The Students Supporting Israel chapter at Catholic University of America is accusing the university of discrimination after administrators denied its requests to bring speakers to campus unless the events represented \u201cboth sides.\u201d <\/p>\n
University officials pushed back, saying the students can revamp their plans and try again.<\/p>\n
The student group had sought to invite Dany Tirza, the chief architect of Israel\u2019s controversial security fence or barrier wall separating the West Bank, for an event about the project. And then they wanted to bring in U.S. representative Randy Fine, who\u2019s Jewish, for an event on \u201cending antisemitism in America.\u201d A sought-after conservative speaker on antisemitism and Zionism, Fine\u2019s torrent of anti-Muslim remarks<\/a> has also sparked controversy and earned him condemnations from the Congressional Jewish Caucus<\/a> and multiple pro-Israel and Jewish advocacy groups<\/a>.<\/p>\n In response to both requests, the university gave the same answer: No. <\/p>\n \u201cConsistent with our Presentations Policy we can consider approval for this topic and speaker as long as there is balanced presentation,\u201d wrote Steve Kreider, the university\u2019s associate dean of students and director of student engagement, in a response to the student group. \u201cIf you would like to restructure the event and resubmit a request to have speakers representing both sides of this issue, we would be able to consider that request for approval.\u201d<\/p>\n Felipe Avila, a senior and the president and founder of Students Supporting Israel, blasted the university\u2019s denials as \u201cpart of a pattern of discrimination and unequal treatment.\u201d Other student groups, like College Republicans and College Democrats, haven\u2019t had to invite speakers who represent both sides of an issue, as far as he\u2019s aware, he said.<\/p>\n \u201cWe strongly believe that we are currently being held to a higher standard that is not consistently applied across all student organizations,\u201d Avila said, \u201cand to us that just feels wrong.\u201d<\/p>\n He acknowledged that topics like the fence walling off the West Bank and speakers like Fine are controversial. But he said he welcomes student debate at the group\u2019s events. He noted that the university allowed SSI to host an event last semester featuring two Israel Defense Forces soldiers, and \u201cstudents had the opportunity, whether they support Israel or otherwise, to ask difficult questions.\u201d Protesters came to the event.<\/p>\n \u201cWe haven\u2019t been shy about embracing controversy,\u201d Avila said.<\/p>\n He also argued an event on combating antisemitism shouldn\u2019t have two sides, as the university\u2019s response seemed to suggest.<\/p>\n Fighting antisemitism \u201cshouldn\u2019t be controversial,\u201d he said. \u201cIt certainly shouldn\u2019t be something that requires an opposing viewpoint\u00a0\u2026 Are they asking for a speaker like Nick Fuentes<\/a> to speak against our speaker on antisemitism? We will never platform what we view as hate speech.\u201d<\/p>\n Karna Lozoya, the university\u2019s vice president for communications, emphasized in a statement to Inside Higher Ed that Catholic \u201cstands firmly against antisemitism.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe safety and dignity of our Jewish students\u2014and every member of our community\u2014is a responsibility we take seriously,\u201d Lozoya wrote. \u201cAntisemitism is real, and we are committed to confronting it in ways consistent with our Catholic mission and belief in the dignity of every human person.\u201d<\/p>\n She also clarified that the university is asking for a wider variety of voices on how to combat antisemitism\u2014beyond Fine\u2014at the event, not an antisemitic voice, as Avila suggested.<\/p>\n \u201cOur written response explicitly invited Students Supporting Israel to submit a restructured proposal with a balanced presentation that would include a variety of voices addressing antisemitism and the responsibilities of all members of our community to create a campus climate that promotes a consistent commitment to upholding the dignity of all human persons,\u201d Lozoya continued. \u201cThat offer remains open.\u201d<\/p>\n Tensions on Campus<\/p>\n The debate over how to handle speakers on Israel and antisemitism is an unusual one for a campus that\u2019s comprised of almost 70\u00a0percent<\/a> Catholic students and has been recognized<\/a> as having a \u201cstrong Catholic identity.\u201d<\/p>\n Avila and most of the roughly 20 students in his group are practicing Catholics who believe \u201cantisemitism is a sin\u201d that \u201cwe should be combating,\u201d Avila said. Some Jewish students are involved, but Avila said he doesn\u2019t know how many.<\/p>\n Nonetheless, Catholic University of America has been roiled by tensions over the Israel\u2013Hamas war, much like other campuses.