Editor: This antisemitism kick Republicans are on right now is dangerous. House Republicans proposed an antisemitism bill in Kansas, refusing to include all forms of racism and discrimination as an amendment.
Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil was arrested and is being deported for speaking out against Israel. Another graduate student, Momodou Taal,from a different university, is facing the same consequences. He is suing the Trump Administration over it.
And now you have a video circulating of men in dark clothing, masks covering their faces, pulling up in an unmarked car to arrest a female college student as she walked on the street in Boston. Rumeysa Ozturk, a doctoral student at Tufts University, was taken to an ICE detention center in Louisiana after a judge told the Administration they couldn’t do that.
What makes the last arrest the most chilling of all is why she was arrested. A pro-Israel group reported her for an op-ed she co-authored in the university newspaper last year that suggested an economic boycott of Israel. She’s not a “terrorist sympathizer,”she didn’t “harass Jewish students”—she wrote an op-ed that criticized the government of Israel.
How much more of this obvious assault on our First Amendment right to free speech are we going to put up with? Are we really going to allow a foreign government to police our thoughts and opinions like this? Why is our government doing this? (Besides the millions Trump got from donors who put the Israeli government over American citizens.) Is it bribery? Blackmail?
Whatever is going on, we now live in a country where we can criticize our own government all we want. Just not the government of one particular country.
TOPEKA — House Republicans refused to consider a plea from Democratic Rep. Valdenia Winn to send a message that there is no place for racism in the state of Kansas.
Winn, a Kansas City Democrat, proposed an amendment to House Bill 2299, which declares that antisemitism is against the public policy of the state. She wanted to expand the language to condemn all forms of racism and discrimination.
“This is not rocket science,” Winn said during a March 19 debate in the House. “This is not trigonometry. This is basic.”
Republicans wouldn’t hear it.
Rep. Susan Estes, a Wichita Republican, objected to Winn’s proposal under a House rule that says amendments have to be “germane” to the existing bill. That sent members of the rules committee into a scramble to conceive a reason to reject the Democrat’s idea.
The way Rep. Susan Humphries explained it, the test for whether an amendment is germane is whether the amendment would expand the scope of the bill, a test rarely applied to amendments proposed by Republicans. The Wichita Republican, who serves as rules chair, explained the situation through a metaphor: You can’t expand a bill about apples to be about all fruit. Under that standard, she ruled, the House could not consider Winn’s proposal.
“I am not opposed to having an act that declares racism to be against public policy,” Humphries said. “Like, let’s do that if we feel like it’s needed. That wording, that expanding from antisemitism to discrimination and racism is an expanding and super close call. But this amendment is not germane.”
Republicans determine which bills get a hearing and whether they advance, making it unlikely that Winn could get anywhere with a standalone bill that dealt with racism.
Rep. Stephanie Clayton, an Overland Park Democrat, argued the amendment was germane because “anyone who had the most rudimentary knowledge of history would understand is that antisemitism is racism.”
“So when we’re talking about apples, oranges, fruit, squares, rectangles, whatever analogy you want to use for what is broad and what isn’t, racism and antisemitism are the same thing, ergo, this amendment is germane,” Clayton said.
Winn said her amendment “does not dilute the bill. It does not say an apple is not a fruit, and all these other things.”
“Let’s make Kansans clear of our intent, that there’s no place for discrimination and/or antisemitism and/or racism in the state of Kansas,” Winn said. “That’s all the amendment. There’s no ‘gotcha’ here, any place, there’s nothing else. It’s simple, people.”
Winn challenged Humphries’ ruling, but the House supported Humphries’ ruling with an 86-36 party-line vote. The House then passed the bill by a 116-8 vote.
Estes introduced the bill, and the House Education Committee that she chairs sponsored the bill. It relies on a definition of antisemitism established by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance.
The bill outlaws encouragement, support, praise, participation in or threat of violence or vandalism against Jewish people or property. It makes it illegal for people to wear a mask to conceal their identity while intending to harass or discriminate against Jewish students, faculty or employees on school property. And it bans antisemitic curriculum in any domestic or study abroad programs or classes.
Rep. Pat Proctor, a Leavenworth Republican, said he struggled with the bill, having spent 25 years in the Army fighting for freedoms, including free speech.
But, he said, he was bothered by the recent vandalism of a Catholic church in Wichita.
“And it occurred to me that if that had been Christians attacking a mosque, it would have been all over the country. It would have been on CNN, it would have been on Fox News, it would have been on MSNBC, and all over the country, everybody screaming in outrage, an attack on Muslims, but because it was an attack on Christians, you heard nary a word,” Proctor said.
Vandalism and threats of violence are not free speech, he said.
“Why is it OK for folks to attack Jewish students because they support some people on the other side of the world — but it’s not OK, hypothetically, for somebody to be attacking a mosque?” Proctor said.
The Kansas chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations issued a statement of solidarity with the Catholic community following the vandalism at St. Patrick’s Catholic Church.
Rep. John Carmichael, a Wichita Democrat whose district includes the church, disputed Proctor’s assessment of the news coverage.
“It was not ignored,” Carmichael said. “The FBI was on the scene that very day, investigating on the basis that this was motivated by religious animus, and I guess the representative from Leavenworth perhaps listens to Fox News. I listened to CNN, and I heard plenty about it on the national news.”
Excerpts or more from this article, originally published on Kansas Reflector appear in this post. Republished, with permission, under a Creative Commons License.
See our third-party content disclaimer.
