed miserably in their responsibility to keep the students safe and to ensure that, yes, allow for robust debate, allow for free speech, allow for discussion and protest, but the moment that those protests turn violent, either physically or verbally, you lose that right. And these institutions have a responsibility to crack down on it and the legislation that we have put forth and worked on together over the past year is really aimed at making sure that the federal government does its job to enforce the law.
The Antisemitism Awareness Act which codifies the IHRA definition of antisemitism into law recently passed the House. What do you say to the 21 Republicans who voted against it?
ML: The IHRA working definition of antisemitism is broadly recognized as the acceptable definition of what antisemitism is. 36 states have adopted it, numerous countries have adopted it. The United States has utilized it going back to the Obama administration, the Trump administration, the Biden administration with respect to the State Department. In 2019, President Trump put in place an executive order. And what the Antisemitism Awareness Act does is codify that executive order into law.
Many of my colleagues on the right have attacked me that I wrote a bill to ban free speech and ban the Bible. It is idiotic. I am a practicing Catholic. I'm not looking to ban the Bible or limit anyone's ability to practice their faith. But very clearly, these institutions of higher learning have failed to address the issue of antisemitism. And part of the challenge has been, frankly, a lack of understanding of what antisemitism is, which is ironic considering you would think academia would be able to understand it better than most, but clearly they can't.
Congressman Torres, 70 Democrats also voted against the Antisemitism Awareness Act. Is antisemitism a more deep-rooted issue in the Democratic Party?
RT: I would not assume that all the 70 Democrats voted against it are anti-Israel or anti-Jewish. A number of my colleagues had First Amendment concerns about the legislation, but I feel like there are misconceptions about the bill. The bill is essentially defining antisemitism within the context of Title VI. The purpose of Title VI is not to target speech, but to target conduct, harassment, discrimination, intimidation. So it defines antisemitism, but it does not change the definition of harassment. So the notion that it's going to censor Christianity or ban the Bible is an absurdity. It ignores the nature of Title VI.
There's a difference between prohibiting antisemitic speech and prohibiting antisemitic hate crimes. No one would claim that a prohibition of a hate crime is a prohibition of the speech itself. That same logic applies to Title VI. There's a difference between prohibiting antisemitic speech and prohibiting antisemitic harassment or discrimination. We're targeting harassment. In order for there to be a Title VI violation, it's not enough to show antisemitic speech, nor is it enough to show antisemitic harassment. You have to show that the harassment is so pervasive and so objectively offensive and so severe-
Dare we say systemic?
RT: Systemic, and that's a high standard. And so, that rigorous standard remains unchanged with the Antisemitism Awareness Act. All it does is it defines antisemitism. Look, the law prohibits antisemitic harassment. So the question is who gets to define it? Should it be the people's representatives in Congress or should it be bureaucrats in the Federal Department of Education? We feel like it's more democratic for the people's representatives to define antisemitism.
Congressman Lawler, what do you make of the argument that the IHRA definition of antisemitism silences debate on Israel?
ML: I think what's also important to point out is within the IHRA working definition and its contemporary examples, it makes very clear that any criticism of Israel that is of the same nature of criticism of any other government is not antisemitic. And so that is the fundamental point. If you're criticizing Israel simply because it is a Jewish state that is different than criticizing the policy decisions that are made by the Israeli government. In the same way that we have people constantly protesting decisions made by our government. That is part of our nation's history, that is part of our constitutional freedoms. That is wholly acceptable.
But when that criticism is targeted specifically to criticize Jews because of decisions made by the state of Israel, or just criticizing the state of Israel because it's a Jewish state, that is the problem.
Congressman Torres, do you think the people with free speech concerns are being disingenuous?
RT: I just think this whole debate is disingenuous because very few people are absolutist in favor of free expression. None of the people who are screaming free expression believe in neutral enforcement of those principles. If those encampments were advocating a view that offended them, they would be advocating for the shutdown of those encampments in a heartbeat.
You mentioned antisemitism in higher education has been an issue for decades. Why invest in enforcing Title VI and defining antisemitism for Title VI right now?
