Harvard adopts strict definition of antisemitism for disciplinary cases

Harvard University will adopt a definition of antisemitism when investigating disciplinary cases as part of a series of moves to protect Jewish students following the Gaza war protests, the university said in an agreement with the Tuesday.

The definition includes some criticism of Israel as an example of antisemitism, including calling Israel’s existence a “racist effort”.

The settlement includes two lawsuits filed by Jewish groups that accused the school of failing to do enough to prevent and punish anti-Semitism on campus. Last year, a federal judge in Boston allowed the cases to go forward.

Harvard’s reaction was unusual. Many universities have been reluctant to adopt a definition of antisemitism, even as they have been under increasing pressure to do so in response to campus conflicts related to the conflict in Gaza.

The definition used by Harvard has been criticized as blurring the line between antisemitism and arguments against Israel and Zionism.

Kenneth Marcus, Louis D. Brandeis president The Center for Human Rights Under the Law, a Jewish advocacy group, said it hoped other universities would adopt the definition.

“Zionist is often a code word for Jews,” he said, adding, “Harvard makes it clear that anti-Zionist norms are just as unacceptable as anti-Jewish norms.”

But Kenneth Stern, who helped develop the definition while at the American Jewish Committee, has become a critic of the definition’s use in academic settings, saying it could stifle open debate about the Middle East. it’s an issue that has divided campuses since the October 7, 2023, attack by Hamas on Israel.

“I would rather the university make it clear that no one is going to be persecuted for any reason and avoid these kinds of speech issues,” said Mr. Stern, director of the Bard Center on Hate Speech.

Previously, Harvard’s policy prevented discrimination based on religion, national origin and ancestry, among other categories, which covered antisemitism. What is new is that the university will now consider the definition of antisemitism proposed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance when investigating complaints.

The definition from the group is not controversial. It defines antisemitism as “certain views about Jews that can be expressed as hatred” of them. But it also cites examples of holding Israel to a “double standard” or describing the creation of Israel as an “apartheid effort.”

Harvard, Mr. Stern said, is “opening up a can,” giving students tools to file complaints about professors, for example. “If you’re a teacher, you know people are looking for something,” he said.

Harvard has been very popular since the outbreak of the war in Gaza. On the eve of the Hamas attack, a group of more than 30 students published an open letter that held Israel “fully responsible”. The university’s former president, Claudine Gay, eventually resigned, in part because of her testimony during a Congressional hearing in which she was accused of not doing enough to combat antisemitism.

Students Against Antisemitism, a group at Harvard, filed a lawsuit in January alleging that Harvard failed to address “violent and widespread antisemitism on campus.” In May, the Brandeis Center also sued, saying the university was not addressing antisemitism.

The agreement reached on Tuesday settles both cases. A former student in the previous case declined to enter into the settlement, which also includes an unspecified amount, and will continue to pursue his claim against Harvard, according to the university.

Former student Shabbos Kestenbaum, who graduated in June, said “the battle is just beginning.” He said he was working closely with the White House and “Harvard can expect to be sanctioned next week.”

Harvard’s move comes a day after the inauguration of President Trump, who said the university “must end anti-Semitic propaganda” or lose federal funding.

Under a 2019 executive order from Mr. Trump, the Department of Education and other federal agencies must “consider” the IHRA’s definition of human rights complaints that allege antisemitism. The executive order has caused confusion among university administrators about what is expected of them, and dozens of schools are currently under investigation.

Critics of the definition’s use in academia say there are already policies in place to prevent harassment of Jewish students, and that the IHRA’s definition is more geared toward suppressing speech related to Israel.

Jeffrey S. Flier, the former dean of Harvard Medical School, said on social media that the IHRA’s definition does not “prohibit or penalize speech.”

“Once adopted by Harvard,” he wrote, “the definition must be used in a manner consistent with other applicable legal principles, and the principles of academic freedom and free speech.”

Under the settlement agreement, Harvard must also establish partnerships with Israeli universities, hire a person to investigate all complaints of antisemitism, and allow the Brandeis Center to “organize various activities in campus,” Harvard said in a statement. The Kennedy School, Harvard’s school of public policy, must allow three alumni to host events “on major issues of Israeli Jewish democracy.”

The university must also post the following statement on its website: “For many Jews, Zionism is part of their Jewish identity. Conduct that violates the Nondiscrimination Policy if it is directed at Jews or the Israeli people can also violate the policy if it is directed at Zionists.

A Harvard spokesperson said in a statement that the university “will continue to implement rigorous processes to maintain a welcoming, open and safe campus environment where every student feels a sense of belonging.” “