Three U.S.
Criticize Decision
Criticize Decision
The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) applauds the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations (Presidents’ Conference) for its forceful letter to Stephanie Monroe, the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Education, stating that “[w]e are troubled by your agency’s recent decision to deny the protections of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI) to Jewish students at the University of California, Irvine (UCI).” According to the Presidents’ Conference, “[t]his decision will affect Jewish students not only at UCI, but also at other colleges and universities across the United States. At a time when reports of anti-Semitic harassment and intimidation on college campuses is increasing, the Office for Civil Rights (OCR), whose mission is to redress racial and ethnic discrimination, should be seeking to expand the protections of the law.”
The Presidents’ Conference’s letter of concern focused on OCR’s decision in the case that the ZOA filed on behalf of Jewish students at UCI, alleging that UCI had violated Title VI by failing to protect Jewish students from anti-Semitic harassment and intimidation. Title VI, which is enforced by OCR, requires that recipients of federal funding (like UCI and other public and most private universities) ensure that their programs and activities are free from racial and ethnic harassment, intimidation and discrimination or risk losing their federal funding. In the case that the ZOA filed, which triggered OCR’s first-ever investigation into allegations of campus anti-Semitism under Title VI, several Jewish students came forward and furnished information to OCR about what they have faced at UCI – harassment and intimidation to the point that some feared for their physical safety and at least two students actually left UCI because they could no longer endure the hostile campus environment. Students described their repeated efforts to get the UCI administration to respond to their fears and concerns, all of which were futile. Despite such reports from student after student, in November 2008 (more than three years after the ZOA filed its complaint), OCR concluded that there was insufficient evidence to support the ZOA ’s allegations against UCI.
The Presidents’ Conference letter to OCR head Stephanie Monroe, dated February 8, 2008, was signed by its leadership, Chairperson June Walker and Executive Vice Chairman Malcolm Hoenlein. Ms. Walker and Mr. Hoenlein noted that campus anti-Semitism is of such concern that the United States Commission on Civil Rights focused on it, holding a hearing on campus anti-Semitism in November 2005. The letter notes that “[b]ased on the evidence, the Commission determined that thee problem is ‘serious’ and ‘warrants further attention.’” According to the letter, the Commission “recognized that anti-Semitism may be couched in attacks against Zionism and
The Presidents’ Conference cautioned that OCR’s now-narrower policy for enforcing Title VI is sending a “disturbing message” to Jewish students who face anti-Semitism on their campuses, to the perpetrators of the hate and bigotry, and to colleges and universities. To Jewish students, the message is that “they must endure a hostile educational environment because the law, while protecting other groups, offers them no recourse or protection.” To the perpetrators of anti-Semitism, they may interpret OCR’s message “as an excuse to do what they are doing on their campuses, because colleges and universities have no obligation to respond to their conduct.” And to “colleges and universities seeking it, OCR has given them a green light not to respond to anti-Semitism even when it threatens and intimidates Jewish students, because they will not be held accountable.”
The Presidents’ Conference urged OCR to follow the Civil Rights Commission’s recommendation and return to its own policy as clarified in the fall of 2004, “mak[ing] it clear that Jewish students are a protected group under Title VI, and that OCR will vigorously protect them from anti-Semitic harassment and intimidation.” The Presidents’ Conference also urged OCR “to reconsider the decision that OCR issued in the [ZOA ’s] case against UCI, since it is based on an overly restrictive reading of Title VI that we believe could have serious consequences.”
This powerful letter buttresses the letter that three members of the United States Senate’s Committee of the Judiciary recently sent to Secretary Margaret Spellings of the U.S. Department of Education, demanding answers to their questions about how OCR handled the ZOA’s complaint, and about whether OCR is interpreting Title VI to protect Jewish students from harassment and intimidation. In the Senators’ letter, dated February 27, 2008, Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA), the Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee, together with Senators Jon Kyl (R-AZ) and Sam Brownback (R-KS), expressed their “concern regarding anti-Semitic incidents aimed at Jewish students at several colleges and universities and the response to such incidents by the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR).” These Senators asked several pointed questions of Secretary Spellings to which they requested a “prompt” and “timely” response, including why it took OCR almost three years to issue a decision in the ZOA’s case, why it took OCR almost two years into its investigation to interview UCI officials and conduct site visits to UCI, and why OCR did not interview all of the witnesses with relevant evidence.
Morton A. Klein, the ZOA ’s National President, and Susan Tuchman , Esq., the director of the ZOA ’s Center for Law and Justice, commended the leadership of the Presidents’ Conference for expressing these concerns to the head of OCR: “We thank June Walker and Malcolm Hoenlein for speaking out on behalf of the Presidents’ Conference about how OCR is failing to protect Jewish students against the harassment and intimidation they’re facing on their campuses. In the ZOA ’s case against UCI, student after student described the harassment and outright fear they felt on campus, and that when they sought help from the UCI administration, they didn’t get it. We were shocked that in light of the evidence, OCR refused to hold UCI accountable under Title VI. But that was plainly due to the agency’s decision to give the law a narrow and restrictive interpretation; OCR seemingly ignored, distorted, and ignored the overwhelming evidence of harassment and intimidation, and UCI’s failure to respond effectively to these problems. Approximately two and one-half months after the OCR decision, an independent task force made up of community members in Orange County , CA
“We are pleased that the Presidents’ Conference has criticized OCR for narrowing the protections it affords to Jewish students under Title VI. The letter reinforces the serious concerns that U.S.
Center for Law & Justice
We work to educate the American public and Congress about legal issues in order to advance the interests of Israel and the Jewish people.
We assist American victims of terrorism in vindicating their rights under the law, and seek to hold terrorists and sponsors of terrorism accountable for their actions.
We fight anti-Semitism and anti-Israel bias in the media and on college campuses.
We strive to enforce existing law and also to create new law in order to safeguard the rights of the Jewish people in the United States and Israel.
Trending Z
News March 20, 2008
“J Street” Has Moved Outside the Pale | Israel National News
Uncategorized March 20, 2008
Atty General Nominee Pam Bondi on Handling Pro-Hamas Students on Campus