RT: I think we lack the enforcement resources, but there's also a lack of political will. Look, the IHRA definition is orthodoxy among the leading Jewish organizations throughout the country, but it's controversial in American politics. I mean a former mayor, Bill de Blasio, remember once said that antisemitism is an exclusively right-wing phenomenon. There are people who deny that on the far left, there are people who deny that anti-Zionism is or can be a form of antisemitism. And so there's a disagreement about the nature of Jew-hatred in American society.
And is that reflected in the Department of Education’s own enforcement actions?
RT: I think there are people who believe that if you are uttering phrases like the, what is it? The Intifada-
DP: The Intifada revolution-
RT: From the river to the sea.
DP: From the river to the sea.
RT: Or we don't want two states, we want 48. If you're uttering those phrases, if you're calling for the destruction of the world's only Jewish state, there are people who believe that that's within the realm of legitimate discourse, that there's nothing remotely antisemitic about that. I obviously disagree.
Is there a double standard for speech targeting the State of Israel?
RT: I think that's a double standard because if you spoke about the CUNY law school graduation speaker. If you had a student who called for the destruction of Puerto Rico, everyone would agree that's anti-Puerto Rican. If you call for the destruction of the Dominican Republic, everyone would agree that's anti-Dominican. So why is it permissible to call for the destruction of the world's only Jewish state? Why is that not anti-Jewish?
Congressman Lawler, you now have both mentioned that antisemitism on college campuses existed well before Oct. 7. But where did this Jew-hatred come from?
ML: The Jewish population in the United States is 2.4%, roughly. New York has the highest concentration of Jews in the world. My district has one of the largest Jewish communities in America. Ritchie has a high concentration as well in Riverdale. We understand the dynamics, frankly in some respects, I think better than most, and appreciate the challenges that the Jewish community has faced.
And you see, ultimately what we are seeing on these college campuses is a level of hatred borne out, in large part in my opinion, from a hatred of Jews period. And it is that the BDS movement is absolutely antisemitic. It is absolutely rooted in a hatred of Jews. This is not about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This is rooted in a hatred of Jews.
How do we move on and seriously combat Jew-hatred in the long term?
ML: I think ultimately, the objective, whether it is racism, whether it is homophobia, xenophobia, antisemitism, the objective has to be to educate people and get them to understand in a much more compassionate way what people are dealing with. You don't have to agree on everything. We're not going to agree on everything, but the criticism and the debate can't be rooted in a hatred of someone. It has to be rooted in a philosophical difference on the substance of the issue, and we can disagree on, you look at an issue within the LGBTQ community and the issue of trans women and women's sports. It can't be rooted in a hatred of trans people. It has to be rooted in a discussion around the issue of women athletes and the impact on Title IX. That is certainly, in my opinion, a debate and a discussion to have. But if it's just rooted in a hatred of somebody because of who they are, then no, that's wrong. That's not what the discussion should be centered around.
Congressman Torres, is anti-Zionism antisemitic?
RT: Even though antisemitism is an ancient hatred, I see anti-Zionism as the latest mutation in the DNA of antisemitism. The two disproportionate drivers of virulent anti-Zionism in America have been academia and social media. I feel like the ideas like decolonization and intersectionality originate from college campuses, but it's social media that enables those ideas to permeate outward into the broader society. And I'll share a personal story. I've been traveling to Israel for about 10 years, and when I first announced that I was going on a delegation to Israel, I became the target of overwhelming betrayal and hatred even 10 years ago. And there was a rally on the steps of city hall against me. I was a New York City council member at the time, and I remember coming across one activist who had a shirt that read Queers for Palestine, which caught my attention.
