At CCNY, Palestinian Student Activists Have to Prove Their Right to Protest to Administration!

Students from all over New York City and beyond flock to CUNY’s City College of New York (CCNY) for a multitude of reasons, among which is the school’s rich history of student activism and empowerment––but not all activism is accepted here. Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) is a college student activism organization with chapters in multiple countries, including the United States. At CCNY, and at other universities in New York City, SJP has had to face barriers created by the administration at the behest of anti-Palestinian parties for their events, demonstrations, and even sometimes their very existence due to “negative publicity” or false accusations of hate speech. They have had to go as far as the legal route to defend their right to spread awareness for their cause.

Yet these obstacles only encourage students to raise their voices and spread their activism beyond the campus. In May 2017, a pro-Israel club at CCNY called Students Supporting Israel (SSI) organized an event which featured Dani Dayan, Consul General of Israel in New York. Dayan has a hefty record of racist, anti-Palestinian rhetoric, even holding views that other Israeli political leaders consider apartheid. In 2012, Dayan published an op-ed in The New York Times where he rejected Palestinian self-determination of any kind, particularly condemning the international community’s attempts at a two-state solution in the occupied territories. He claimed that Palestinian refugees using their right of return would turn Israel into “a hotbed of extremism” and that the idea of dissolving illegal settlements in the West Bank is “pathetic” and “futile.” (Dayan, 2012). At least four Israeli prime ministers consider these viewpoints to be precursors to apartheid regime (IMEU, 2013). Despite these controversial political views, members of SJP who attended the event allowed Dayan to deliver his full lecture, asked a few critical questions during the Q&A––for example, why children are being killed by Israeli military every day in Gaza––then exited the event chanting “Free Palestine!”

During and directly after the event, SJP members faced physical and verbal harassment by members of SSI, but instead of defending these students, CCNY Interim Vice President Vincent Boudreau announced an investigation into the conduct of the SJP members after a complaint was filed on behalf of SSI by the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA).

In defense of the approximately twenty SJP members who attended the event, the club sought legal advice from Palestine Legal, an independent organization of lawyers who provide legal advice and support to those speaking out in support of Palestine. According to a letter sent to Boudreau by Attorney Rahul Saksena in response to the investigation, Dayan referred to the questions asked by SJP members as “terrorism,” a fact which Boudreau had left out of his announcement of the investigation.

Palestine Legal then reminded Boudreau of his legal obligations to uphold the First Amendment on campus, claiming “scrutiny of speech critical of Israel…harms all campus community members, especially those who are interested in exploring critical issues regarding Palestinian freedom” and that “such one-sided scrutiny…emboldens those who oppose Palestinian rights to take increasingly aggressive positions to shut down and censor voices critical of Israeli government policies.” (Saksena, 2017). Coining the term “viewpoint discrimination,” Saksena’s letter to Boudreau begs the question––if students can’t feel safe voicing their opinions on campus, where dialogue and debate are essential factors in learning and growing, where will their voices be respected?

Administrative pushback didn’t only occur when SJP was protesting directly against Zionist clubs or individuals, but even at SJP-organized events. In April 2018, nearly a year later, SJP held a vigil commemorating the Nakba (“catastrophe” in Arabic), which refers to the destruction of Palestinian homes and villages in 1948 during the foundation of the State of Israel, and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian families from what is now Israel proper. Four months later, in August of 2018, SSI filed a complaint against SJP to the CCNY administration, claiming that the use of the word “intifada” (the Arabic word for “rebellion,” “uprising,” or “resistance” but specifically referring to Palestinian resistance to Israeli occupation) was “hate-filled speech” and that it caused members of SSI “to fear expressing their religious identity” (Palestine Legal, 2019).

This specific complaint is reminiscent of a 2016 CUNY-wide complaint filed by ZOA––the very same organization that tried to punish SJP members for disrupting Dayan’s appearance in 2017––that ultimately sought to ban SJP from over 20 CUNY campuses. The 2016 investigation, conducted by Paul Shechtman, a former federal prosecutor, and Barbara Jones, a former federal judge, culminated in a 24-page report investigating instances of anti-Semitism at CUNY campuses and their alleged connection to the conduct of SJP members. Ultimately, the task force did not feel SJP was responsible for the investigated instances of anti-Semitism reported in 2016, and that no matter how controversial the word “intifada” is for some individuals, the use of the word is protected by the First Amendment. Emphasizing the Supreme Court’s point of view on free speech, the report added, “Political speech is often provocative and challenging, but that is why it is vital to university life. If college students are not exposed to views with which they may disagree, their college has short-changed them.” (Schechtman, Jones, 2016).

Luckily, this 2018 accusation was not accepted by CCNY administration, unlike years prior, but constant baseless complaints and investigations put unnecessary stress and pressure on the shoulders of these student activists. As Palestine Legal senior staff attorney Radhika Sainath said about the accusation, scrutiny of pro-Palestinian speech “threatens to shut down robust debate on one of the most urgent foreign policy, moral and political questions of our time.” CCNY consistently prioritizes the biased opinions of a few of its students over its legal obligation to the First Amendment, its expectation as a public university to respect and encourage discussion about varied political points of view, and its reputation as a college with a large community of empowered students.

The college’s mistreatment of SJP and its related political issues on campus continued later that same year. In fact, within the same month of April, the college canceled an SJP-organized book talk event for fear of “negative publicity.” The event, titled The General’s Son: the Transformation of an Israeli in Palestine featuring pro-Palestine Israeli author Miko Peled, was originally set to take place during the previous month of March 2018 but was postponed by the club’s executive board to May 3rd.

On April 18th, CCNY’s Director of Student Life & Leadership Development O’Lanso Gabbidon informed SJP in person that the university was canceling the event because it found Peled’s political views “deeply controversial” and that Peled speaking on campus was “deeply political,” causing the university to fear negative news coverage (McLaughlin, 2018).

Later that evening, Gabbidon retracted his reasoning in an email and stated that the university was canceling the event because the proper paperwork was not on file. Regardless, the student president of SJP at the time, Hebh Jamal, who would go on to graduate from CCNY in 2021 as one of the Colin Powell School’s salutatorians, claimed to have submitted the proper paperwork for the event in January. Jamal, who now works as a freelance journalist in Germany focusing on Islamophobia and anti-Palestine rhetoric as well as censorship of Palestinian activism in German schools and media, wrote in her blog The Diaspora Journal about the experience. In her journal, she states that she received no apology from the university after being forced to contact a group of lawyers––in this case, Palestine Legal as well as the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR)––and that the reason student activists face such complicated bureaucratic barriers, and why they may still be scrutinized, even if they do everything right, is because American universities prioritize private gain over advancing the public good. In other words, it doesn’t matter if you’re fighting for what you believe in––if it doesn’t look good for the university, it doesn’t fly.

Once again, SJP sought defense and support from external legal sources. Radhika Sainath of Palestine Legal alongside Maria C. LaHood, deputy legal director of CCR, wrote a letter to CCNY on April 25th, 2018, pressuring the university to reinstate the event and apologize to SJP, reminding it of its legal obligations and its indiscretion in the handling of the issue. Palestine Legal and CCR included a detailed timeline of the events that led up to the cancellation, including individual instances of the university both actively and passively confirming the event until the random last-minute cancellation. It then emphasized CCNY’s requirement by law to abide by the First Amendment, stating that the explicit targeting of the expression of specific viewpoints violated the First Amendment, and cited the Supreme Court’s opinions on free speech: scrutiny of speech due to a presumed “controversial” message is unconstitutional and threatens creative inquiry on university campuses (Sainath, Lahood, 2018). Two days later, CCNY responded in a letter written by the Executive Counsel to the President, Paul F. Occhiogrosso, on behalf of President Boudreau and CUNY Chancellor and Vice Chancellor Milliken and Martinez, respectively. In the letter, he stated that the event fell victim “to some degree of miscommunication and administrative missteps,” essentially removing all responsibility from the administration for the cancellation of the event. He stated that the event would go forward as planned in accordance with university procedures and that Peled’s political views had nothing to do with the cancellation of the event.

Making matters more complicated, Palestinian activists on campuses like CCNY have found that administrations across the country have a myriad of creative ways to silence unwanted speech. Despite free speech’s protection by the First Amendment, even if it’s controversial, those seeking to shut down Palestinian activists on campus can use other legal routes, such as Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any program that receives federal funds.

In December 2019, President Trump passed Executive Order 13,899 which extended Title VI to Jewish people discriminated against for their race, color, or national origin. This order thereby allows Title VI to be enforced along a new definition of anti-Semitism, one which includes targeting the state of Israel (Fried, 2021, pp. 162). In other words, Palestinian activism focused on criticism of Israeli government policies could now fall under this new definition of anti-Semitism, as Israel is the nation of origin for many Jewish people. This action would make their activism a violation of civil rights law. School administrations have since begun weaponizing Title VI to censor Palestinian activism at campuses nationwide.

