Stop University Administrators from Adopting IHRA Definition of Antisemitism to Ban Palestinian Rights Protesters who Condemn Israel’s Occupation and Gaza Genocide.
Academic Freedom and Free Speech on Campus are under assault, and things are about to get much worse now that Harvard University decided to settle a lawsuit initiated by Students Against Antisemitism. As a result, Harvard has agreed to use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, which includes criticism of Zionism and Israel. At Harvard, Zionists are now considered a protected class of people. When will other universities follow Harvard by banning free speech under the guise of combating antisemitism? Condemnation of Zionism is not condemnation of Jews. Many of Israel’s harshest critics are Jewish people, many of whom proclaim to be anti-Zionist.
Harvard’s press release states: “For many Jewish people, Zionism is part of their Jewish identity. Conduct that would violate the Non-Discrimination Policy if targeting Jewish or Israeli people can also violate the policy if directed toward Zionists. Examples of such conduct include excluding Zionists from an open event, calling for the death of Zionists, applying a ‘no Zionist” litmus test for participation in any Harvard activity, using or disseminating tropes, stereotypes, and conspiracies about Zionists (e.g., ‘Zionists control the media’), or demanding a person who is or is perceived to be Jewish or Israeli to state a position on Israel or Zionism to harass or discriminate”.
It is important to take a closer look at IHRA’s ‘Working Definition of Antisemitism’ to understand the ramifications of Harvard’s policy revision. The following two examples in IHRA’s ‘Working Definition of Antisemitism’ stand out as a particularly alarming assault on free speech.
“Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.”
In other words, calling Israel an apartheid state qualifies as antisemitism. The IHRA statement clearly implies that the founding of Israel, a nation built on stolen Palestinian land, is part of the Jewish people’s right to self-determination and criticism of that is antisemitism.
“Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.”
Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza has frequently been compared to Nazi Germany’s persecution of Jews and the Holocaust. Some people argue Israel’s actions are worse because the Nazis didn’t destroy hospitals. There is a strong justification for this comparison, but in no way does it condemn or blame Jewish people for the actions of the Israeli state.
It’s a very slippery slope, when it comes to deciding what speech is acceptable and what speech crosses the line of permissibility. Certainly threatening an individual or group with physical violence, bullying or harassment crosses the line. Expressing disgust or outrage with Zionism or Zionists should not cross that line, yet by Harvard’s definition it does.
Some of Harvard’s examples of discrimination may even seem reasonable, but the line easily gets blurred to include any speech that criticizes Israel and supports Palestinian Rights.
What about targeting teachers and students who have stood up to condemn Israel for committing genocide and defended the Palestinians’ right to self determination? They are obviously being discriminated against, with teachers being fired and students being suspended for exercising their First Amendment Rights. Pro-Israel Zionist supporters are receiving special treatment, while discrimination against Palestinian rights advocates has been encouraged by US lawmakers, President Biden and President Trump.
The US Congress has also participated in this grotesque violation of the First Amendment, forcing numerous university presidents to resign for allowing pro-Palestinian protests on their campus.
On January 29, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order to ‘Combat Antisemitism’ which ‘takes forceful and unprecedented steps to marshal all Federal resources to combat the explosion of anti-Semitism on our campuses and in our streets since October 7, 2023.’ Foreign students attending US colleges on a student visa risk deportation for participating in Palestinian rights demonstrations. Trump’s order calls to ‘Deport Hamas Sympathizers and Revoke Student Visas: “To all the resident aliens who joined in the pro-jihadist protests, we put you on notice: come 2025, we will find you, and we will deport you. I will also quickly cancel the student visas of all Hamas sympathizers on college campuses, which have been infested with radicalism like never before.”
The question going forward is how to protect free speech at Oregon universities and stop school administrators from adopting the IHRA definition of antisemitism, which could potentially ban Palestinian rights protests on campus.
Pressure on universities to comply with Trump’s executive order or lose federal funding may cause college administrators to implement draconian measures to ban college protests and free speech that criticizes the Zionist apartheid state of Israel and defends Palestinian rights.