And so I asked the activist, "I'm just curious, what is your opinion of Hamas?" And I honestly thought the activist was going to tell me, "Well, I support Palestinian rights, but of course I object to Hamas." And instead she said, "No, I support Hamas because Hamas is fighting for the liberation of the Palestinian people from Zionist occupation." And at that moment, I was in a state of shock. I had the beginnings of an epiphany. I said, the fact that an LGBTQ activist could defend a terrorist organization that systematically and savagely murders LGBTQ people. That to me was as definitive a sign as any of the utter stupidity, absurdity, and moral bankruptcy that the BDS movement has inflicted on progressive politics. And over time, I came to realize one of the most powerful ideas on college campuses is the idea of intersectionality, which holds that you cannot be both progressive and pro-Israel. That in order to be pro-LGBTQ and pro-black and pro-immigrant and every progressive cause that I care about, you have to be anti-Israel. And that has been a powerful, it's a powerfully seductive concept.
Congressman Lawler, does that mean that the Boycott Divestment Sanction campaign against Israel is antisemitic?
ML: If anybody came forward and said that they were going to boycott, divest, and sanction name the country, and it was rooted in the fundamental fact that it was an Arab country, or a black country, or a Hispanic country, the hysteria would be nonstop and understandably and justifiably, but somehow with respect to Israel, it's not.
Do you agree, Congressman Torres?
RT: I actually think there's nothing wrong with advocating for boycotts and sanctions. The problem with the BDS movement is that it's not seeking to change the policy of the Israeli government. It's seeking the destruction of Israel's a Jewish state, right?
How are foreign countries helping fuel antisemitism in the United States?
RT: Much is said about the monetary influence of AIPAC, which is the great Boogie Man, AIPAC's resources pale in comparison to Qatar. I feel like most countries have a sovereign wealth fund. Qatar itself is a sovereign wealth fund. It has no real population it's governing. It has nothing but an abundance of energy, resources, and money. And we've seen Qatari money pour not only into higher education, billions of dollars, but even in K to 12 education. There was a public school in Brooklyn where the Qatari Foundation was funding an Arab heritage program. Obviously nothing wrong with an Arab heritage program except there was an image of the Middle East where Israel was wiped off the map.
How was that map allowed in a New York City public school?
RT: When I asked the Chancellor, "Why would you allow this to happen?" He said, "I can't vet all the educational materials that go into the classroom." I said, "Well, can you vet the ones that are coming from the Qatari Foundation? Can we start there?" I don't understand.
Should we ban Qatari money going to our schools?
RT: I feel like we should seriously consider banning them.
ML: I would argue we should ban, and maybe this is legislation we'll work on, ban foreign dollars either from China, Russia, North Korea and Iran and maybe countries that finance terrorist organizations like Hamas. But Qatari influence has become too glaring to ignore in higher education.
Are you surprised by the links that have emerged between progressive and Islamist organizations?
RT: I'm not sure if I could speak to those links in particular, but just my sense is the irony is, and for me it's not only about anti-Zionism, like it's a trinity of anti-Zionism, anti-Americanism, and anti-capitalism. The head of The People's Forum, which is a not-for-profit closely associated with the Democratic Socialist of America, which by the way, received, I think Goldman Sachs facilitated a multimillion dollar transfer to The People's Forum. The executive director said that the destruction of Israel will be the final blow to capitalism. And so all of it is interconnected. And the question I asked myself is, why are capitalists planting the seeds of their own decline? Like why do we have mainstream foundations and government agencies subsidizing institutions that are vehemently anti-American, vehemently anti-Israel, advocating for extreme positions like the abolition of policing in society? There are corporations and foundations that are subsidizing anti-American extremism. It's not only foreign government, much of it is made in America and subsidized by America. And I think we should start to be more thoughtful about where we allocate our dollars, both publicly and privately.
Why are Goldman Sachs and other companies and organizations funding domestic anti-Israel sentiments and antisemitism?
RT: I think there's a willful blindness to antisemitism. There's this, like I heard this about the encampment movement. They're just, these are kids whose heart is in the right place.
They just want the Palestinians to have a state. Never mind that the explicit mission of students for justice in Palestine and within our lifetime is the violent destruction of Israel by any means necessary. All of that is ignored. So I think there is willful blindness, willful stupidity that's governing much of American society.
What role does Holocaust education play in combatting antisemitism?
RT: I would like to think that greater awareness of the Holocaust would lead to greater empathy for Jews, but it's not clear that that's the case. And it seems,and others have made this point, that the manner in which we teach the Holocaust, when you decontextualize and universalize the Holocaust, you lose sight of antisemitism's particularity, that antisemitism at its core is a conspiracy theory, but if you just see it as one prejudice among many, one form of bigotry among many, then you've lost sight of the true evil that inspired the Holocaust. And so I feel like there's been a fundamental miseducation about the true nature, the conspiratorial nature of the Holocaust.
So I think it would have to be properly taught, but look, the ideology of the new left, I consider myself a liberal Democrat, which I think is different from a leftist, but the ideology of the new left divides the world into two categories, the oppressor and the oppressed, the powerful versus the powerless. And so if you're viewing the world from that perspective, in your mind, Israel is the oppressor that can do no right and Hamas is the oppressed that can do no wrong, and that's the simplistic distorting lens through which the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is seen increasingly in the eyes of Generation Z.
Are young Americans just being taught to hate Israel or also America?
RT: I also think we're being taught to hate ourselves.
We have social media platforms and college campuses that are indoctrinating the next generation, not only with a hatred for Israel, but also with a hatred for their own country. And I've said I'm aware of no civilization in human history that can succeed on the strength of self-loathing. I know nationalism can often be a dirty word and anything in excess can be dangerous, but every country needs some degree of nationalism and some degree of patriotism. And as a liberal Democrat, I refuse to cede patriotism to the right, and no political party should have a monopoly on patriotism. We should take pride in America as the greatest country on Earth. I think Bill Clinton put it perfectly once. He said, "There's nothing that's wrong with America that cannot be cured by what's right with America," and so I think we need to recover the story of America as a more perfect union.
Immediately after Oct. 7 President Biden firmly stood behind Israel. But recently his policies have been changing, drifting away from unapologetic support of Israel. What do you think of his policy changes?
RT: I disagree with a number of the statements that have been made by the president and the vote, the abstention from the UN resolution I thought was a terrible mistake, but I see those as aberrations on an otherwise pro-Israel presidency. He was the first president to go to Israel in a time of war and send not one but two carriers to the Eastern Mediterranean, and he has been fundamentally pro-Israel at considerable cost to himself because there is a visible vocal anti-Israel wing in the party. But look, I disagreed with the president's decision to go on CNN and announce that he was withholding aid from Israel.
I feel like there should be tough conversations between Israel and the United States, but it should be held in private. We have to recognize there are two wars unfolding. There's the war in Gaza, but there's the information war on social media, and if we are signaling to the world that American support for Israel is waning, we should ask ourselves, is that going to deter Hamas or is that going to embolden Hamas to perpetuate the war and to delay the release of the hostages? And the question answers itself. And so I feel like the administration should be mindful and should remember that the far left is far more representative of the alternate reality of Twitter than the real world.
Congressman Lawler, what do you make of the President’s public drift away from Israel?
ML: I think it's unconscionable that... I thought the President by and large was very strong on Israel in the aftermath of October 7th. I think he had really provided strong support and leadership. I am however deeply disappointed in the last month, both with Senator Schumer's comments on the Senate floor, former speaker Pelosi calling for Benjamin Netanyahu to resign, the President going on CNN the other day and announcing withholding of ammunitions, and the decision to not vote at the UN on the resolution.
The UN just yesterday revised the death toll. Now, this death toll that has been provided by the Hamas Ministry of Health for months has been at the core of the basis for opposition to providing aid to Israel. These numbers have been manipulated to turn the world against Israel, to say that Israel is the one that is killing innocents. And yet the United Nations, this beacon of antisemitism just yesterday revised that count significantly downward, significantly.
And so I think what I hope is that the administration will put aside the electoral concern of Michigan or Minnesota or other states and focus on a very simple fact, which is something that President Bush said immediately after October 7th. "The world stands with Israel in the aftermath of October 7th. The moment they defend themselves, the world will turn." America must stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel.
Congressman Torres, are there politicians right now who are genuinely anti-Israel?
