4 House Members Slam College’s Anti-Israel Event

<a href="http://www.shutterstock.com">Maksym Bondarchuk </a>/Shutterstock

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


A scholar and a political commentator are about to let fly to some very, very dangerous speech at a New York college next week. It’s so dangerous, in fact, that four Democratic members of Congress are getting involved.

Next Thursday, Brooklyn College’s political science department and the student group Students for Justice in Palestine are scheduled to hold a panel discussion with philosopher Judith Butler and Omar Barghouti, a Palestinian political analyst, on something called “BDS.” BDS stands for Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions, the controversial international movement that pushes to get Israel to withdraw its settlements from the Palestinian territories by boycotting Israeli products, divesting from Israeli industries, and imposing sanctions.

The coming event has pro-Israel groups up in arms (Butler definitely has some controversial ideas about Hamas). But other people are jumping on board fast. One city official said the discussion of a movement critical of Israeli policy could bring a “second Holocaust.” But the latest voices of outrage come from even higher up. On Thursday, four members of Congress from New York, along with other high-level New York officials, sent a letter to Brooklyn College’s president calling for the political science department to withdraw their support from the event.

The letter, which was signed by Democratic Reps. Yvette Clarke, Hakeem Jeffries, Jerrold Nadler, and Nydia Velasquez, as well as members of the State Assembly and city council, states: “We collectively believe that the BDS movement is a wrongheaded and destructive one, and an obstacle to our collective hope for a peaceful two-state solution.” The letter asks Brooklyn College to “withdraw their endorsement” of the event because it is “one-sided.” They charge that by not presenting a “counter-perspective,” the institution is “stifl[ing] free speech.”

Corey Robin, an associate professor of political science at the college, where nearly one-fifth of the undergraduate population is Jewish, says this kind of intervention is “unprecedented. In the time I’ve been at Brooklyn College, since 1999, I can’t remember a single instance where you’ve had a formal public call like this” to withdraw support from an academic discussion. “I’ve never seen members of Congress doing this, as well. It’s scary.”

Robin takes issue with the idea that the entire college is “endorsing” the BDS movement by allowing students to invite people to come talk about it at the political science department. “We are not organizing this forum,” he says, referring to his department. “We did not invite these speakers. It is not our place to tell students whom they can and cannot include on a forum. That would be a very severe violation of students’ academic freedom.”

The college’s spokesperson told the New York Times that “cosponsorship” doesn’t mean endorsement, and said the administration encouraged students to hold events that presented differing viewpoints.

A spokesman for Nadler said in an email that “[w]hile the college may say that ‘sponsorship is not endorsement,’ the fact that its imprimatur is on the event is de facto promotion of the event. And I wonder whether the college would likewise put its imprimatur on a student event promoting, say, the disgusting notion of ‘white racial superiority.'” 

Clarke said that whether you call it endorsement or sponsorship, “it is a disservice to our community to put the weight of an institution behind an event that does not provide for diversity of thought or an opportunity for others to share their points of view.” Jeffries reiterated his objection to the political science department’s “apparent endorsement of one perspective.”

Velasquez’s office did not respond to a request for comment.

The Democratic representatives and anti-BDS advocates argue that the college should bring in someone with an opposing viewpoint to speak in order to make the event more fair. Robin says this kind of demand is also unprecedented: “We routinely convene panels on issues. I have never had a request that we have to present opposing view.”

He says the department has brought in other controversial speakers, such as former Black Panther Kathleen NealDavid Horowitz, the conservative pro-Israel commentator, has also spoken at the college. Next month, Glenn Greenwald will give a lecture at the department on civil liberties, Robin says. “Are we now obligated, if someone doesn’t like him, to present an anti-civil-liberties position?” Robin asks. “Controversial speakers are part of what academic education is all about.”

WHO DOESN’T LOVE A POSITIVE STORY—OR TWO?

“Great journalism really does make a difference in this world: it can even save kids.”

That’s what a civil rights lawyer wrote to Julia Lurie, the day after her major investigation into a psychiatric hospital chain that uses foster children as “cash cows” published, letting her know he was using her findings that same day in a hearing to keep a child out of one of the facilities we investigated.

That’s awesome. As is the fact that Julia, who spent a full year reporting this challenging story, promptly heard from a Senate committee that will use her work in their own investigation of Universal Health Services. There’s no doubt her revelations will continue to have a big impact in the months and years to come.

Like another story about Mother Jones’ real-world impact.

This one, a multiyear investigation, published in 2021, exposed conditions in sugar work camps in the Dominican Republic owned by Central Romana—the conglomerate behind brands like C&H and Domino, whose product ends up in our Hershey bars and other sweets. A year ago, the Biden administration banned sugar imports from Central Romana. And just recently, we learned of a previously undisclosed investigation from the Department of Homeland Security, looking into working conditions at Central Romana. How big of a deal is this?

“This could be the first time a corporation would be held criminally liable for forced labor in their own supply chains,” according to a retired special agent we talked to.

Wow.

And it is only because Mother Jones is funded primarily by donations from readers that we can mount ambitious, yearlong—or more—investigations like these two stories that are making waves.

About that: It’s unfathomably hard in the news business right now, and we came up about $28,000 short during our recent fall fundraising campaign. We simply have to make that up soon to avoid falling further behind than can be made up for, or needing to somehow trim $1 million from our budget, like happened last year.

If you can, please support the reporting you get from Mother Jones—that exists to make a difference, not a profit—with a donation of any amount today. We need more donations than normal to come in from this specific blurb to help close our funding gap before it gets any bigger.

payment methods

WHO DOESN’T LOVE A POSITIVE STORY—OR TWO?

“Great journalism really does make a difference in this world: it can even save kids.”

That’s what a civil rights lawyer wrote to Julia Lurie, the day after her major investigation into a psychiatric hospital chain that uses foster children as “cash cows” published, letting her know he was using her findings that same day in a hearing to keep a child out of one of the facilities we investigated.

That’s awesome. As is the fact that Julia, who spent a full year reporting this challenging story, promptly heard from a Senate committee that will use her work in their own investigation of Universal Health Services. There’s no doubt her revelations will continue to have a big impact in the months and years to come.

Like another story about Mother Jones’ real-world impact.

This one, a multiyear investigation, published in 2021, exposed conditions in sugar work camps in the Dominican Republic owned by Central Romana—the conglomerate behind brands like C&H and Domino, whose product ends up in our Hershey bars and other sweets. A year ago, the Biden administration banned sugar imports from Central Romana. And just recently, we learned of a previously undisclosed investigation from the Department of Homeland Security, looking into working conditions at Central Romana. How big of a deal is this?

“This could be the first time a corporation would be held criminally liable for forced labor in their own supply chains,” according to a retired special agent we talked to.

Wow.

And it is only because Mother Jones is funded primarily by donations from readers that we can mount ambitious, yearlong—or more—investigations like these two stories that are making waves.

About that: It’s unfathomably hard in the news business right now, and we came up about $28,000 short during our recent fall fundraising campaign. We simply have to make that up soon to avoid falling further behind than can be made up for, or needing to somehow trim $1 million from our budget, like happened last year.

If you can, please support the reporting you get from Mother Jones—that exists to make a difference, not a profit—with a donation of any amount today. We need more donations than normal to come in from this specific blurb to help close our funding gap before it gets any bigger.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate