LOCAL 2865 2030 Addison Street, Suite 640A, Berkeley, CA 94704 p: 510549-9863 fF: 510549-2514 vaw2865@vaw2865.0rg www.uaw2865.0r9 Dear President Napolitano, United Auto Workers Local 2865, which represents over 13,000 student workers in the University of California system, wishes to voice strong opposition to the proposed adoption of the State Department definition of anti-Semitism by the UC Regents. As members of the union local’s Joint Council, we write to ask that you withdraw your personal support for its adoption and ensure that this does not end up on the agenda for the July Regents Meeting in San Francisco. The State Department definition conflates legitimate, first amendment-protected criticisms of policies of the Israeli government with anti-Semitism, which is commonly defined as discrimination against Jewish people. ‘The State Department definition includes a section deciaring that "demonizing", “delegitimizing’, or applying a “double-standard'” to Israel are examples of anti-Semitism. These terms are extremely vague and could be applied to virtually any criticism of any Israeli policy. In addition, we are concerned that by adopting such a measure, the UC Regents would in fact be treating Israel as exceptional and applying a double standard to the values of the University, which is supposed to foster free intellectual exchange and which prides itself on commitment to academic freedom, free speech and student leadership. UAW 2865 understands that many Jews find the conflation of Judaism with Israel and the decisions of its government anti-Semitic in itself. The growing movement of Jewish communities who have spoken out against war crimes and human rights violations by the Israeli state highlights this, and to deny their legitimate grievances against policies claiming to speak on behalf of world Jewry is unethical and tells them their Jewish identity does not matter. In December, our union local endorsed divesting from corporations complicit in violations of International law by Israel and ending US military aid to Israel, by a nearly two-thirds majority. Many Jewish students unhappy with Israeli policies toward Palestinians joined in that campaign, not for a second thinking their criticisms of Israel were an attack on their own Jewish identity. As this vote specifically targeted Israel without calling for divestment and ending military aid to other countries, this could be characterized as applying a "double-standard’ to Israel, and therefore declared anti-Semitic, One could argue that students seeking to boycott and divest from Israel weren't the ones applying the double-standard, but in fact US foreign policy does so through the outsized amount of military aid provided to Israel. The double-standard isn't applied by those seeking recognition of Israeli violations of Intemational law, but by the US government which prevents any action at the United Nations against Israel for these violations, The United States Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights has clearly ruled that criticism of Israel is protected campus speech, In 2013, the Office for Civil Rights dismissed three separate Title VI Civil Rights Act complaints against UC campuses which claimed that several events critical of Israel fostered an anti-Semitic campus climate. In rejecting these claims, the office stated that the events in question “constitute expression on matters of public concern directed to the University community. In the university environment, exposure to such robust and discordant expressions, even when personally offensive and hurtful, is a circumstance that a reasonable student in higher education may experience. In this context, the events that the complainants described do not constitute actionable harassment.” Berkeley + Davis « Irvine Los Angeles « Merced « oo /erside + San Diego « Sonta Barbora + Santa CruzKenneth Stern, the lead author of the European Union Monitoring Center’s working definition on anti-Semitism, which served as the basis for the State Department definition, opposes enforcing the definition on college campuses. In a recent Jewish Journal op-ed, Stern characterizes efforts by outside groups like the AMCHA Initiative to apply the State Department definition as a transparent ploy to establish unconstitutional “speech codes’ that are “anathema to the ideals of academic freedom.” He says that enshrining this definition in the UG system “is an illadvised idea that will make matters worse, and not only for Jewish students; it would also damage the university as a whole.” He continues: The Regents would be better advised to think of ways to increase the teaching and scholarship about antisemitism and hatred in general rather than adopt a definition that was never intended to regulate speech on a college campus. If the university were to officially brand critical views of Israeli policy as “anti-Semitic,” many of us would wake up the next day with a stamp of condemnation on our academic work. Many would have to change our academic focus, or wonder if we should to avoid controversy and undue scrutiny. Many would change their course curriculums to avoid the topic all together. Many would be afraid to ask questions about Israel and Palestine. Many would choose to avoid campus debates on the topic, keep our heads down and decide to stay away from essential, learning opportunities that campus activism and controversial programming afford. Many would change our resumes, hide our passions, and decide not to speak our conscious or ask questions. This would be devastating to the learning environment at what should be a world- class university. As a body that represents thousands of student teachers for the work they do in classrooms, we see this redefinition of anti-Semitism as a serious threat to the academic freedom of our members. Lastly and most importantly we ask the UC regents consider the legal, ethical and academic implications this has on its Palestinian and Arab student and faculty constituency. Many students are here in the US studying in the UC because opportunities for education, to live in freedom, dignity, safety and peace has been denied to them because of persistent Israeli ‘occupation, wars and the denial of Palestinian refugees the right to return to their homeland, To conflate a critique of Israe! with anti-Semitism first does not account for the fact that Arab people are also Semitic people and secondly it criminalizes the very existence, experience and narratives of one of your already most underserved and marginalized communities. This measure would signify a new form of institutional racism that would consolidate and strengthen |slamophobia, anti-Semitism, anti-Arab racism which will surely be reflected in campus climate. As 2 union committed to justice, equity and collaborative exchange, we strongly urge you to not consider adoption of the State Department definition of anti-Semitism. ‘We hope you will do the right thing and not attempt to stifle protected speech on campus. Sincerely, United Auto Workers Local 2865