Antisemitism

Trump's Order Aimed at Fighting Anti-Semitism Is Constitutionally Problematic, but It's Not Anti-Semitic

Erroneous reporting set off a bizarre backlash that obscured the real problem.

|

When it comes to refuting dubious allegations of anti-Semitism, Donald Trump cannot win, a point dramatically illustrated by the reaction to the executive order he signed yesterday. The order, which is aimed at fighting "anti-Semitic harassment in schools and on university and college campuses," raises serious First Amendment concerns, which I'll get to in a minute. But much of the initial backlash against the order focused on its purported anti-Semitism. That's right: An order targeting anti-Jewish prejudice somehow became yet another example of Trump's anti-Jewish prejudice. On Twitter, the president's reflexive critics described his order as reminiscent of Nazi racial ideology, "fascist," and "as antisemetic [sic] as it gets."

Those comments were based on a New York Times story that erroneously claimed the order "will declare that Judaism may be considered a national origin." That phrase has since been stricken from the article, without any indication of a correction. But the story still says "the order will effectively interpret Judaism as a race or nationality, not just a religion," which is not accurate either.

Here is what the order actually says:

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), 42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq., prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving Federal financial assistance. While Title VI does not cover discrimination based on religion, individuals who face discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin do not lose protection under Title VI for also being a member of a group that shares common religious practices. Discrimination against Jews may give rise to a Title VI violation when the discrimination is based on an individual's race, color, or national origin.

As George Mason University law professor David Bernstein noted yesterday in a Volokh Conspiracy post, that understanding of Title VI is consistent with the policies of the last two administrations. The Justice Department during the George W. Bush and Obama administrations took the position that Title VI "provides protection to Jews, Arab Muslims, Sikhs, and/or members of other religious groups" when "discrimination is based on the group's actual or perceived shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics, rather than its members' religious practice."

The Trump administration's take on Title VI is not new, and it does not reflect a belief that Jewishness resides in one's blood or DNA. "The executive order does not mean that the Trump administration is declaring that Jews are, objectively speaking, a nation or a race," Bernstein writes. "Rather, it's that Jews are protected as a nationality or race if discrimination against them is motivated by the perception that they are a nationality or race. Consider Hispanics. Hispanics are not a 'race,' and indeed can be from any racial group. But no one would raise an eyebrow to discover that Hispanics are protected from discrimination based on race or national origin if subject to discrimination by someone who hates Hispanics as a group."

Times editorial avoids the mischaracterization of Trump's order presented in the paper's news coverage, saying the administration is trying to "combat anti-Semitism on college campuses by using Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to withhold federal money from schools that fail to counter discrimination against Jews." The Times generously concedes that "Mr. Trump's action might seem like a gesture of real concern" but complains that "it does little to target the larger source of violent anti-Semitism." In other words, Trump is targeting left-wing anti-Semites when he should be targeting right-wing anti-Semites.

The Times compounds its churlishness by averring that "the president himself has trafficked in anti-Semitic stereotypes, frequently endorsing crude, negative caricatures about Jews." To back up that claim, the editorial cites a speech that Trump delivered on Saturday at the Israeli American National Council Summit in Hollywood, Florida. After bragging about his efforts to move the U.S. embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem at a reasonable cost, Trump said this:

So we [were] going to spend 2 billion, and one of the [proposed expenditures] was going to buy a lousy location. A lot of you are in the real estate business, because I know you very well. You're brutal killers. (Laughter.) Not nice people at all. But you have to vote for me; you have no choice. You're not going to vote for Pocahontas [i.e., Democratic presidential contender Elizabeth Warren], I can tell you that. (Laughter and applause.) You're not going to vote for the wealth tax. "Yeah, let's take 100 percent of your wealth away." No, no. Even if you don't like me; some of you don't. Some of you I don't like at all, actually. (Laughter.) And you're going to be my biggest supporters because you'll be out of business in about 15 minutes, if they get it. So I don't have to spend a lot of time on that.

In case you doubt that the audience actually greeted Trump's remarks with laughter and applause, you can watch the video here. Although the Jews who listened to Trump's speech evidently were not offended by what he said, the Times is offended on their behalf. But that reaction hinges on an uncharitable interpretation of Trump's comments, colored by the presumption that he "traffick[s] in anti-Semitic stereotypes, frequently endorsing crude, negative caricatures about Jews." Trump may or may not be right that the rich developers who heard his speech will vote their pocketbooks next November (regardless of how they feel about him), but that suggestion is hardly proof of anti-Jewish bias.

The real problem with Trump's executive order is not that it incorporates a Nazi-esque definition of Jewishness, or that the president's sincerity is questionable in light of things he has said that the New York Times editorial board considers anti-Semitic. The real problem (one the Times also notes) is the order's potential impact on freedom of speech.

The order says federal agencies enforcing Title VI should "consider…the non-legally binding working definition of anti-Semitism" adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA). That definition, which is also used by the State Department, cites "contemporary examples of anti-Semitism" that include "drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis," "blaming Israel for all inter-religious or political tensions," "applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation," "focusing on Israel only for peace or human rights investigations," and "denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination" or "denying Israel the right to exist."

