THE BERNHARD PERSPECTIVBE
Last April, faculty and staff members at Barnard College were asked to respond to a list of 10 questions in an email from the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The Commission is the federal civil rights agency responsible for enforcing laws that make it illegal to discriminate against employees because of the person’s race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability or genetic information.
The questions specifically asked if respondents “practice Judaism, have Jewish ancestry, are Israeli, and/or are associated with an individual(s) who is Jewish and/or Israeli?” And if so, had they been subject to “unwelcome comments, jokes or discussions” or “antisemitic or anti-Israeli protests.”
Many people, Jews and Gentiles, found it more than a little scary that the federal government wanted to find out who the Jews are on the faculty as well as those who associate with and/or are sympathize with Jews.
One Barnard professor said it reminded her of the 1930s Italy, when lists of Jews were put together by the government. “We’ve seen this movie before, and it ends with yellow stars,” she said.
Nor is this an isolated incident. Just recently, a similar demand was sent to University of Pennsylvania. Again, the T**** administration requested the names and contact information for Jewish faculty and staff, and again as part of an alleged EEOC antisemitism investigation.
The university’s response was that it does not collect that information.
There are a number of interpretations besides an EEOC investigation as to what T****’s real motivation for these demands are. The most obvious is that this is little more than an attempt to ferret out information that could be used to advance President T****’s political agenda. And just exactly what is that agenda? There are several possibilities of note.
One is that this allows T**** to frame himself as aggressively fighting antisemitism. The belief is that this would appeal to some Jewish voters and broader MAGA conservatives who want universities pressured on campus politics.
Another is to use an antisemitism investigation as broad leverage against “elite” universities. The administration has previously pursued investigations, funding threats and settlements against numerous universities. Such perceived schools are frequent and popular targets in T****-era culture-war messaging about DEI, progressivism, protest, and free speech.
Still another interpretation involves identifying communities connected to politically sensitive activism. The intent is to build cases that equate certain protest activity with discrimination. These actions are also designed to deter future protests through intimidation, close scrutiny, active surveillance, and even legal action.
Furthermore, these “investigations” turn alleged antisemitism on campuses into a major national political issue with the Administration framing universities as failing to protect Jewish students and faculty. This allows the Administration to position itself as being strongly pro–Jewish safety and pro-civil rights, as opposed to the universities. As such, it appeals to specific voter coalitions and donors.
These actions by T**** also fit into a broader shift in how civil rights law is being used. Specifically, this includes expanding federal investigative power in novel ways, testing how far anti-discrimination law can go in practice, and potentially reshaping precedent for future administrations.
Many critics note the chilling effect on recipients of these requests. Faculty at both universities have reported the outreach felt “incredibly sinister” or invasive. Some comparisons (controversial, but widely voiced) invoke historical fears about lists of Jews.
Such fears can be politically useful to T**** by discouraging participation in controversial speech or activism which T**** disapproves of, and increasing self-censorship in academic settings and among faculty communities. These deterrent effects align with T****’s broader political goals around campus activism.
And because these investigations have explicitly referenced campus incidents tied to Israel/Gaza tensions, these requests also serve to identify networks around those conflicts, not just victims of discrimination. Thus, some faculty have described the effort as fishing expeditions rather than narrowly tailored civil-rights probes.
And then there is the obvious fact that the tactic functions as crass political theater, which T**** revels in. It creates a tough-on-campus-activism image his followers will cheer even as critics argue it does little to protect Jewish faculty and can clearly intimidate them.
It is abundantly clear that the Administration’s assertion it is simply undertaking an innocuous investigation into possible campus anti-semitism is at least disingenuous, and beyond that, wholly dishonest.
But the exact reasons for these intrusive demands, including the Administrations official version, are ultimately of secondary consequence. After all, this is still America; a person’s faith is their own business and none of the government’s concern.
For in truth, this version of a midnight knock on the door from the government trolling to find out who is a Jew is un-nerving at best for those who still believe in basic America civil liberties. And for Jews, it has historically deep and terrifying implications. as well.
“Hello? Hello? We’re just here to ask, are you a Jew? You can tell us. We’re from the government, so it’s OK.”
For the record: Yes, I am. And also for the record, the hell it is.
And I don’t give a damn who you are.
Leave a Reply