With the fall semester about to begin, Jewish City University of New York (CUNY) students and staff will likely continue to confront an antisemitism problem. This problem has caused some students to be afraid to attend classes in person or to outwardly display symbols of Judaism such as wearing a kippah or Star of David. It has also produced frustration that the authorities have failed to take stronger action to stem such hatred.
The rising tide of antisemitic incidents at CUNY includes verbal assaults, antisemitic graffiti and the CUNY School of Law’s student government and faculty endorsement of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) campaign targeting Israel; this year the law school’s student commencement speaker address devoted his address to criticizing Zionists and Israel.
During a seven-hour hearing by the New York City Council’s Committee on Higher Education in June, the university was lambasted by the committee for its lack of action in protecting Jews on its 25 campuses. Committee members were particularly irked by the failure of Chancellor Félix Matos Rodriguez to attend after a previous hearing was canceled after he told them he had a scheduling conflict. During the hearing, a parade of students and staff told harrowing tales of being subject to antisemitic harassment by fellow students and faculty—in some cases opting to go virtual for their own safety—and of faculty resigning from the professional staff union because of its anti-Israel stance as well as being forced out of the university itself.
It is a problem that Councilwoman Inna Vernikov, a member of the higher education committee, called “pervasive” and “ongoing for years” in a letter to Gov. Kathy Hochul, asking among other things, she encourage CUNY to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism.
The IHRA, a non-legally binding resolution adopted in 2016 by its 31 member countries, including the United States, states that “antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews,” and cites several examples, including the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. In June Hochul issued a proclamation adopting the IHRA definition as a “vital resource in the struggle against antisemitism that will facilitate constructive discourse, further understanding and enable a more thoughtful response to this harmful behavior that impacts us all.”
In her letter Vernikov wrote, “Jewish New Yorkers, students and faculty alike have endured an increasingly hostile climate that undermines the notion that campuses are diverse and inclusive spaces.”
She called a July 13 meeting between herself and others concerned with antisemitism, which was attended by Rodriguez and other CUNY representatives “productive” but said, “This does not change the reality of a hostile climate at CUNY overnight and I would not be doing my job if I did not press upon CUNY and follow up with all who can make a difference on our asks.”
In an interview with the Jewish Link, Vernikov said the group went in with a list of demands. These included increasing diversity and inclusion training in antisemitism within the CUNY system, the possibility of including student leaders in such training, and new exchange programs with Israel, which the chancellor was receptive to implementing.
“They said they will get back to us about other items on the list,” said Vernikov, a Republican representing District 48 in Brooklyn and a member of the council’s Jewish caucus. Also attending that meeting was Ilya Bratman, executive director of Hillel at Baruch College in New York City; a student; and Glenda Grace, CUNY senior vice chancellor for institutional affairs, strategic advancement and special counsel. Grace had been one of three representatives who attended the council hearing in Rodriguez’s absence.
Bratman said while Rodriguez’s failure to show at the council meeting was “a terrible mistake,” he was pleased that the chancellor seemed ”very responsive, very accepting” of the group’s requests. “It was great to have an intimate conversation, just the five of us,” he said. “We were able to showcase very clearly some of the intricate problems on campuses, how we’ve battled for years and gave him firsthand accounts,” said Bratman, adding that the firsthand details helped Rodriguez to see how serious and widespread the issue has become in recent years.
“Ninety percent of the attacks are verbal,” said Bratman. “We want to create safe spaces for them and for [Jewish] students to know they have the support behind them to feel safe. If allowed to be unchecked in time these attacks will lead to terrible violence. We are Jewish people and we’ve seen this happen when we are not able to stop the flow of antisemitism. When we allow a certain kind of rhetoric on our campuses people become more capable of performing violent acts so we have to speak loudly against antisemitism and we are asking the chancellor to also do so.”
Among the other actions the group requested are: the imposition of specific consequences for those who harass, intimidate and/or discriminate against Jewish students or professors; the creation of a mechanism to safely report and keep a record of antisemitic incidents at all schools; designate a diversity officer to specifically to deal with students who are victims of antisemitism; an “unequivocal” commitment to never disallow academic exchange programs and study abroad programs with Israel; the development of a clear decentralized antisemitism policy and responses together with a comprehensive and detailed process for its condemnation and investigation.
By Debra Rubin
