top of page
Search

StandWithUs Organizes Coalition Letter to Universities that Allowed Unlawful Encampments

Updated: Jul 31

The StandWithUs Saidoff Legal Department sent a letter to over a hundred US universities on behalf of a broad coalition of national Jewish and Christian campus organizations, reminding them of their legal responsibilities to Jewish and Israeli students in light of unlawful protests and encampments. In spring 2024, administrators capitulated to campus agitators in a failed and unlawful effort to accommodate pro-Hamas activists. This letter highlights the flaws in university actions and calls for specific remedies.


 

 July 29, 2024 


Dear University President and General Counsel, 


We write on behalf of the undersigned organizations, which are dedicated to fighting antisemitism on college campuses, to urge you to take immediate action to redress the alarming impact of antisemitic protests and encampments on your campus and to reverse any agreements your administration has already taken to appease antisemitic agitators. 

Any attempt to deprive Jewish or Israeli students of their basic rights, including by aiding, abetting, enabling, or capitulating to antisemitic agitators, such as those affiliated with campus encampments, likely renders your academic institution liable for violations of federal, state, and local laws, including but not limited to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Ku Klux Klan Act, contract laws, and applicable anti-boycott laws. Such violations, where legally actionable, will be met with a swift and robust response from the Jewish and civil rights community. 


While we acknowledge your desire to deescalate tensions on campus, negotiating with these agitators incentivizes additional campus disruptions and tramples on the rights of other students. We are horrified by the unabashed bigotry, anti-American and anti-Jewish vitriol, and unlawful activity promoted and conducted by these agitators, and deeply concerned by your administration’s carrying out some or all of the following actions in acquiescence to them: 


• Contributing university resources to encampments or failing to prevent an encampment’s use of university resources; 

• Permitting or failing to prevent professors from conducting classes and official university activities within the encampments, such as offering course credit for participating in anti-Zionist protests; 

• Failing or refusing to enforce applicable university policies pertaining to time, place, and manner restrictions that encampment agitators flagrantly violate; 

• Facilitating or failing adequately to address harassment, vandalism, physical assault, deprivation of the use of campus resources, and physical restriction of access to parts of campus for Jewish and Israeli students while also offering immunity, clemency, or a reduction of penalties for those perpetrating these unlawful, antisemitic actions; 

• Granting anti-Zionist agitators access to high-level university meetings and negotiations while excluding Jewish and Israeli students who identify as Zionist from attending, even though these meetings directly impact them; 

• Offering special status or rewarding other groups, at the direction of unlawful protesters, especially if doing so effectively discriminates based on national origin; and 

• Entertaining demands for anti-Israel boycotts, including academic boycotts, which unlawfully discriminate against Israelis based on their national origin. 


Far from being deterred, many student groups have been emboldened by universities’ appeasement measures, explicitly calling for escalation of disruptive and aggressive tactics in response. For example, a student group at Harvard recently celebrated, “Harvard walks back on probations and reverses suspensions of pro-Palestine students after massive pressure…Harvard has caved in, showing that the student intifada will always prevail…This reversal is a bare minimum…We will not rest…” If unlawful protests, encampments, or other similar activities should resume in the upcoming academic year, we strongly discourage appeasement measures and remind you of your legal and moral obligation to protect the rights and freedoms of all students. We urge your administration to take the following actions preemptively: 


Reversal of Agreements with Encampment Organizers: We urge your administration to disavow any agreements made with representatives of the encampment or similar groups and issue a clear statement that your administration will not agree to such tactics in the future. We note that to the extent your administration negotiated an agreement outside of proper channels or otherwise in violation of your university’s bylaws, any concessions made therein may be void or voidable as ultra vires acts. 


Enforcement of Laws and Policies: Identify and take legal and/or disciplinary action against participants in the encampment or related protests who have violated laws and/or university policies. This includes enforcement of laws relating to trespassing, vagrancy, and camping on public property. See, e.g., City of Grants Pass v. Johnson. Disciplinary action must be consistent with the standards and processes applied to other students and groups accused of similar violations; double standards and due process violations must not be tolerated. 


Improve Reporting, Data Tracking, and Transparency: Simplify and regularly publicize your university’s reporting mechanisms for incidents of antisemitic bias and discriminatory harassment so that students are aware of their rights and know where and how to file a complaint. Publish quarterly anonymized and aggregated data regarding your administration’s disciplinary actions on antisemitic complaints, including the type of sanctions that you imposed; doing so is not prohibited from disclosure under federal privacy laws. 


Create a Title VI Coordinator to Address Antisemitic Discrimination: Establish a Title VI coordinator to address student complaints of antisemitic harassment and discrimination. Train personnel in this position to identify instances of antisemitism as defined by the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism (IHRA Definition), including all of its examples, so as to prohibit discrimination based on shared ancestry. 


Reject BDS Demands: Publicly refuse calls to engage in academic/economic boycotts and divestment activities against Israel and its supporters, which are morally reprehensible, violate the principles of academic freedom and, if enacted, may run afoul of anti-discrimination or anti-boycott legislation. 


Document Preservation: Considering the above concerns and the possibility of litigation therefrom, take immediate action to ensure that all relevant university employees preserve all records, including photographic and video evidence, hard copy documents, and electronically stored information, concerning the encampment and any negotiations and/or agreements with encampment representatives. 


We urge you to take remedial action before the next semester begins so that your Jewish and Israeli students may resume their studies without incident, free from a hostile learning environment, and without the necessity of further action to vindicate their rights and ensure their protection. 


Sincerely,



 

View the official letter below. To navigate, simply use the arrows to flip through pages, and utilize the toolbar for additional options such as fullscreen mode and printing.



Comments


bottom of page