RT: I think a new dynamic too, and I think what's different about this moment is for the first time, we have a wing of American politics that is genuinely anti-Israel, that is seeking the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state. And I feel like we should not capitulate to that extreme.
Read the transcript here.
SHOWNOTES
Bipartisan bill would create "antisemitism monitors" at colleges (Andrew Solender, AXIOS, April 26, 2024)
Reps. Lawler, Torres Introduce Legislation Empowering Federal Department of Education to Impose a Third-Party Antisemitism Monitor On Colleges and Universities Receiving Federal Funding (Congressman Mike Lawler, Press Release, April 26, 2024)
New York duo introduces COLUMBIA Act to require antisemitism monitors at colleges (Rachel Schilke, Washington Examiner, April 26 2024)
NY lawmakers propose conditioning federal funding on monitoring of antisemitism (Lauren Irwin, The Hill, April 26, 20240)
Torres, Lawler push for federal antisemitism monitors on college campuses (Jewish Insider, April 26, 2024)
The Antisemitism Awareness Act: What to know (Politifact, May 10, 2024)
North Carolina may join other states in codifying antisemitism definition (Associated Press, May 8, 2024)
Antisemitism Awareness Act of 2023 (Passed House on May 1, 2024)
Defending Education Transparency and Ending Rogue Regimes Engaging in Nefarious Transactions Act (DETERRENT) Act (Passed House on December 6, 2023)
States Adopt IHRA Definition of Anti-Semitism (Jewish Virtual Library, 2024)
Antisemitism Awareness Act Is the Antidote to DEI (Bruce Abramson, Real Clear Politics, May 12, 2024)
About the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism (ADL, April 24, 2024)
What the ‘Antisemitism Awareness’ Bill Could Mean for Higher Ed (Katherine Knott, Inside Higher Ed, May 3rd, 2024)
Prepared Remarks of Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen at U.S. Department of State Conference on “Ancient Hatred, Modern Medium: A Conference on Internet Anti-Semitism” (Wednesday, October 21, 2020)
Antisemitism on College Campuses: Incident Tracking from 2019–2024 (Hillel International, Updated May 13, 2024)
Protesters set up more tents a day after GWU shuts down encampment (Washington Post, May 9, 2024)
Six GWU students among 33 arrested at campus protest encampment (Washington Post, May 9, 2024)
White House announces new steps to counter antisemitism, including on college campuses (The Hill, May 7, 2024)
US opens civil rights probe into Princeton over alleged antisemitism on campus (Times of Israel, April 11, 2024)
Inside the Campus Playbook To Build a Nationwide ‘Unity Intifada’ in Support of Hamas (Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, May 9, 2024)
The People Setting America on Fire (Park MacDougald, Tablet, May 6, 2024)
The ‘Outside Agitators’ of Campus Protests (Editorial Board, Wall Street Journal, May 1, 2024)
Berkeley Is a Safe Space for Hate (Daniel Solomon, Tablet, March 17, 2024)
Isn't it anti-semitic to hold Israel to a higher standard of behavior than its neighbors? That's a question worth pondering. For example, a decade ago, the Syrian government was fighting a civil war by using poison gas in urban areas.
Before the McMaster, Petraeus and a few other heroes devised a better strategy of clearing insurgents, holding (continuing to protect the people, not leaving) and building (a new government), we were not winning the war in Iraq and the cost in the deaths of US soldiers and Iraqi civilians was high. Israel hasn't learned this lesson. Yes, Israel needs to eradicate Hamas and liberate the people of Gaza from their tyranny (just like we helped eradicate ISIS terrorists in Iraq and Syria at high cost to the civilians in the towns they seized). Israel has left Gaza many times after fighting Hamas, always without providing protection to civilians and a new local government. They have already returned to drive out Hamas a second time from some areas, Until Israel has some viable plan for the future of Gaza without Hamas, killing more militants and civilians isn't accomplishing anything. Biden is right to oppose such a plan. Netanhayu wants Hamas to survive, so a two-state solution will be impossible.