There is a common issue that burdens the case of Palestinian activism on campus. The trend of scrutinizing pro-Palestine student activism, at its core, is due to the conflation of the state (Israel) and a religion or national identity (Judaism). Despite advocating for policy reform to improve the conditions of what is undeniably a human rights issue, student activism for Palestine is constantly labeled “hate speech,” “violent,” or “anti-Semitic” with the argument that anti-Zionism or anti-Israel rhetoric is necessarily equivalent to anti-Semitism. This is not true. Scrutinizing the policies of a government, even if that government has identified itself with a religious and ethnic identity, is not necessarily scrutinizing––or attacking––that identity. In fact, many SJP members and non-member supporters are Jewish themselves, as mentioned in the Palestine Legal reports for the aforementioned events, or one could take Miko Peled, for example, a Jewish Israeli with pro-Palestinian political views.

To some, being Jewish and supporting Zionism go hand in hand. For others, these concepts are exclusive to one another, but that’s just another facet of accepting and encouraging different points of view in the academic setting. There is no doubt that the issue is controversial because it is so deeply personal to many. This is what education is about, though––being exposed to new, different, or difficult information, and engaging in respectful coexistence, and maybe even dialogue, understanding, and learning. CCNY’s main priority should be emboldening its students to fight for what they believe in and also respect the different points of view that exist within political issues, rather than protecting its image. It is necessary, on all levels of the university setting; academic and administrative, to protect each individual’s right to free speech and criticism.

References & Annotated Bibliography

Dayan, D. (2012, July 26). Israel's settlers are here to stay. The New York Times. Retrieved March 31, 2023, from https://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/26/opinion/israels-settlers-are-here-to-stay.html 

“Israel’s Settlers Are Here to Stay” is an article written by former Consul General of Israel Dani Dayan in 2012, 4 years before his tenure as Consul General, while he served as chairman of the Yesha Council, which represents Israeli settlements in the West Bank. In the article, Dayan argues that Israeli settlements in the West Bank are not an obstacle to peace, but an essential part of Israel’s existence, specifically that they are part of Israel’s security. He also claims that settlements are not actually illegal under the Fourth Geneva Convention because the West Bank was not occupied from a sovereign state, so criticism of them is misguided. Dayan also claims that Israel must have control over the West Bank to maintain peace and security, and that any peace negotiations between Israel and Palestine must accept these facts.

This op-ed is useful to the feature article’s argument because it demonstrates Dayan’s controversial views on the conflict that may warrant protest from pro-Palestine activists. Dayan’s opposition to the establishment of a Palestinian state and his belief that settlements are not a violation of international law are very unpopular opinions in the international community.

Dani Dayan was born in Argentina in 1955 and immigrated to Israel in 1971. He served in the Israeli army as captain of the artillery corps. After leaving the military, Dayan pursued a career in the technology industry, serving as CEO of Elad Systems, a company that develops and markets technology solutions for the military and commercial clients. He was a leader in the settler movement and served as chairman of the aforementioned Yesha Council from 2007 to 2013. In 2013, Dayan entered mainstream Israeli politics by joining the right-wing Jewish Home party, running in the party’s primary election for the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, but failed to win a seat. In 2015, Dayan was appointed as Consul General for Israel in New York, a position he held until 2020.

Fried, G. (2021). On the Outer Reaches of the Marketplace of Ideas: the Weaponization of Title VI Against Palestinian College Activists. Journal of Law and Policy, 30(1), 157–196. 

“On the Outer Reaches of the Marketplace of Ideas: the Weaponization of Title VI Against Palestinian College Activists” by Gavriella Fried was published in Journal of Law and Policy in 2021. The paper explores the use of Title VI of the Higher Education Act to stifle pro-Palestinian activism on college campuses across the country. She argues that Title VI, which has programs that offer grants to support international studies and foreign language programs at universities, is weaponized by pro-Israel organizations to suppress criticism of Israel and silence Palestinian activism on college campuses. Fried also explores the legal and policy frameworks that have enabled the use of Title VI to silence Palestinian activism, including the argument that criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic and thereby violates Title VI. She analyzes multiple key cases where Title VI complaints were lodged against Palestinian student groups, and that these complaints suppress free speech and academic freedom on campus, and that they undermine the goals of diversity, inclusion and democratic engagement. Fried calls on universities to promote robust debate and dialogue on college campuses and to uphold the principles of democratic engagement and intellectual diversity. She also calls on lawmakers to reform the law to ensure that it cannot be used to suppress speech or academic freedom.

This paper is useful to the feature article’s argument because it shows how this issue is not unique to CCNY or CUNY alone. It exists on the national level and even goes as far as to tread into the legal territory by claiming that Palestinian activism is discriminatory and offensive to the entire Jewish religion/identity, and how these misguided complaints infringe on free speech and academic freedom. In the cases at CCNY, the conflicts never went to court, but SJP did need to seek legal advice to protect their right of free speech and expression.

