How UC Davis capitulated to Donald Trump and harmed law school students | Opinion
Last week, the UC Davis School of Law, also referred to as King Hall, announced that the university had suspended the operations of the Law Students Association as punishment after the student group adopted a boycott, divestment and sanctions amendment to its bylaws. This was a nonviolent, Palestinian-led movement that calls for a divestment and boycott of and economic sanctions against Israel.
The Law Students Association recently passed an amendment that prohibits the association from using its approximately $40,000 budget to invest in certain companies or fund speakers from the Israeli government and a number of Israeli universities. It also prohibits paying to host three law firms that revoked job offers to students associated with Palestinian causes.
The Amendment was democratically adopted and supported by the law school’s student body and 16 law school student organizations. Upon dissolving the Law Students Association, UC Davis Law School Dean Jessica Berg said the association violated a university policy that requires student government organizations to support activities on a “viewpoint-neutral” basis. But this policy was selectively applied as many other student government activities are not “viewpoint-neutral” but have not resulted in university punishment.
Did UC Davis dissolve the Law Students Association because it was concerned about repercussions from the divestment of the group’s measly $40,000? Of course not. The university dissolved the association to appease the current presidential administration by showing that it is doing something to control pro-Palestinian sentiment on campus.
UC Davis is one of 60 universities across the country currently being investigated for antisemitism by the U.S. Department of Education Office of Civil Rights. UC Davis apparently believes it needs to show the Trump administration it is doing something about antisemitism to preempt cuts to its research funds. Censorship of students, however, is the wrong approach.
To the detriment of us all, President Donald Trump’s assault on federal funding for universities has upended research programs throughout the country. Many schools cannot even guarantee support for incoming graduate students. Moreover, capitulation to Trump’s demands brings its own set of problems for students. The graduates of the UC Davis School of Law may have a difficult time securing employment after the school administration has tacitly tarred its student body as antisemitic for adopting the amendment to the Law Students Association.
The Trump administration is using the charge of antisemitism as a cudgel to suppress free speech and research on college campuses. Antisemitism is a horrible scourge on humanity. Everyone used to know exactly what it was, but now everything has changed. The university needs to be clear about what antisemitism is and what it is not.
Acknowledging competing definitions, one has to ask: Is a pro-Palestinian demonstrator antisemitic because they support equal rights and freedom for Palestinians living in Israel? Is Amnesty International antisemitic because it has labeled Israel’s conduct of the war on Gaza genocide? Is whatever behavior the Trump administration labels antisemitic, therefore antisemitic?
The law students’ adoption of the amendment to their bylaws was not an antisemitic act. It was an act intended to promote Palestinian rights. If UC Davis starts suppressing speech at its law school, where will it end? What will the university do if Trump sets guidelines for speech and academic freedom on campus? These are questions the university ought to start considering now.