These positions strike many Jews (including me) as grossly unfair, but they are not necessarily motivated by anti-Semitism, let alone synonymous with it. They raise important questions about the justice of Israeli policies, the sources of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, collective vs. individual rights, and the legitimacy of nation-states. A college campus is precisely the sort of place where issues like these should be hashed out. But if allowing students, faculty members, and outside speakers to express vehemently anti-Israel views can be construed as a Title VI violation, and therefore a threat to federal funding, universities may be inclined to err on the side of censorship. That possibility is not far-fetched, since discrimination can include a "hostile environment" that interferes with a student's education, and a hostile environment can be created by things other people say.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), which is committed to defending freedom of speech for people across the political spectrum, notes that the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism "may apply to core political speech protected by the First Amendment." FIRE rightly worries that the executive order's "ambiguous directive and fundamental reliance on the IHRA definition and its examples will cause institutions to investigate and censor protected speech on their campuses."

There are legitimate reasons to be concerned about Trump's executive order, but they have nothing to do with his purported anti-Semitism or any other special characteristic of this particular president, his party, or his administration. To the contrary, the order  reflects a bipartisan tendency to battle bigotry by suppressing controversial speech.

Addendum: David Bernstein thinks FIRE's concerns about the executive order are misplaced. "If one wants to make the case that this sets a bad precedent because it may eventually lead, by legal and policy evolution, to the IHRA definition being used to claim hostile environment liability for pure speech, that's a reasonable critique," he writes in an email. "But that's really more of a problem with hostile environment law than with the [executive order]."

Bernstein notes that the order says the "contemporary examples" of anti-Semitism cited in the IHRA definition should be used "to the extent that" they are "useful as evidence of discriminatory intent." In his view, that means the examples come into play only when there is "an underlying act that seems like it might have been discriminatory, but the perpetrator denies intent."

Bernstein also notes that the order says federal agencies, in applying the IHRA definition, "shall not diminish or infringe upon any right protected under Federal law or under the First Amendment." He thinks that language "would prohibit" the Education Department's Office for Civil Rights "from interpreting the [order] to require universities to punish students for engaging in purely political speech not directly aimed at harassing particular students."

In response, Robert Shibley, FIRE's executive director, says "it's unrealistic to think that this definition and list of examples won't be used by students, faculty, administrators, and finally Department of Education bureaucrats to determine what speech counts as anti-Semitic harassment." In practice, he writes in an email, "the definition and list will not just be 'considered' for purposes of determining 'discriminatory intent.' This is not a criminal proceeding where protected speech will only be considered as an evidentiary factor by a jury—it's going to be the same college administrators making the same kinds of decisions they make now in Title IX discrimination cases (that is, bad decisions) under the same kind of pressure over losing federal funding."

Shibley also worries that the precedent set by this executive order will encourage other groups to "demand that certain expression be specified by the government as prima facie examples of anti-X bigotry, with the express purpose of targeting the speech of their political opponents." He adds that the order's assurance about respecting the First Amendment is not enough to save it, because "rhetorically stapling a copy of the First Amendment to a vague instruction mandating 'consideration' of an overbroad definition doesn't ameliorate the inevitable constitutional harm."

NEXT: Bipartisan House Agriculture Bill Is a Win for Both Farmers and Immigrants

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Mr. Sullum, with all respect, I believe you’re missing an important piece of the puzzle. The intent of the order appears to have been intended, specifically, to counter the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement on college campuses.

    Trump wants to use Title IX to prevent colleges and universities from boycotting or divesting from Israel. He’s effectively erasing the distinction between “Israeli” and “Jewish”.

    If it isn’t possible to boycott blacks, Asians, women, Hindus, Indians, or Muslims, without discriminating against them by way of Title IX, then why is it okay to boycott Israel?

    You won’t attend conferences in Israel, you won’t invest in Israeli companies, you won’t do this, and you won’t do that with those people–because “those people” are Israelis–but you’re not discriminating against Jews?!

    If Donald Trump can make it so that Jews are a race for Title IX purposes, then colleges and universities can’t divest from Israel without violating Title IX. Rightly or wrongly, that appears to be what Trump was trying to accomplish by making Judaism a race.

    1. Why blame Trump (or credit, if that’s what you are doing) when this same thing was done by the last two Presidents?

      TDS works both ways.

      1. Are we talking about what Trump did or what someone else did?

        1. He’s talking about TRUTH … as you AGAIN evade the issue when called out.

          HINT: Like Trump, you brag, senselessly, about what has been US policy for over a decades … or simply lie.

          1. Fuck off and die, Hihn.

    2. And …. Trump’s EO does NOT declare that Judaism is a race. Or a nation. You skimmed TFA so fast you probably didn’t even get past the headline.

      1. I have no idea what distinction you’re trying to make here, but Trump’s attempt was to head off the BDS movement on college campuses.

    3. I’m glad that the actual text of the EO (or its relevant part) has been published here, and that it does not contain the reported language declaring that Jewishness “would be regarded as a nationality”. (For anyone who doesn’t get why such language would be scary, it was exactly such a declaration that preceded, and formed the “legal” underpinning for, the Holocaust.)

      So, in response to the incorrect reports about this EO, I and other people were “comparing” the Trump administration’s [supposed] language to that of the Nazis. We made such a comparison, we saw the responses, and realized that the comparison was unfounded. In Israel, such comparisons may extend to actual actions, and not just words. Putting such comparisons out there cannot in itself be regarded as “anti-Semitism”, regardless of what the IHRA claims.

