The federal government has launched investigations of George Mason University (GMU) — Virginia’s largest university — and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) over claims they tolerated anti-semitism that created a hostile environment for Jews, or gave preferential treatment to pro-Hamas students that fostered a hostile environment for Jews.
The Education Department opened “shared ancestry” investigations into both schools on Dec. 22, citing Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, according to the website of the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights.
The investigations are under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which bans discrimination based on race, color, or national origin, not religion as such. The Supreme Court has ruled that anti-semitism qualifies as racial discrimination under another civil rights law, 42 U.S.C. 1982, in its decision in Shaare Tefila v. Cobb Congregation (1987). The Education Department has applied that logic to anti-semitism under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, in “Dear Colleague” letters issued under the Trump and Biden administrations. However, 42 U.S.C. 1982 was passed in the 19th Century at a time when Jews were seen as a race. Today, they are not seen as a race, only a religious and ethnic group.
Title IV of the Civil Rights Act, by contrast, does ban religious discrimination at public (as opposed to private) colleges, and both GMU and UNC are public universities. The federal government clearly has the authority under Title IV to take action against GMU and UNC for failure to remedy discrimination against Jews.
Allegations against GMU, located in Fairfax, Virginia, involve a student tearing down posters of Israeli hostages held by Hamas. The school stated X that it had “been advised by the Commonwealth’s Attorney that the conduct does not appear to be criminal in nature,” but that it would address the incident in accordance with its code of conduct.
The Commonwealth’s Attorney who refused to prosecute vandals who tore down posters of Israeli hostages is Fairfax County prosecutor Steve Descano. He is part of the left-wing of the Democratic Party, which tends to be pro-Hamas, unlike Joe Biden, who is not pro-Hamas (even if the Biden administration did foolishly release millions of dollars to Gaza’s Hamas-controlled government shortly before it killed more than 1000 Israeli civilians and at least 32 Americans in the October 7 attacks). Descano defeated a mainstream liberal Democrat, Ray Morrogh, in the Democratic primary. The Washington Post reported that Descano received hundreds of thousands of dollars from a George Soros-funded group, enabling him to massively outspend the mainstream liberal incumbent.
Colleges like GMU have allowed masked pro-Hamas rallies even in states like Virginia, which has a law banning public mask-wearing except for Halloween and health reasons, even though colleges would never tolerate mask-wearing right-wing protesters. This ideological favoritism based on the viewpoint of protesters violates Supreme Court rulings such as Police Department v. Mosley (1972), which said pro-union protesters couldn’t be allowed to picket if other groups weren’t allowed to picket. The Virginia Court of Appeals has upheld Virginia’s mask ban, but left-wing prosecutors like Steve Descano won’t enforce it against pro-Hamas protesters. Even though Code of Virginia § 18.2-422 clearly states, “It shall be unlawful for any person over 16 years of age to, with the intent to conceal his identity, wear any mask, hood or other device whereby a substantial portion of the face is hidden or covered so as to conceal the identity of the wearer, to be or appear in any public place…However, the provisions of this section shall not apply to persons (i) wearing traditional holiday costumes….”
As law professor David Bernstein observes, “the biggest problem with how many campuses are handling pro-Hamas protests right now is not a failure to prohibit ‘hate speech,’” — which should not be banned on college campuses — “but a failure to enforce existing, content-neutral rules” against misbehavior like going into classrooms to disrupt class with noisy protests that make it impossible to hear what the professor is saying. As history professor KC Johnson notes, “recent disruptive anti-Israel protests –students with bullhorns interrepting classes, etc)–were organized by unrecognized student groups. They’re ‘technically not permitted to stage on-campus demonstrations,’” because of their unrecognized status. So “Why hasn’t Harvard enforced its rules?”
The investigation at UNC follows a complaint filed by lawyer David Weisberg, who chronicled a series of anti-Semitic incidents dating back to 2019. Some of these incidents seem to involve political speech aimed at no particular student, which could raise First Amendment issues under court rulings like Rodriguez v. Maricopa Community College District (2010), which dismissed a racial harassment lawsuit over a white professor’s racially-charged anti-immigration emails that were not aimed at any specific Hispanic staffer, even though a trial judge had concluded that they might have created a racially hostile environment.
One incident cited by Weisberg involved professor Chebrolu, who, during a lecture in a communications class, apparently said, “Israel and the United States do not give a s**t about international law or war crimes,” and that Israel’s existence “somewhat ridiculous.
Weisberg also described comments from an event entitled “No Peace Without Justice: A Round-Table Talk on Social Justice in Palestine.” Dr. Rania Masri, a speaker not employed by the school, allegedly said, “Let us demand the eradication of Zionism,” and referred to it as a “cancer.”
In November, seven other colleges and universities were put under investigation for antisemitism.