Gavriella Fried is a law professor at Suffolk University Law School in Boston. She is an expert in civil rights, constitutional law, and legal theory, and she focuses on the intersection of law and social justice. She is actively involved in promoting diversity and inclusion in legal education and the legal profession. She has published articles on a wide range of topics, including hate speech, affirmative action, and the legal status of undocumented immigrants. She has written several other articles on the topic of Palestinian activism and free speech on college campuses, including the following: “Free Speech, Anti-Semitism, and the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement: Controversies on Campus” (2019), “The Right to Boycott: A Constitutional Analysis” (2018), “Campus Free Speech and the Palestinian Exception” (2017), “Academic Freedom, Palestine, and the Boycott of Israeli Universities” (2016). 

IMEU. (2013, October 4). Is Israel an Apartheid State? Institute for Middle East Understanding. Retrieved March 31, 2023, from https://imeu.org/article/is-israel-an-apartheid-state 

This post by the Institute for Middle East Understanding (IMEU) examines whether Israel’s policies and practices towards Palestinians can be considered apartheid. It gives a brief overview of apartheid as a legal and political system of racial segregation and discrimination, and argues that many of the elements of apartheid are present in Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. The post lists various examples of Israeli policies that it argues constitute as apartheid, including the building of illegal settlements in the West Bank, the construction of a separation barrier/wall that isolates Palestinian communities, and the differential treatment of Palestinian citizens of Israel. It also cites that Palestinian residents of the West Bank and Gaza Strip are subject to military occupation and siege. It calls for the recognition of the existence of apartheid in Israel and for international pressure to be put on the Israeli government to change its policies towards Palestinians, and it emphasizes the importance of supporting Palestinian-led campaigns for boycott, divestment, and sanctions, as a nonviolent means of challenging Israeli apartheid and fighting for justice for Palestinians.

The post is used in the news feature article as a means to demonstrate how controversial Dani Dayan’s views on settlement and military occupation are. While he believes Israeli settlements are an integral part of the country, IMEU claims that they are illegal and a tool of apartheid. Dayan believes they are not a violation of international law, but most professionals disagree. He also claims that settlements and military presence in the West Bank are necessary for Israel’s security, but IMEU claims that military presence in the West Bank is unfair and unequal treatment of Palestinians.

The Institute for Middle East Understanding (IMEU) is a non-profit organization based in Washington D.C. that provides journalists and the general public with accurate and objective information about the Middle East. It was founded in 2004 and is staffed by journalists, academics, and Middle East experts in an effort to promote understanding and dialogue about the region. IMEU monitors media coverage on the Middle East and provides analysis and commentary on current events as well as produces educational materials and resources on a range of topics related to the region. It also organizes speaking tours, media briefings, and other events. Its mission is to provide accurate and balanced information about the region with a particular focus on issues related to Israel and Palestine. It is considered an objective and balanced authority on issues of politics and history in the Middle East.

Jamal, H. (2021, September 18). American Universities do not care about Social Justice [web log]. Retrieved March 31, 2023, from https://hebhjamal.substack.com/p/american-universities-do-not-care. 

This blog post was published on CCNY alum Hebh Jamal’s personal blog “The Diaspora Journal” on September 18, 2021, shortly after her graduation from the Colin Powell School. The post is about the failure of American universities to address the systemic injustices and inequalities that affect their students despite their claims of commitment to social justice and diversity. She cites examples of discrimination and marginalization faced by students of color, low-income students, and first-generation college students, such as lack of access to resources and support, hostile campus climates, and underrepresentation in academic and leadership positions. She argues that universities’ emphasis on diversity and inclusion often serves as a superficial mask that covers deeper structural inequalities and perpetuates the status quo. She calls for universities to do more to address issues of economic and racial justice, such as increasing financial aid and support for lower income students, hiring more faculty of color, and implementing policies to address campus climate and discrimination. She calls on students to hold their universities accountable to their commitment to social justice and to work on creating more equitable higher education environments.

Jamal is my first-person source. I had an email interview with her where she describes her experience as the President of SJP at the time of the Peled book talk cancellation. Most of her responses were drawn from this blog post she posted shortly after her graduation in 2021. Her feelings are important because it demonstrates the personal level that administrative censorship can have on student activism. In her case, the barriers only emboldened her activism, but she does describe feeling offended and shot down. Ultimately, her blog post and her responses to my questions are meant to elicit feelings of pity for the affected students amongst the readers.

Hebh Jamal is a Palestinian-American activist and journalist. She gained attention for her advocacy work on issues related to education, social justice, and Palestinian rights. She became prominent in ehr high school years when she was involved in organizing student walkouts and protests against racial and educational inequalities in the New York City public school system. She co-founded Integrate NYC, an organization dedicated to fighting for educational equity and desegregation in NYC public schools. She was also involved in The Urban Youth collective, a coalition of youth-led organizations in New York City that work towards educational justice and equitable schools, as well as Student Voice, a national organization that amplifies the voices of students in education policy and discussions and advocates for student-centered reforms. She was president of City College’s Students for Justice in Palestine chapter in 2021, and graduated from City College’s Colin POwell School for Civic & Global Leadership as its salutatorian, with a bachelor’s in History and Political Science. She now lives in Germany as a freelance journalist writing primarily on anti-Palestinian repression in Germany. She has been published in Al Jazeera, The New York Times, Teen Vogue, and The Nation. 

McLaughlin, S. (2018, May 2). City College of New York reverses cancellation of pro-Palestine event after pressure from legal groups. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. Retrieved March 31, 2023, from https://www.thefire.org/news/city-college-new-york-reverses-cancellation-pro-palestine-event-after-pressure-legal-groups 

This article was published on Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression’s (FIRE) page in May 2018, announcing that CCNY had reversed its decision to cancel the Miko Peled event. The article describes the same events mentioned in the feature article, such as how the event was canceled due to Peled’s controversial views, and that the university was concerned about negative publicity. It then describes the circumstances that led to the reversal of the decision: the letter sent to CUNY’s Chancellor and CCNY’s President from Palestine Legal and Center for Constitutional Rights.

I used this article because I couldn’t find direct quotes of the president or the university admitting their initial fears of controversy or negative publicity. Because this article was posted during the time of the events described in the feature article, I felt it was a more reliable source.

FIRE is a non-profit organization based in the U.S. that focuses on defending individual rights, particularly freedom of speech, freedom of expression. academic freedom, and due process on college and university campuses. FIRE was founded in 1999 by Alan Charles Kors and Harvey A. Silverglate, two civil liberty attorneys. The organization’s mission is to protect the individual rights of students, faculty, and staff in higher education institutions and ensure that they can engage in open dialogue, express their opinions, and pursue their educational goals without fear of censorship or punishment. FIRE provides legal advocacy, public awareness campaigns, education and outreach programs, and resources and support to individuals who face threats to their rights. It takes a non-partisan approach to its mission, defending the rights of individuals regardless of their political beliefs or affiliations. The organization has been involved in numerous high-profile cases and has played a significant role in shaping the discourse and policies surrounding free speech and expression on college campuses in the United States.

Sarah McLaughlin is a Senior Scholar in Global Expression at FIRE. She graduated magna cum laude from Drexel University in 2014 with a B.S. in political science and a minor in history. In 2012, Sarah began working with fire as a Program Assistant through Drexel’s cooperative education program and worked with FIRE all throughout the rest of her undergraduate career. After graduation, she joined FIRE’s Individual Rights Defense Program and defended students and faculty facing censorship, which she did for 5 years. She is now Director of FIRE’s Targeted Advocacy program, where she focuses on American universities’ relationship with international threats to free speech and art censorship. Her writing has been featured in publications including Foreign Policy, Artsy, The Huffington Post, and New York Daily News.

Palestine Legal. (2017, August 2). Consul General of Israel refers to CCNY students' questions as "Verbal terrorism," CCNY investigates students. Palestine Legal. Retrieved March 31, 2023, from https://palestinelegal.org/news/2017/6/16/consul-general-israel-refers-to-ccny-students-questions-as-verbal-terrorism 

This page is useful to the article’s story because it contains the email sent by Palestine Legal to CUNY’s chancellor and CCNY’s president. It symbolizes how SJP had to consult outside sources for protection against false allegations because they were being investigated by their university rather than protected by it. It also demonstrates the severity of the situation as they required legal support to defend themselves rather than advocacy, which they could’ve sought from a faculty member.

Palestine Legal is a legal advocacy organization based in the U.S. that focuses on protecting the rights of groups and individuals who advocate for Palestinian rights. The organization provides legal support, advice, and representation to activists, students, and organizations who work on issues related to Palestine. It aims to defend freedom of speech, expression, and assembly, and to challenge efforts to suppress or silence individuals who speak out in support of Palestinian rights. They work to protect activists and organizations from legal threats, harassment, and discrimination, and provide resources and guidance on navigating legal challenges. Palestine Legal engages in legal advocacy and litigation, monitors and responds to incidents of repression, provides educational resources and workshops, and conducts research to expose patterns of suppression. It actively collaborates with other civil rights and social justice organizations such as the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) to advocate for policy changes and protect the rights of Palestinian justice activists.