      1. “…(For anyone who doesn’t get why such language would be scary, it was exactly such a declaration that preceded, and formed the “legal” underpinning for, the Holocaust.)…”

        And they were both written on PAPER. too!
        What a pathetic attempt at guilt by innuendo.

      2. Regardless of the actual text of the document, the point was to protect Israel and Israeli groups from BDS activities and pressure on college and university campuses by using the same protections that social justice warriors use to protect other groups from institutional discrimination.

        I understand that some people might make the claim that the BDS movement isn’t targeting these people because they’re Jews. They’re targeting them because they’re somehow related to the government of Israel. On the other hand, it just so happens that the people they want to discriminate against are almost 100% Jews!

        If that’s the argument the pro-BDS people are making, it makes them sound a lot like those who complain about affirmative action. That latter group will often argue that affirmative action is necessary because if they just went by grades and ACT/SAT test scores, it would discriminate against certain races disproportionately. The whole reason opposing affirmative action is racist (in the eyes of SJWs) is that no matter how you try to justify your lack of bias, your preferred policy disproportionately discriminates against minorities.

        “Equality of outcome”, isn’t that what they call it? Why are women paid less for the same jobs? This is there standard argument about equality. Why does all that standard logic go out the window when we’re talking about Jews?

        The answer is because they don’t really give a shit about the rationalizations for anything they want to do anywhere near as much as they want the outcomes. By hook or crook, they want more minorities in colleges, they want women to make the same pay as men, and they want to divest, boycott, and sanction Israel. Valid justifications are for saps.

        1. While Israel runs an open-air prison at Gaza, essentially an apartheid state.

          It’s not about Jews, it’s about the Israeli government and Zionism.

          1. That is actually pretty funny, since Hamas and Islamic Jihad seem to fire off rockets at Israel proper = While Israel runs an open-air prison at Gaza, essentially an apartheid state.

            Apartheid state…dude, learn what apartheid actually is.

            1. It is you dumb chump;
              noun: apartheid
              a policy or system of segregation or discrimination on grounds of race.

              Palestinians do not have the basic rights of citizens (e.g., voting) nor are they permitted free movement around the or into and out of the country.

              I am not defending Hamas; they are terrorists, but coming against an entire population of people like this (A) galvanizes Hamas and their recruiting, and (B) is morally bereft.

              Of course, the Zionists have to do this, because a full democracy would have them out on their asses. But let’s cut the crap. It IS an apartheid state. YOU would not live under the conditions under which they are FORCED to live.

              1. And before you try to get off on a semantic point, the second definition of aparthied is “segregation on grounds other than race.”

                I realize being Palestinian is not, per se, a race, but the Zionists (and definitely a racist pig like Bibi) seem to think so.

                1. MVP is another anti Semite, even worse than Rob Misek.

              2. Palestinians as you mean them are not citizens of Israel. Nor do they wish to be.

                Israeli Arabs are citizens and have equal rights in Israel.

                Israel did not annex Gaza. The West Bank is still governed by what was left of the accords by the PA after Arafat walked out of Camp David.

                Now tell me what would happen if Hamas were in Tijuana shooting missiles and fire bombs into San Diego.

              3. MVP
                December.13.2019 at 9:49 am
                “It is you dumb chump;
                noun: apartheid”

                It is you , you stupid pile of shit;
                noun: Ignoramus.

            2. Learn the truth about those rockets. Only Israel has knowingly sent rockets into a UN sanctuary site, killing people who thought they were safe. Or an elementary school filled with children.,

              Also learn what self-defense means.
              Are you really unaware that a military blockade is an act of war?
              So is invading another county, seizing their land and building illegal settlements … all by armed force. It’ called “aggression.” You can Google the definition, if you don’t know that either.

              1. Fuck off and die, Hihn.

              2. Hihn wants another Jewish holocaust. So his nazi masters will be proud of him.

          2. The question is why similar justifications don’t merit legitimate consideration for similar exceptions in other areas, and the reason you didn’t answer it is because you either can’t or don’t give a shit about the consistent application of principle.

            Are we to assume that you give similar consideration to arguments against affirmative action now?

      3. check an English Dictionary …. you need education.

    4. You can’t boycott Israel because Jews live there? There are Jews living in Iran and we have had economic sanctions against them for decades. I guess it’s not so much that Jews are the chosen people. Israel’s the chosen country.

      1. Yeah. and The only country in the M.E. that shares American values so it’s really surprising we chose them.

        1. “that shares American values so it’s really surprising we chose them”

          You wouldn’t say that about Iran, would you? American values include freedom of religion. The constitution doesn’t give precedence to Jews, Christians, or any other faith.

      2. Please

        The remaining Persian Jews, Zoroastrians, Christians, and Baha’i are kept like pets in a zoo at best. Most of them conceal identity.

        Boycott Israel all you want.

        Good luck with that. What are you typing on?

        1. @ mtrue

    5. WRONGLY!!!!

      1. There’s gotta be like an uncanny valley for certain ideas. You know how the uncanny valley shows that we’re attracted to things that are like us right up until the point that they become too much like us–and then the more the become like us, the more disgusted we are by it?

        Lots of libertarians will defend hate speech as free speech. Hate speech isn’t something we approve of, but it’s like a necessary evil. If you’re gonna have freedom of speech, you’re gonna have people saying terrible things. There are plenty of libertarians who will use the same argument for the right to own an AR-15–despite whatever horrible thing some lunatic does in a mass shooting. Once you get to freedom of association, for some reason, it’s a bridge too far.

        No one seems to want to go so far as to say that if you’re going to have freedom of association, you’re gonna have people who choose not to associate with certain people for awful, disgusting, and stupid reasons–and just leave it at that. It’s more or less the same argument as the others, but that’s the last bell any of us seem to want to ring. Maybe we should let the left ring it for us.

        Maybe we should let the left explain to us why it’s okay for public institutions to actively discriminate against Jews. We’re all ears.

        1. Lots of Jews in Israel. But Jewish != Israeli.

          1. If you spend any time at all in Israel, or even reading the words of BDS founders and activists, it is hard to avoid the fact that it the whole movement is about hatred of Jews.
            They want the Jews wiped out completely, even the progressive ones. Even secular Jews.
            All the talk about BDS being about opposition to specific Israeli policies is obfuscation.

    6. Academia in USA has extended ‘race’ beyond its original definition of a group of people with shared physical characteristics to include:
      1) groups of people related by common descent or heredity.
      2) group of tribes or peoples forming an ethnic lineage
      3) any people united by common history, language, cultural traits, etc.

      So it wasn’t just a Hitlarian construct that Race has become a catchall. If laws against HATE Speech are Constitutional, then the President can legally instruct Federal Agencies to take appropriate action to prevent discrimination against a religious group.

    7. The impact, particularly on the the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions [B.D.S.] movement against Israel, which the New York Times reports has “roiled some campuses, leaving some Jewish students feeling unwelcome or attacked,” could be as significant as the Obama administration’s threat to cut off funding under Title IX regarding complaints of campus sexual assaults.

      So it is likely that many Jewish students, and even students who are not Jewish but believe that universities should not be encouraging or even participating in activities which apply sanctions and/or boycotts against a country and its citizens, to begin filing complaints under Title VI.

      Such complaints, which would be similar to those filed by students under Title IX, could be filed wherever there is reason to believe that their college or university may be in violation of this new order which adds discrimination against Jews to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; a statute which prohibits discrimination “on the ground of race, color, or national origin.”

      While no college or university has even actually lost its funding for alleged violation of Title IX, complaints filed by students and/or faculty under that statute have led to more than 200 investigations, dramatic changes on hundreds of campuses, and added expenditures of hundreds of millions of dollars.

      The threat of federal investigations and even possible loss of funding, will likewise PROBABLY persuade many institutions of higher education to distance themselves – and certainly end any participation in – activities which impose sanctions or otherwise seek to boycott or punish Israel.

      PUBLIC INTEREST LAW PROFESSOR JOHN BANZHAF

      1. Well professor, there is a very easy solution here for the colleges: Don’t take Federal money, if you don’t want the strings attached.

      2. Thank you for this clarification.

    8. Never doubt Ken’s ability to get everything exactly backwards.

      The intent of the order appears to have been intended, specifically, to counter the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement on college campuses.

      BY THE MOST PUBLICLY ANT-SEMITIC LIAR IN AMERICA?

      The many who LIED … so SHAMELESSLY … to defend LITERALLY violent assaults …. BY NEO-NAZI ASSHOLES … in Charlottesville … al

      1. Cont’d

        Trump, the man who LIED … so SHAMELESSLY … ro defend LITERALLY VIOLENT assaults … BY NEO-NAZI ASSHOLES …. in Charlottesville … wearing NAZI HELMETS … carrying NAZI FLAGS … and POLICE-STYLE SHIELDS … (the fuckers CAME for violence … oh year … JOINED WITH WHITE NATIONALISTS (racists)

        FULL AND UNDENIABLE PROOF INCLUDED here … in 3 parts … because Reason’s active discouragemt of posting links to actua

        Regular readers will have no doubt where Ken stands, relative to hate groups on the Authoritarian Right

        P,

        1. cont’d (Reason software fa
          ULL AND UNDENIABLE PROOF INCLUDED here … in 3 parts … because Reason’s active discouragemt of posting links to actu
          he many who LIED … so SHAMELESSLY … to defend LITERALLY violent assaults …. BY NEO-NAZI ASSHOLES … in Charlottesville … al

          1. Cont’d (Reason software fail)

            FULL AND UNDENIABLE PROOF INCLUDED here … in 3 parts … because Reason’s active discouragement of posting links to actual proof

            Regular readers will have no doubt where Ken stands … has always stood … on the EXTREME Authoritarian Right … where the nazis and racists reside.
            (I did NOT say KEN is himself a nazi or racist, nor that Trump is either. Their authoritarian nature merely places them in the same da

            1. PART ONE: ACTUAL VIDEO …
              Trump states a PROVEN LIE at a press conference …. SHAMELESSLY and “BULLYINGLY”

              “What about the alt left that came charging at, as you say, at the alt right? Do they have any assemblage of guilt? What about the fact that they came charging with clubs in their hands swinging clubs? Do they have any problem? I think they do.”

              Trump lied … to defend Nazi and racist assaults. SHOUTS DOWN news media – as he always does when guilty. Calls them LIARS. “I watched it all on television … SO DID YOU.”

              BLATANT BULLSHIT. Nobody watched it. NO news cameras at the point of assault. News reports later broadcast what they called “personal videos” (mostly cell phone?). None recorded the actual assault.

              That’s WHY the President’s “worst” act was NOT saying “… good people on both sides.” IT’S THE LIE ON WHO LAUNCHED THE ASSAULTS AND MURDERS … FOR LACK OF PROOF …. at the tine … (provided here)

              NEXT: UNDENIABLE PROOF…. private videos surfaced only later … Trump is a lying sack of shit …. (for any who may NEED proof.)

              1. Part Three: KAPOW : 4 men found guilty in violent Charlottesville rally described as ‘serial rioters’ …. by Trump’s own DOJ!!! (snort)

                Three members of a white supremacist group were sentenced to prison Friday for kicking, choking and punching multiple people during the 2017 “United the Right” rally in Charlottesville and other rallies in California. The three were members of the California-based militant white supremacist organization “Rise Above Movement.”

                A fourth defendant, Cole Evan White, will be sentenced at a later date, the attorney’s office said.

                “These defendants, motivated by hateful ideology, incited and committed acts of violence in Charlottesville, as well at other purported political rallies in California,” U.S. Attorney Thomas T. Cullen said.

                “They were not interested in peaceful protest or lawful First Amendment expression; instead, they intended to provoke and engage in street battles with those that they perceived as their enemies.”

                This has been converted to a Press Release, sent to all major media outlets, with all evidence … and to the House impeachment committees … when the timing seems optimal.

                Watch this thread. I shall be punished for this … AGAIN … Trump’s not the only psycho on the alt-right. They cannot challenge PROOF … so lots of screeching, yelling and infantile assaults … just like Trump’s lyin’-sack-of-shit Presser
                The prosecution rests

            2. PART TWO : MOAR VIDEO PROOF: The initial assault. … (Private video found on an alternate news twitter feed)

              “Alt-Left” standing peacefully, no visible clubs or bats.
              Alt-Right Fascists/Racists charge en masse, swinging clubs.
              Fascists carrying police-style riot shields. The assholes CAME for violence.

              TRUMP LIE: Alt-left led the assault
              PROOF: Alt-RIGHT did that

              TRUMP LIE: Alt-left attacked swinging clubs.
              PROOF: Alt-RIGHT -right DID … and had the ONLY clubs.
              Alt-LEFT standing peacefully, arms locked (like the 60s), not possible to carry ANYTHING

              TRUMP LIE: Alt-left wearing black helmets
              PROOF: Alt-RIGHT wearing black (NAZI) helmets, carrying NAZI flage,

              SHAME ON EVERYONE who LIES about the truth, to defend a morally debased President, over country and honor.

              NEXT: THE SMOKING GUN THAT TRUMP MUST BE REMOVED … FOR ABUSE OF POWER (lies, shouting down dissent) … AND DISGRACING THE PRESIDENCY.

              1. Fuck off and die, Hihn.

              2. Hihn, you’re the nazi. You want to exterminate all the Jews.

                You’re the bad guy. Not a good guy, like Trump.

      2. “THE MOST PUBLICLY ANT-SEMITIC LIAR IN AMERICA?”

        Trump is so antisemitic, he recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

        Trump is so antisemitic, he recognized Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights.

        Trump is so antisemitic, the Trump administration announced that they no longer consider Israeli settlements in the West Bank to be illegal.

        I don’t believe the state of Israel has ever enjoyed stronger support from an American president than they have enjoyed from President Trump.

        1. Ken receals that NEO-NAZIS ARE NOT ANTI-SEMITIC! WHO KNEW?
          He has now DEFENDED Trump’s SHAMEFUL BULLSHIT … in defense of mass assaults and murder … by neo-nazis and white supremacists … Ken having KNOWINGLY dismissed ABSOLUTE PROOF.

          KEN BURIES HIS NON-RESPONSE … FAR AWAY FROM THE UNDENIABLE PROOF HE … UHHH … DENIES …. WHICH STARTS HERE
          https://reason.com/2019/12/12/trumps-order-aimed-at-fighting-anti-semitism-is-constitutionally-problematic-but-its-not-anti-semitic/#comment-8049022

          A series of comments … with THREE links to ABSOLUTE proof.
          No surprise from Ken.

          I don’t believe the state of Israel has ever enjoyed stronger support from an American president than they have enjoyed from President Trump.

          ANTI-SEMITISM INCLUDES AMERICAN JEWS, (LOL)

          WHY SO COWARDLY AN EVASION? You quote my words, but ignore ABSOLUTE PROOF … that Trump LIED .. to defend neo-NAZIS and white Nationalists.

          I don’t believe the state of Israel has ever enjoyed stronger support from an American president than they have enjoyed from President Trump.

          Has NOTHING to do with
          a) the issue
          b) what you quoted,

          …. Just …. like … Trump

          1. Fuck off and die, Hihn.

        2. “I don’t believe the state of Israel has ever enjoyed stronger support from an American president than they have enjoyed from President Trump.”

          I don’t think any previous American president has caved to so many Israeli demands without anything to show as gains from the negotiations.

          1. Since there is no cite for your bullshit claims, we can assume there is no commenter here who posts as much bullshit as you.

    9. Oh Sullum is well aware of the BDS issue – that’s what has the left so up in arms over this. Trump is using one of their own tools – identity politics – against them, and they are pissed.

      More broadly, the Constitutional problem with this action is the Constitutional problem with the entire Civil Rights Act.

      1. Are you also a supporter of neo-nazis?
        How large is your Klavern?

        1. Whatever meds the neurologist is prescribing aren’t working. You should write that down so you remember it next time you are in the geropsych unit.

