"against Israeli colonialism, apartheid and genocide at academic conferences and on law faculty email listservs,"
"must be brought to an end."
"To the extent that the IHRA definition prohibits calling for the dismantling of colonial state structures, prohibits legal scholars from debating the contours of the right of self-determination, prohibits allegations of race discrimination, and prohibits allegations of genocide, the IHRA definition is unconstitutional,"
"characterizes broad categories of constitutionally protected speech critical of Israel as antisemitic,"
Ramsi Woodcock, a tenured law professor at the University of Kentucky, filed a Nov. 13 lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky after the university suspended him and opened an investigation into whether he created a hostile environment. Woodcock publicly called for military action against Israel, posted a petition online, and spoke against Israeli colonialism, apartheid and genocide at conferences and faculty email listservs. The lawsuit alleges violations of First Amendment free expression, procedural due process, and discrimination under the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The suit challenges application of the IHRA antisemitism definition and a Kentucky joint resolution requiring its use, arguing the definition characterizes protected criticism of Israel as antisemitic.
Read at ABA Journal
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]