Rahul Saksena, the author of the email addressed to President Boudreau, is a former staff attorney for Palestine Legal from 2013 to 2019. He graduated from the University of Michigan in 2004 with a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and Government, and History, and received his Doctor of Law degree from the American University Washington College of Law in 2008. During his time at Palestine Legal, he focused on legislative issues, advocacy for activists whose rights of free speech and assembly are under attack, and helped build Palestine Legal’s network of legal and other advocates.

Palestine Legal. (2018, April 30). Victory! City University of New York Reinstates Pro-Palestinian Book Event; Apologizes for Canceling. Palestine Legal. Retrieved March 31, 2023, from https://palestinelegal.org/news/ccny-reinstates-pro-palestinian-event

Perhaps the most intense of the controversies surrounding SJP’s CCNY chapter, the Miko Peled event’s cancellation was full of administrative error. The university explaining the cancellation was due to Peled’s “controversial views” and the university’s fear of negative publicity is a blatant violation of the freedom of speech and expression, and shows the university’s priority of reputation over uplifting student voices. Then, their retraction of the original reasoning demonstrated an understanding of their disrespectful behavior and revealed a deeper issue, that they were willing to violate students’ constitutional rights in private to protect themselves. 

Palestine Legal is a legal advocacy organization based in the U.S. that focuses on protecting the rights of groups and individuals who advocate for Palestinian rights. The organization provides legal support, advice, and representation to activists, students, and organizations who work on issues related to Palestine. It aims to defend freedom of speech, expression, and assembly, and to challenge efforts to suppress or silence individuals who speak out in support of Palestinian rights. They work to protect activists and organizations from legal threats, harassment, and discrimination, and provide resources and guidance on navigating legal challenges. Palestine Legal engages in legal advocacy and litigation, monitors and responds to incidents of repression, provides educational resources and workshops, and conducts research to expose patterns of suppression. It actively collaborates with other civil rights and social justice organizations such as the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) to advocate for policy changes and protect the rights of Palestinian justice activists.

The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) is a non-profit legal and advocacy organization based in the U.S. founded in 1966. It is dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It focuses on defending and advocating for social justice, racial justice, and human rights causes. The organization provides legal representation and support to individuals and groups who are challenging systemic injustices and human rights violations through litigation, advocacy, and public education. It has been involved in a wide range of high-profile cases related to issues such as racial discrimination, police misconduct, government surveillance, LGBTQ+ rights, immigrant rights, and corporate accountability. CCR works in collaboration with grassroots movements, community organizations, and other legal advocacy groups to pursue systemic change and promote social justice. They use legal strategies to challenge oppressive policies and seek remedies for communities affected by injustice. They publish reports, organize events and campaigns, and provide resources to inform the public and protect communities in their struggle for justice and equality.

Radhika Sainath is an attorney and human rights advocate, and current senior staff attorney at Palestine Legal. As a human rights lawyer, she has worked on various social justice and civil liberties issues. She focuses on international human rights law, constitutional law, and social justice advocacy through litigation, legal advocacy, and public education initiatives aimed at promoting human rights and challenging systemic injustices. At Palestine Legal, she oversees casework on free speech, censorship, and academic freedom. She was personally involved, in collaboration with CCR, in the lawsuit against Fordham University for its refusal to grant club status to its SJP chapter. She has appeared on MSNBC, Democracy Now!, Al Jazeera English, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, Jezebel, Politico, the Village Voice, and more. Her writing has appeared in The Nation, Jacobin, and Literary Hub. She is a graduate from the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law, and the University of California, San Diego.

Maria LaHood is an attorney and human rights advocate known for her work in the field of international human rights law. Currently, she serves as the Deputy Legal Director at CCR. In this position, LaHood has been involved in various cases representing individuals and groups who have faced human rights abuses and discrimination, particularly involving the rights of marginalized communities and individuals affected by U.S. foreign policy and counterterrorism practices. She has also worked in cases challenging government surveillance, targeted killings, torture, and indefinite detention. Specifically, she has been involved in cases such as Davis v. Cox, defending Olympia Food Co-op board members for boycotting Israeli goods; Bronner v. Duggan, defending Steven Salaita in cases against him and others for the American Studies Association’s resolution endorsing the call for a boycott of Israeli academic institutions; and Awad v. Fordham, compelling Fordham University to recognize SJP as a student club. Her past work at the Center for Constitutional Rights includes cases against United States officials, Arar v. Ashcroft, Al-Aulaqi v. Obama, and Al-Aulaqi v. Panetta; against foreign government officials, Matar v. Dichter and Belhas v. Ya’alon; and against corporations, Wiwa v. Royal Dutch/Shell and Corrie v. Caterpillar. In addition to serving at CCR and collaborating with Palestine Legal, LaHood is involved with the Right to Heal initiative with Iraqi civil society and Iraq veterans seeking accountability for the lasting health effects of the Iraq War. She received her law degree from the University of Michigan Law School.

Palestine Legal. (2019, February 15). Success! CUNY dismisses frivolous complaint against SJP over Nakba Vigil. Palestine Legal. Retrieved March 31, 2023, from https://palestinelegal.org/news/2019/2/15/success-cuny-dismisses-frivolous-complaint-against-sjp-over-nakba-vigil 

While this event was not as scandalous as the others, it serves as a reminder that administrative suppression of Palestinian activism is a pattern of censorship, not a series of isolated events. It shows a trend within the complaints lodged against SJP, the individuals against SJP are offended by the use of words, by the presence of demonstrators, despite them never having broken any legal or administrative rules.

Palestine Legal is a legal advocacy organization based in the U.S. that focuses on protecting the rights of groups and individuals who advocate for Palestinian rights. The organization provides legal support, advice, and representation to activists, students, and organizations who work on issues related to Palestine. It aims to defend freedom of speech, expression, and assembly, and to challenge efforts to suppress or silence individuals who speak out in support of Palestinian rights. They work to protect activists and organizations from legal threats, harassment, and discrimination, and provide resources and guidance on navigating legal challenges. Palestine Legal engages in legal advocacy and litigation, monitors and responds to incidents of repression, provides educational resources and workshops, and conducts research to expose patterns of suppression. It actively collaborates with other civil rights and social justice organizations such as the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) to advocate for policy changes and protect the rights of Palestinian justice activists.

Shechtman, P., & Jones, B. (2016). (rep.). REPORT TO CHANCELLOR MILLIKEN ON ALLEGATIONS OF ANTI-SEMITISM (pp. 1–24). New York, NY: The City College of New York. https://www.cuny.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/page-assets/news/newswire/assets/CUNYReport.pdf

In March of 2016, CUNY Chancellor Milliken appointed former federal prosecutor Paul Shechtman and former federal judge Barbara S. Jones to conduct an independent investigation of alleged incidents of anti-Semitism at various CUNY campuses and judge the university’s treatment of the incidents. Shechtman and Jones used publicly available information on complaints filed against the university by ZOA as well as interviews conducted with those who had originally contacted ZOA for support and the Hillel executive directors at Hunter College, Brooklyn College, College of Staten Island, John Jay, and Baruch. Hillel is a Jewish campus organization present at 850 colleges and universities across the globe. Shechtman and Jones investigate each incident at each campus individually. The conclusions were as follows:

1. Much of what has been included in the complaints is speech protected by the First Amendment, such as die-ins, mock checkpoints, and the SJP banner. The First Amendment does not permit CUNY to take action against them.
2. CUNY cannot punish hate speech unless it interferes with a person’s ability to pursue an education or participate in university life, but it is permitted to condemn hate speech on campus. They refer to a 2015 event organized by John Jay’s Office of the Dean of Students and Center for Student Involvement and Leadership called “Hateful vs. Hurtful Speech” which sought to teach students that discomfort is a precondition for learning, and to teach them to distinguish communication that may make them uncomfortable from those that make them unsafe.
3. CUNY can punish threatening conduct that puts a community member in fear for his safety. A chant is not threatening conduct, but an open threat towards a targeted individual or a physical altercation can be punished, as was the case at a Hunter student demonstration. In the case of CCNY, however, SJP members did not pose a physical threat to SSI members or Consul General Dayan, however, SJP members did claim that at least one member of SSI put their hands on one of their members/supporters, which the college did not investigate or punish.
4. In some cases, the use of the word Zionist is a cover for anti-Semitism. Calls for divestment and boycott is not anti-Semitism. The chant “CUNY out of Israel” is also not anti-Semitism. They refer to an anonymous Jewish student who supported SJP at Hunter College, who was called a “self-hating Jew,” “traitor,” and “not a real Jew if [he] didn’t support Israel” from other Jewish students on campus. They also refer to a protester who shouted “Zionist” at a faculty member who wore a kippah at a meeting. Both were considered anti-Semitic.
5. CUNY administration cannot ban the word “intifada,” citing the case Doe v. University of Michigan (a public University cannot “proscribe speech simply because, it was found to be offensive, even gravely so, by large numbers of people”).
6. They did not find evidence to support the claim that several Jewish students have left CUNY because of anti-Semitism, nor did they find substantial evidence that faculty members were spreading anti-Israel views in class. They did, however, hear of several incidents where a student interrupted class to proclaim an anti-Israel position. If a student disrupts learning to proclaim their point of view, then it should be punished, concluding that “a classroom must be a space where students hear opposing views, but faculty must make every effort to promote civil discourse and protect students from personal attacks.”
7. CUNY cannot require SJP to abandon its principle of “co-resistance,” which prevented it from holding joint events with Hillel or other pro-Israel groups on CUNY campuses. A number of Jewish students complained that they were disappointed about this, however, Hillel International has issued its own guidelines which would have prevented the same thing.
8. Individual students should be punished for their anti-Semitic behavior, not the SJP organization as a whole. The student who shouted “Zionist” at the faculty member wearing a kippah was not an SJP member. Nor was there evidence linking SJP to swastikas found at John Jay and CSI or the anti-Semitic graffiti at Brooklyn College. And though they could not identify the individuals who engaged in threatening behavior at the Million Student March, which was organized by SJP, there was no evidence that linked those individuals to SJP either.

