top of page

How to Combat Antisemitism in Massachusetts Higher Ed

 

September 18, 2025

 

This document provides guiding principles and concrete practices that institutions can employ to meaningfully combat antisemitism without enabling the Trump administration’s desire to advance an authoritarian agenda under the guise of “combating antisemitism.” While focused on higher education, the principles and recommendations are broadly applicable.

 

Please direct inquiries to concernedjfaculty@gmail.com. 

​

Guiding Principles

​

1.  Safeguard bedrock democratic principles of equality, free speech, academic freedom, and due process.

​​

Protect the civil rights and civil liberties of Jews and all marginalized communities; prioritize non-punitive institutional practices (e.g., restorative justice); and support heightened labor protections for educators in K-12 and university settings. Avoid rhetoric or policies that vilify educators or inject systems of surveillance and intimidation into our institutions and our classrooms.

​

2.  Stay focused on antisemitism.

​​

Decouple “Zionism” (a political ideology) from “Jewishness” (a religious or ethnic identity). Avoid conflations that mischaracterize legitimate criticism of Zionism or Israel as antisemitism. Such conflations stifle protected speech and risk promoting the antisemitic belief that all Jews are responsible for Israel's actions.

​​

3.  Promote inclusion and equality within the Jewish community and beyond.

​

Regardless of the institution or entity, it is essential to include, incorporate and attend to the perspectives and experiences of Jews who do not identify as Zionist (or who otherwise oppose Jewish nationalism and its manifestation in the state of Israel). Take affirmative steps to address patterns of harassment, bullying and discrimination experienced by non-Zionist Jews.  

​

Concrete Recommendations

 

1.  Adopt a data-driven approach based on high-quality data, sound research methods, and serious policy analysis. This requires decoupling policy recommendations from unreliable data produced by organizations like the Anti-Defamation League. As we testified, the ADL’s “misrepresentation of antisemitism is inviting persecution of immigrants,” has “engaged in public Islamophobia,” and has “engaged in repeated public lying that is the hallmark of authoritarianism.”

​​

2. Prioritize non-punitive processes, such as restorative practices, and reduce reliance on suspensions and terminations as tools to address bias. This means establishing shared terminology, committing to confronting interpersonal and systemic oppression, and building trust across ideological, political, and religious differences. â€‹

​

​a. See Professor Lustick’s public testimony from September 8, 2025.

​

3. Support curricula and institutional programming and opportunities that expose students to a diversity of Jewish identities (e.g., race, gender, national origin, cultural/religious practice) and perspectives (e.g., Zionist, anti-Zionist, non-Zionist).​

​

​a. An existing MA bill that promotes inclusive K-12 curricula and pedagogy is S.371: An Act to Promote Comprehensive and Inclusive Curriculum in Schools. 

​

​4. Employ anti-harassment policies that: 

​

a. clearly differentiate between prohibited harassment and protected speech;

b. do not codify political beliefs or ideologies (e.g., conservative, progressive, Christian Nationalist, Zionist, anti-Zionist) as protected categories;

c. avoid definitions of antisemitism (e.g., the IHRA definition of antisemitism) that are routinely employed to punish individuals whose speech criticizes the state of Israel and its policies and Zionism. 

i. If an institution believes a definition would help internal policies and practices, the Jerusalem Declaration and Nexus Document offer useful alternatives with far less risk of weaponization.

​

5. Implement antisemitism trainings that:

​

a. decouple Jewish identity from any nation-state (e.g., Israel) or political ideology or belief (e.g., Zionism or anti-Zionism);

b. foreground antisemitism’s relationship to, and interaction with, other dangerous ideologies including white nationalism, anti-Black racism and anti-immigrant xenophobia.

​​​​​

6. Avoid policies or practices that give undue special treatment to Jewish students, and therefore invite stereotyping or scapegoating. Instead,

​

a. defend all "diversity, equity and inclusion" initiatives and programming as a bulwark against the prejudice and discrimination that threatens Jews and other groups; 

b. support and invest in all ethnic studies-related academic departments, centers and programs.

​

​7. ​Protect the the rights of educators and students to research, teach, learn, and speak about antisemitism, the Holocaust, genocide, and related topics without threat of punishment or retaliation by:

​

a. incorporating within university policy the AAUP's Recommended Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom & Tenure; 

b. enhancing labor protections for all K-12 and higher education workers (including lecturers and graduate student workers); 

c. adopting policies that affirmatively protect the academic freedom rights of individual and collective bodies of educators and students to organize and participate in economic boycotts and calls for divestment.

d. denouncing spurious accusations of antisemitism deployed as a pretext to discredit disfavored viewpoints, erode civil rights, undermine the rights of students and educators, and corrode the institutional autonomy necessary to safeguard core democratic norms. ​​

​

8. Stress the importance of free and open inquiry and the critical evaluation of competing ideas—including those related to Zionism, Israel/Palestine and antisemitism. As Ambassador Alan Solomont noted in his testimony before the Commission on June 9, 2025:​

​

“[O]ne common denominator [across college campuses] is the lack of training and preparation that students receive, even before they enter college, to engage in civil discourse and dialogue across differences. One concrete step that the legislature can take is to build on the improvements that Massachusetts has already made in the area of civic education and to pay particular attention to teaching students not only about democracy but how to do democracy as well.”

​

9.  Value the experiences and perspectives of non-Zionist Jews, who comprise a substantial percentage of American Jews. Policies designed to combat antisemitism can increase the bullying of Jews by other Jews when they conflate Judaism and Zionism, or conflate support for Jews with support for the state of Israel. Opposition to Zionism is a longstanding and vital tradition in Jewish thought, and non-Zionist Jews must be protected with the same vigor as Zionist Jews. The experiences of non-Zionist Jews should be included in any full accounting of antisemitism, and schools and universities should be encouraged to cultivate safe spaces for all Jews, regardless of political orientation. 

​

Selected Readings & Resources

 

bottom of page