State resolution calling on UC to condemn anti-Semitism faces criticism

A state Senate resolution urging each University of California campus to condemn anti-Semitism and racism faces opposition from civil rights and pro-Palestine groups who say they think its definition of anti-Semitism is too broad.

Senate Concurrent Resolution 35, proposed in March by Sen. Jeff Stone (R-Murrieta) and passed by the Senate Education Committee last week, claims anti-Semitism has been growing throughout the world and on college campuses across the country.

“We want to put the state Legislature on the record (of opposing anti-Semitism),” said Chris Wysocki, chief of staff for Stone.

Wysocki cited February’s controversy over the appointment of Rachel Beyda, a second-year economics student, to the Undergraduate Students Association Council Judicial Board. At a USAC meeting, several USAC members questioned how Beyda would remain neutral given her affiliation with the Jewish community on campus.

The incident, which many have called anti-Semitic and sparked national headlines, led to USAC passing a resolution condemning anti-Semitism.

“Beyda was part of it, but it was kind of a broad pattern we started to see,” Wysocki said.

Some pro-Palestine groups, as well as civil rights groups, have also opposed the resolution and sent a letter to Stone.

James Lafferty, executive director of the Los Angeles chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, said he thinks the resolution’s use of the U.S. Department of State’s definition of anti-Semitism groups criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism.

“Lumping criticisms of Israel with those who carry swastikas takes away the credibility of Israeli people when they are actually faced with anti-Semitic situations,” Lafferty said.

Wysocki said the resolution used what they think is the most widely accepted definition of anti-Semitism. The Department of State defines demonizing, delegitimizing or applying a double standard to Israel as anti-Semitic.

The bill was amended this week to address some of the concerns, including a clause saying the resolution does not intend to diminish anyone’s right to free speech.

Sydney Levy, director of advocacy for the Jewish Voice for Peace, said he thinks the resolution singles out anti-Semitism as a problem on campuses even as students face other problems such as Islamophobia and racism. The organization supports efforts to end what it says is the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories.

“We are living in a moment when Muslim students are being killed,” Levy said, referring to shooting of three Muslim students in Chapel Hill, N.C. “But one item a legislator is concerned about is anti-Semitism.”

The UC has not taken a stance on the resolution, said University spokeswoman Shelly Meron in an email statement.

However, she referred to a statement from UC President Janet Napolitano and UC Board of Regents Chairman Bruce D. Varner in which they condemned recent controversial incidents, such as USAC’s questioning of Beyda and the swastikas painted on the UC Davis’ Jewish fraternity house.

UCLA doesn’t have a specific policy addressing anti-Semitism or Islamophobia, said university spokesman Ricardo Vazquez, referring to the UCLA Principles of Community. Chancellor Gene Block released a statement late February condemning the questioning of Beyda’s appointment as well as offensive fliers targeting Students for Justice in Palestine.

The resolution has been referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee.