A Losing Game

Abstract

A Losing Game Kenneth S. Stern (bio) As Pamela Nadell notes, she wasn't my first choice for a scholar to testify at the House Committee on the Judiciary's hearing on campus antisemitism. But that's only because I did not know her. The Judiciary committee staff had asked me to suggest academics who opposed the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act (ASAA) and would make compelling witnesses. The scholars I had worked with over the years, including fellow members of the Alliance for Academic Freedom, all had other commitments that could not be changed. "Who else would be good?" I asked the half dozen people who weren't available. One suggested Nadell. Another said Nadell would be an excellent choice, and that she was "strong and would not fold under pressure." That's how, a few weeks before the hearing, Nadell and I had a conversation. She had many questions, and asked for reading material, which I sent. She then reached out to her Jewish studies colleagues and many others for their thoughts, and came to the same conclusion as I—that the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act was ill-advised, and would damage academic freedom and the interests of those involved with Jewish studies. The committee staff, no surprise, approved Nadell, and we met, as she notes, on that November day at the House Judiciary Committee. The hearing was a study in contrasts. We're very used to seeing a partisan divide in the US today, some of it playing out before that same committee in that same hearing room. But on the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act, it was obvious that there were members of both parties who supported it, and others who opposed it. It was also clear that those who opposed it did so with less bravado and more caution, aware of the potential political costs. All the Democrats and Republicans, I believe, were supporters of Israel. The issue that divided them was how strongly they valued academic freedom and free speech. Those who testified were also divided. As Nadell writes, the witnesses supporting the legislation included my friend and former AJC colleague Rabbi Andy Baker, Simon Wiesenthal Center's Rabbi Abraham Cooper, Jonathan Greenblatt of the ADL, a representative of Christians United for Israel, and a lawyer tasked with promoting the bill, Paul Clement, a former US Solicitor General. [End Page 201] These were all people from outside the academy, each of whom had their own institutional or political interests to articulate. I'm not questioning their sincerity or good faith, only noting that none of the pro-ASAA groups at the hearing, despite their concern with the campus, were campus-based, or to any significant degree campus-linked. Those opposing the legislation, on the other hand, were stakeholders in the campus. Barry Trachtenberg, a professor of Jewish studies at Wake Forest University, Suzanne Nossel of PEN America (which includes many academic writers among its members), I, and most especially Nadell, either work on campus or directly with campus stakeholders. Those opposed to the legislation all argued that while there are indeed instances of antisemitism at some campuses, the problem was drastically overblown, that Jewish students were for the most part not victimized by antisemitism, and that the effect of the legislation would be to make matters worse. As Nadell noted, citing a recent Stanford study, when Jewish students "experience discomfort as Jews, they trace it to the stridency of both sides of the Israel-Palestine debate on campus." In other words, to address the problem, educators should work to reduce the effect of stridency, not buy into the binary of one side or the other, which the legislation does. As I pointed out in my testimony, there is debate inside the Jewish community about whether Jews who are anti-Zionist are "inside the tent" or "outside the tent." This isn't an easy question. Most Jews would likely count Satmar Jews, who are anti-Zionist, as part of the community. Why then exclude young Jews who have an ideological or theological objection to Zionism based on their understandings of Jewish values and social justice? I'm not sure this debate can be decided, but the legislation...