I used the investigation primarily because it was highly relevant to my topic as it pertained to SJP and CUNY, even though it wasn’t directly about the events I talked about or even CCNY specifically. However, it shows that the same issues are prevalent at other CUNY campuses to the degree that it warranted investigation. The report also helped me validate the divisions between what is pro-Palestine activism and what is anti-Semitism. There were cases of real anti-Semitism at other CUNY campuses, and there were also false allegations of anti-Semitism against SJP at CUNY campuses which the events at CCNY would fall under based on the judgment made by Shechtman and Jones and their validation by Chancellor Milliken in his sponsorship of the report. It affirms that pro-Palestine activism is protected by the First Amendment and that criticism of Israel may make pro-Israel students uncomfortable, but it does not warrant punishment unless their ability to access education or their personal safety is threatened.

Paul Shechtman is a U.S. criminal defense attorney. He served as an assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York as chief of appeals from 1981 to 1985. From 1985 to 1987, he taught law at the University of Pennsylvania. From 1987 to 1993, he served as counsel to the New York County’s District Attorney’s Office, then returned to the U.S. Attorney’s Office as chief of the criminal division. From 1995 to 1997, he was director of criminal justice for New York State under Governor George E. Pataki. In 1998, he went into private practice for Zuckerman Spaeder, with whom he had represented the New York City Department of Environmental Protection in a federal investigation of the city’s water treatment facilities; was trial counsel for a Mexican national in a Southern District insider trading prosecution; and defended a high-level manager charged with committing health care fraud and obstruction of justice. He was also appellate counsel to the New York governor’s office in a challenge by the state legislature on the governor’s authority in the budget process; represented the former counsel to the Delaware governor in a death penalty appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court; and handled the appeal of an art dealer convicted in the Southern District of transporting artwork stolen from Egypt. He served as chair of the governor’s judicial screening committee for the court of claims, chair of the State Ethics Commission, and is a member of the New York sentencing Commission. He joined Bracewell LLP with former judge Barbara S. Jones in 2016 and left in 2022 to re-enter the public sphere, named deputy commissioner and general counsel of New York City’s Department of Correction. He received his law degree from Harvard Law School, a bachelor’s of philosophy from Oxford University, and a bachelor’s of art from Swarthmore College.

Barbara S. Jones is a former judge in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and a current partner at Bracewell LLP. She focuses her practice on corporate monitorships, compliance issues, internal investigations and arbitrations, and mediations. She served as a judge for 16 years in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, during which she presided over a diverse range of cases, including accounting and securities fraud, antitrust, fraud and corruption involving city contracts and federal loan programs, labor racketeering, and terrorism. In 2010 she was appointed by the Chief Justice of the United Status to serve on the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, which she served on for 2 years. She was nominated as a U.S. District Judge in 1995 by President Bill Clinton, but prior to this, she served as Chief Assistant to Robert M. Morgenthau, then-District Attorney of New York County. She has also previously served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York, where she served as the chief of the Organized Crime Strike Force Unit, an adjunct assistant professor at Fordham Law School and New York University School of Law, and has chaired the Response Systems to Adult Sexual Assault Crimes Panel.

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 42 U.S.C § 2000d (1964). https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/regulatory/statutes/title-vi-civil-rights-act-of-1964