<\/p>\n Avila founded Students Supporting Israel last August, partly in response to Olive Branch, a pro-Palestinian student group that emerged amid the war to \u201cfoster cultural and humanitarian awareness in the Middle East and North Africa,\u201d according to the group\u2019s Instagram<\/a>. The university disbanded Olive Branch \u201cfor allegedly supporting<\/a> Hamas as well as other anti-Catholic doctrines,\u201d according to a resolution<\/a> last fall from CUA\u2019s Student Government Association, which sought to ban pro-Israel clubs from campus. The resolution was tabled.<\/p>\n Joshua Ortiz, one of the sponsors of the resolution, who also protested the IDF event, said the resolution was an \u201cimpulse of the past that isn\u2019t going to be brought up again\u201d because he and Avila have had productive conversations since about how to foster more constructive dialogue on campus.<\/p>\n Ortiz said the two have political disagreements, but he agrees with Avila that the university\u2019s policy to invite a \u201cbalanced\u201d range of speakers is selectively and sometimes unfairly applied.<\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019ve never heard of a club being forced to bring in a secondary speaker to challenge the main speaker\u2019s point of view,\u201d Ortiz said. \u201cI think that\u2019s, quite frankly, just nonsense.\u201d Clubs should have \u201cdiscretion\u201d over their own events, whether that\u2019s holding a \u201cdebate or a conversation between two views\u201d or choosing to \u201czone into a certain perspective.\u201d<\/p>\n However, he did say it\u2019s fair for the university to draw a line if a speaker holds bigoted views, even if they also stand for other positive values, like combating antisemitism.<\/p>\n \u201cAny type of prejudice or racism directly goes against the virtues of the Church,\u201d he said. Student clubs \u201cshould have the liberty to pick a speaker who the club deems fitting to speak for their specific club, so long as it abides by the morals of the Church.\u201d<\/p>\n The Debate Over Balance<\/p>\n This isn\u2019t the first time questions have swirled about whether a university can\u2014or should\u2014allow controversial speakers<\/a> on campus or insist on speakers offering multiple perspectives.<\/p>\n Jessie Appleby, an attorney at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, said such policies requiring balance aren\u2019t common, but she has encountered them at other higher ed institutions.<\/p>\n As a private university, Catholic can and does bar various types<\/a> of speech on campus, including \u201cblasphemy\u201d or \u201cadvocacy.\u201d (The university fired a psychology lecturer<\/a> in 2024 after a doula invited to speak to her class described working with women undergoing abortions and transgender clients. Avila, an antiabortion activist, publicized a recording of the class session.)<\/p>\n But the university also promises<\/a> freedom of expression, Appleby said. As far as she\u2019s concerned, \u201crestricting events based on the viewpoint of the event is viewpoint discrimination\u2014and that would include restricting events simply because they don\u2019t offer a balance.\u201d<\/p>\n She added that if the university is selectively applying its policy, especially to student groups or events \u201cthe university thinks might present a controversial point of view, that is its own pretty serious problem.\u201d<\/p>\n Kenneth Stern, director of the Bard Center for the Study of Hate, agreed that higher ed institutions shouldn\u2019t require student groups to try to achieve balance with their speakers. The concept of balance can be \u201cmurky,\u201d particularly for hotly debated issues with a vast range of perspectives, said Stern, who has written about<\/a> the tensions related to the Israeli\u2013Palestinian conflict on campuses. <\/p>\n He recommended universities or other student groups bring their own speakers to campus and host their own educational events when they feel a student group is leaving out critical voices or platforming a controversial voice, like Fine.<\/p>\n \u201cI disagree with him tremendously, especially the things he\u2019s said about Muslims and Palestinians,\u201d Stern said, \u201cbut he\u2019s a member of Congress. I think the students should be able to hear him\u00a0\u2026 [to] ask tough questions\u201d and then bring other speakers to campus who represent other views on how to combat antisemitism and other topics.<\/p>\n \u201cThe better approach is if the school feels, or the students feel, that a particular program doesn\u2019t represent the breadth of issues, put on another program,\u201d he added. The goal shouldn\u2019t be to \u201chunt for speech we don\u2019t like\u201d but to address that \u201cthese are contentious issues and help our students understand it more.\u201d<\/p>\n