Last night, President Trump signed an executive order targeting anti-Semitism and Israel boycotts on college campuses. Here is an explanation of what the executive order intends to do and the controversy surrounding it.

Featured photo courtesy of Drew Angerer/Getty Images

By Emily Burack

This story originally appeared on Alma.

Last night, The New York Times reported that President Trump is set to sign an executive order targeting “anti-Semitism and Israel boycotts on college campuses.” The article stated, “The order will effectively interpret Judaism as a race or nationality, not just a religion, to prompt a federal law penalizing colleges and universities deemed to be shirking their responsibility to foster an open climate for minority students.”

Here’s what that means, and why it’s so significant.

What does this executive order intend to do?

The proposed executive order is meant to make the Civil Rights Act of 1964 apply to Jewish college students. Why? Under Title VI of that act, the Department of Education can withhold public funding from a school or university that discriminates “on the ground of race, color, or national origin.” Not included: religion.

Therefore, by classifying Jews as part of a “nationality” with a “shared national origin,” they can become a protected class under this act.

Okay, so why do this?

The Trump administration will now be able to say that boycotting Israel on college campuses is harming Jews, and then they will likely try to withhold funding from schools that promote the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel.

Trump is using the definition of anti-Semitism cited in 2016 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, which defines certain types of anti-Israel activity as anti-Semitic, but also says not all Israel criticism should be classified as anti-Semitism.
What does the Executive Order actually say?

This morning, Jewish Insider obtained a draft of the order that Trump will sign. Nowhere in the order does it explicitly define Jews as a nationality, but calls for the enforcement of “Title VI against prohibited forms of discrimination rooted in anti-Semitism as vigorously as against all other forms of discrimination prohibited by Title VI.” So, the text implies: Jews can be perceived as a race or having a common national origin, in order to receive protection under Title VI.

Are Jews a nationality?

This is complex: The idea of “nationality” as we understand it in 2019 is a modern concept — it relates back to the rise of the “nation-state,” which we can trace back to the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. Essentially, definitions of modern nation-states are not easily agreed upon: Some define them as states where the people in the state shares the same culture, or where people are united by language or common descent. Long story short, this led to a rise of nationalities.

Jews, as we know, have a history that extends way back before the rise of “nation-states,” which made Jews a problem in the “Westphalian system.”

We can conceive of the Jewish people as a “nation,” but that doesn’t necessarily mean they share a nationality. A nationality is has been defined as the legal relationship between an individual and a state.

As Ben Faulding (@TheHipsterRebbe) points out on Twitter: The biblical idea of a nation is not equivalent to the modern idea of nationality.

How did people react?

Again, even though no one had seen the actual text of the order last night, the Times article was enough to cause many people to react to it on Twitter.

Here were some common themes:

1. Judaism is not a nationality is the main argument that is circulating on Twitter. The argument is essentially: Jews are an ethno-religion, and come from a wide variety of nationalities.

2. The order falls into promoting the idea of “dual loyalty,” an anti-Semitic trope that implies Jews will never be loyal to the country they are living in.

3. Some brought up the fact that Trump has white nationalist supporters.

4. Many drew comparisons to the Soviet Union, where Jewishness was a nationality and a religion. This also fed into the dual loyalty trope:

5. And comparisons to Nazi Germany, where German Jews were no longer defined as German.

6. Yet others pointed out that this is another way Jews are being used as pawns to stifle free speech, especially by pro-Palestinian activists.

Did anyone support it? Yes.

1. Some argued it will push forth a law to hold colleges accountable for anti-Semitism (implied as BDS), where bipartisan legislation has tried and failed.

2. Jews are a nationality, went another argument.

3. Others argued it’s just meant to help fight anti-Semitism on campuses, and the only way to do it is to affirm that Judaism isn’t just a religion.

4. President Obama set the precedent, others pointed out.

If Obama already applied Title VI to Jewish students, why do we need this executive order?

To make Trump’s base happy, for one.

But yes, anti-Semitism was already covered, per the Obama administration.

So why was the reaction so intense?

Historical precedent has undeniably made people wary about classifying Jews as a nationality, and un-linking them from the current country they live in. Trump has also invoked tropes and themes in speeches that many have found anti-Semitic, making the issue extra sensitive.

1 COMMENT

  1. So Trump wants to use an executive order to stretch the language of an existing law for the benefit of Israel and Jewish college students… and the left is accusing him of anti-Semitism? They might as well accuse his of being an anti-Semite for liking red ties.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.