      2. If only reason writers could be as concise and reasonable as this. ^libertarian

  2. Not giving someone federal funds is not a violation of the first amendment.
    Fuck off

    1. Who said it was? (smirk)

      1. Smirk; we all hope you fuck off and die, Hihn.

  3. //There are legitimate reasons to be concerned about Trump’s executive order, but they have nothing to do with his purported anti-Semitism or any other special characteristic of this particular president, his party, or his administration.//

    That’s an awfully long winded way of saying that Trump’s conduct is absolutely fucking fine, but at least, for a change, Sullum comes to the correct conclusion.

  4. We screwed up, but orange man bad.

    1. Hey, at least there was no documentary or testimonial evidence of anti-Trump bias at the New York Times, it was just an honest mistake that could happen to anybody. That’s why we just changed the text of the article without making any note of it.

      1. YOU WANT ABSOLUTE, DOCUMENTED PROOF … THAT TRUMP IS A LYING SACK OF SHOT ,.. WHO HAS DISGRACED HIS OFFICE … AND MUST BE REMOVED … ,
        https://reason.com/2019/12/12/trumps-order-aimed-at-fighting-anti-semitism-is-constitutionally-problematic-but-its-not-anti-semitic/#comment-8049032

        Or will YOU join him in DEFENDING the most vile, violent, hatred-driven assholes in America ,.. Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists?

        Who do YOU stand with?

        1. Fuck off and hope your mommy never learned what a pathetic piece of shit you are Hihn.
          Oh, and die someplace we can’t smell you.

  5. I only read the headline, but it’s so funny that anyone is stating that this is “not anti-Semitic” when it’s an overtly pro-Semitic action and nothing else.

    1. It’s not anti-Semitic to want to counter the BDS movement. However, it’s anti-free speech. A heavy-handed attempt to squash BDS also supports the reasoning of the anti-Semites by implying Jewish Americans are hurt by what hurts Israel. That’s not the case at all. Jewish Americans are Americans first and foremost. The Trump-voting AIPAC donors whose first priority is Israel are a minority. Nearly 70% of Jewish American voters voted against Trump. I doubt toadying to Netanyahu, AIPAC and evangelical Christians (the most fervent supports of Israel due to their end-of-times narrative) will change that.

      1. Most Jewish Americans are Israelis first, as are most Jewish pols , many who have dual citizenship!….AIPAC controls the US Congress as they hand out boatloads of money to pols on BOTH SIDES & have for decades……Every prez for the last 50 years from BOTH PARTIES fills their cabinets with Zionist scum….The same Zionist scum that has ruined American culture, economy & society…The same Zionist scum that has gotten America to fight their wars for them & fill their coffers with Billions of dollars!..THE TIME HAS COME TO STOP SENDING THEM THIS MONEY!

        The worst Zionists are the Christian Zionists…American Christians fawn over Israel, but what Israel has done to Palestinian Christians is heartbreaking:

        https://chuckbaldwinlive.com/Articles/tabid/109/ID/3957/Christian-Zionists-Returning-Bethlehem-To-The-Days-Of-Herod.aspx

        1. idiotic nonsense …. you don’t know what you’re talking about. Palestinian Christians are treated better by Israelis than by Palestinian Muslims.

          1. There is no point in debating an antisemite hazard.

            His first line betrays it.

            They crawl out from under the rock from time to time here. There must be a Jew related article pops up on the links they go to.

            1. Echo….Yeah, as soon as I saw the headline, I knew we’d start seeing the knuckleheads. I swear, it is like moths to a flame. Gut Shabbes.

            2. The Truth is always hard to swallow!!!

            3. The Truth is always hard to take!!!

        2. Teddy Pump
          December.12.2019 at 6:41 pm
          “Most Jewish Americans are Israelis first,…”

          Scumbag anti-semite here to provide our weekly dose of lies in one single post.

        3. Yep, a lizard crawling out from under a rock. 70% of Jewish American voters voted against Trump. This Israel-toadying does not convince them. Most Jewish Americans don’t donate to AIPAC. They don’t lobby for a one-state solution. You are confusing Jared Kushner and some powerful bigwigs in AIPAC with most Jewish Americans.

          The claim that Jewish pols have Israeli citizenship was rated a “Pants-on-Fire” lie:
          https://www.politifact.com/facebook-fact-checks/statements/2019/feb/25/blog-posting/no-members-congress-dont-have-dual-citizenship-isr/

          It is true that Zionism is popular with evangelical Christians. They support the end-of-times narrative where all the Jews are in Israel and they all have to convert to Christianity or go to hell. Friends of Netanyahu, maybe. Not real friends of Jews.

    2. “it’s an overtly pro-Semitic action”

      Not really. In order to be pro-Semitic it would have to actively recognize people or persons as Semitic, then extend some benefit to them.

      As the article correctly notes, this merely protects protects people (Semitic or not) from discrimination by others for any perceived Semitic character.

      Put more plainly, this EO does not care what you actually are, it is only concerned when certain acts get visited upon you.

  6. This is why criticizing the Trump administration has special difficulties.

    “I have concerns about this executive order because…”

    “Yeah, nazi nazi nazi, am I right? Trump is so nazi-like.”

    “No, I wasn’t saying that at at all, I was worried about it might affect certain criticisms of Israel…”

    “That’s right! Justice for Palestine! No apartheid! Boycott Israel! Trump is such a fanatical Likudnik…”

    “*sigh*”

    1. “You mean you’re *not* saying Trump is a nazi and a Likudnik?”

      “No, I’m expressing concern about…”

      “Fuck off, Trump-bot, go back to Breitfart and gobble your Leader’s member.”

    2. Trump is NOT a nazi … he merely LIED — shamelessly — and arrogantly — to defend their mass assaults and murder, in Charlottesville.

      https://reason.com/2019/12/12/trumps-order-aimed-at-fighting-anti-semitism-is-constitutionally-problematic-but-its-not-anti-semitic/#comment-8049032

      Who do YOU stand with?

      1. Please fuck off and die. You could make the world a better place before Christmas this year, you pathetic piece of shit

  7. Instead of opening the door to hostile environment claims about anti-Israel speech, the guidelines should have been more narrowly targeted. Eg, “academic boycotts against Israeli students or faculty because Israel is considered a Jewish state, are illegal, and we’ll do a case-by-case study to see if anti-Israeli actions are motivated by Israelis (generally) being Jews.”

    1. “But as with our own mistakenly-named ‘Muslim ban,’ we won’t presume that measures taking against a particular country are based on the race of that country’s inhabitants. There can be reasons other than racial bigotry for not liking a country.”

      1. Note – I just drafted that proposed policy off the top of my head, I’m not saying it’s the current interpretation.

  8. Erroneous reporting set off a bizarre backlash that obscured the real problem.

    You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

    1. HOW CRAZY A BIGOT IS TLL2000?
      “NIGGERS” are totally invisible to his SJW lies.

      And this is INSANE:

      discrimination ended after the passing of the 1866 Civil Rights Act. The rest is just SJWS trying to entitle themselves ABOVE everyone else.

      And how STUPID is he? TOTALLY!
      ***DOES NOT KNOW President Eisenhower had to send ARMED TROOPS to Little Rock Arkansas … to defend NINE BLACK KIDS from …. discrimination YOU say ended over 90 years earlier!!

      *** BRAINWASHED ENOUGH to be ALSO NOT KNOW of school segregation, Jim Crow laws, and so much more.
      ,
      **Brainwashed enough to “NOT KNOW that Rosa Parks was 1955 … 89 years AFTER your bullshit end of discrimination,

      ** Brainwashed enough to also BE IGNORANT of Litte Rock, two years later.
      For any other history-ignorant young racists … Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus activated his state militia …. armed force to keep nine black kids from registering at Little Rock’s Central High School.

      Eisenhower needed ARMED TROOPS to put down the discrimination YOU SAY HAD ENDED NEARLY A CENTURY EARLIER! ….. OMFG … have you entered high school yet?

      1. Sorry, Ray. Reason SHOULD have placed that reply under TJJ2000’s racist atrocity.

        1. Fuck off, and get a rusty shovel up your ass, Hihn.

  9. I propose the jack supporting these SJWS entitlement high-chairs (Civil Rights act of 1964) be thrown out. ALL that jack is doing is enabling the “entitled” to MAKE problems where NO PROBLEM really exists… It’s all about screaming themselves into kings of entitlement.

    Discrimination ended after the passing of the 1866 Civil Rights Act. The rest is just SJWS trying to entitle themselves ABOVE everyone else.

    1. You don’t fix a leaky pipe by just pumping more water through it.

      1. This article is producing parodies better than me.

        Off topic but one of my coworkers put in a water softener, and after a while the calcium and lime got cleared out and he realized the build up was in fact plugging the many holes. So he took out the water softener and waited for the deposits to re-plug up the leaks.
        So he did fix a leak by running more water.

        1. “This article is producing parodies better than me.”

          It’s Hihn, all the way down.

    2. HOW CRAZY A BIGOT IS TLL2000?
      “NIGGERS” are totally invisible to his SJW lies. (/sarc)

      And this is INSANE:

      discrimination ended after the passing of the 1866 Civil Rights Act. The rest is just SJWS trying to entitle themselves ABOVE everyone else.

      And how STUPID is he? …. TOTALLY!
      CONFUSES SJWs with …. “niggers” (/sarc)

      ***DOES NOT KNOW President Eisenhower had to send ARMED TROOPS to Little Rock Arkansas … to defend NINE BLACK KIDS from …. discrimination YOU say ended over 90 years earlier!!

      *** BRAINWASHED ENOUGH to be ALSO NOT KNOW of school segregation, lunch counters, Jim Crow laws, and so much more.
      ,
      **Brainwashed enough to “NOT KNOW that Rosa Parks was 1955 … 89 years AFTER your bullshit end of discrimination,

      ** Brainwashed enough to also BE IGNORANT of Little Rock, two years later.
      For any other history-ignorant young racists … Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus activated his state militia …. armed force to keep nine black kids from registering at Little Rock’s Central High School.

      Eisenhower needed ARMED TROOPS to put down the discrimination YOU SAY HAD ENDED NEARLY A CENTURY EARLIER! ….. OMFG … have you entered high school yet?

      1. Let’s talk about this “so called” discrimination..
        — Women not being allowed in Men’s bathrooms and visa versa.
        — All Girls Schools
        — All Boys Schools
        — White House Initiatives for “Historically Black” Colleges & Universities, Educational Excellence for “Hispanics”, Educational Excellence for “African Americans”, etc, etc, etc…

        So lets tell it like it is — Its seems okay if we pick out “winner” inalienable characteristics and give them group-priviledges but its not okay to pick a “looser” inalienable characteristic and allow them to have a “group-privileges” to ANYTHING????????????

        There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with having Men & Women use different bathrooms. There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with having White & Black Universities. There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with having Christians, Catholics, and Jews in different churches!!!

        So long as the government doesn’t “entitle” one above the other — AS WELL GUESS WHAT; it’s doing for all the “winner” inalienable characteristics.

        P.S. A Liberal H.S. education doesn’t do my thinking for me.

        Oh what’s this — next up — The President will send out ARMED TROOPS to make sure Women can use the Men’s Bathroom.

  10. “Erroneous reporting set off a bizarre backlash that obscured the real problem.”

    You misspelled “lying”.

  11. To accuse Trump of anti Semitism is preposterous and nobody serious about the issue has accused him of that.

    He actually bends over backwards when it comes to Jews. His own daughter who took the Hebrew name Yael (strong name that) and son in law and their children are Jewish. He is an ardent supporter of Israel. In his past look at what happened at Mar a Largo and his other elite clubs. He broke though the Palm Beach elite which excluded Jews and others and opened it up to all. For goodness sake he is N.Y. business man. He has been working with the Hebrews all his life.

    He is not racist nor anti-gay either.

    The concerns from some in the Jewish community about this particular act as I have discussed on another thread, is that it may go too far. Perhaps all of these title whatever things do. I am open to that.

    The concern for many in the Jewish community is that any attempt to codify who is a Jew in American law is difficult. Antisemites use such narrow definitions against us. Hence the Nurenberg laws.

    People in general should be free to identify as they wish.
    Government should have nothing to do with that.

    1. Wasn’t Yael the tent-peg lady?

      1. So she is:

        Extolled above women be Jael,
        Extolled above women in the tent.
        He asked for water, she gave him milk;
        She brought him cream in a lordly dish.
        She stretched forth her hand to the nail,
        Her right hand to the workman’s hammer,
        And she smote Sisera; she crushed his head,
        She crashed through and transfixed his temples.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jael

        I am crushing your head!

        1. Yup she was a badass fighter. Her story is part of the song of Deborah (D’vorah a very popular Hebrew name) another female warrior leader.

    2. ” nobody serious about the issue has accused him of that.”

      So, no ‘true Scotsmen’ have accused him of that. Alright, on that we agree.

      But ENBs previous article on this topic sure had all sorts of other people casting rather pointed aspersions over it.

      “Remember that in Hitler’s first written comment in 1919 on the so-called Jewish Question, he likewise defined the Jews as a race and not a religious community,” tweeted Jon Cooper, chair of the Democratic Coalition.

      “Hitler kicked off the Holocaust with the Nuremberg Laws that, among other things, declared German Jews weren’t of German nationality. So Trump signing an executive order declaring Judaism it’s own nationality is….well not great for us descendants of Holocaust survivors,” commented science journalist Erin Biba.

      A number of people have pointed out that defining Judaism as a race or ethnicity rather than a religion is a plank white supremacists promote.

      “Anti-semites like David Duke say Judaism is not a religion, but a nationality/race,” in order “to advance formation of a white ethnocentric state” that excludes Jews, tweeted author Kurt Eichenwald. “Trump just affirmed this trope by executive order.”

      Not all critics of the order went right to Hitler-level racist motives…

      Not all critics just many – including political organizers, journalists, and authors.

      But you want us to believe that nobody takes them seriously?

      It appears ENB did. At least enough to quote them.

    3. To accuse Trump of anti Semitism is preposterous and nobody serious about the issue has accused him of that.

      (lol) CHARLOTTESVILLE,

      He is not racist

      >(lol) CHARLOTTESVILLE

      nor anti-gay either.

      BULLSHIT,
      Here’s a lengthy list of Trump’s anti-gay actions as President … 13, plus links to other abuses.

      https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/dominicholden/trump-lgbt-anti-actions-administration-pride-month

      It takes issues like this to see HOW bigoted Trumpsters really are.

      NEXT …. ABSOLUTE PROOF OF HOW TOTALLY IGNORANT (OR BIGOTED) IS YOUR BRAINWASHING,

      1. At this link, PROOF of Trump’s LIES TO SUPPORT NEO-NAZIS AND WHITE NATIONALISTS … With THREE links to ABSOLUTE proof.

        https://reason.com/2019/12/12/trumps-order-aimed-at-fighting-anti-semitism-is-constitutionally-problematic-but-its-not-anti-semitic/#comment-8049032

      2. Fuck off and get screwed with a rusty chainsaw, Hihn.

  12. The problem … and the confusion … is Trump’s shameful BULLSHIT to DEFEND VIOLENT ANTI-SEMITES … at Charlottesville.

    https://reason.com/2019/12/12/trumps-order-aimed-at-fighting-anti-semitism-is-constitutionally-problematic-but-its-not-anti-semitic/#comment-8049032

    1. Fuck off and die, Hihn.

    2. Trump’s daughter and grandkids are Jewish. He is also a big booster for Israel. Not a shill for Hamas murderers, like you are.

      Hihn the Nazi.

  13. Trump doing the bidding of another right-wing foreign government. Just another day.

    1. Fuck off and die, shitbag.

    2. An idiotic statement. From a raving faggot.

      Go drink your Drano.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.