The Trump administration's tough tactics, such as threatening to cut funding and clients to universities and law firms for not doing more to combat anti-Semitism, have alarmed many Jews and Jewish organizations. It has prompted an unexpected response: "Please don't try to help us," meaning "Please don't use us for your political gain."

This debate is unique, complex, and troubling. It is difficult to imagine another such conflict in recent times, involving attacks on Jews, Israel, and Zionism. In which so-called “defenders” of Jews are using methods of violence that ultimately incite and fuel anti-Semitism, while eroding constitutional guarantees of free speech.

Joel Cohen: It's very difficult for me - and probably for the president himself - to understand the real reasons for the things he does or the positions he takes on everyday issues. But it's very easy to understand that he is very keen to stifle the kind of free speech he campaigned against, especially free speech on campus.

Long before October 7th and before his re-election last November, Trump was well aware that anti-Semitism was undoubtedly on the rise in America. Did he say to himself, "Here's the best course of action: Let's pretend to be defending the Jews in America and in Israel, our most important ally in the Middle East, and use that relationship to defeat those who say things that are contrary to the idea of 'good Americans' in our country?" I don't know for sure. But it's arguable: If he's helping to keep Jews safe on campus or elsewhere, is his motives important or necessary for Jews? Richard, you have a strong civil liberties background, what do you say to that?

Richard Emery: Using anti-Semitism as a weapon to undermine democratic values is as bad as anti-Semitism itself. The Nazis did it, and Trump is doing it. To support any perpetrator, whether anti-Semites or, in this case, to use anti-Semitism as a basis for autocracy and oppression, is to exploit our strong emotional attachment to Jews and their plight.

The current situation at universities and in general, in selecting people for arrest and deportation, is reminiscent of the Skokie scandal of 1978. Nazis wanted to march in a predominantly Jewish suburb of Illinois, which resulted in a court order against the march. After the Supreme Court ordered an expedited review, the Illinois Supreme Court overturned the court order, guaranteeing Nazis the right to march and peacefully display the swastika. In a Trump world, the hard-to-digest First Amendment rights to free speech, which are the foundation of our democracy, are being turned upside down to justify arrest and deportation, as well as the cancellation of federal grants for many research and programs. Imagine a Nazi march protected today? Except in Charlottesville, it would be unthinkable, even with Trump’s approval.

But the greatest irony is that Trump is doing exactly what he opposes: weaponizing speech. He is threatening and punishing anyone who disagrees with his anti-Semitic rhetoric. Under the guise of eliminating anti-Semitism, he is hypocritically dismantling the institutions that allow for the expression of popular debate. The First Amendment has become a broken guarantee that protects corporate speech and the right to profit from it far more effectively than it guarantees the freedom to express opinions on public issues that contradict the “approved” liturgy of the government. This is the beginning of the end of the freedoms we cherish. And Jews are once again being used to justify political oppression.

Bennett L. Gershman: To the Jews who applaud Trump's crackdown on universities and his demand that law firms combat anti-Semitism for not doing enough to stop anti-Semitism, I have only one thing to say: "You're crazy!" Don't you know that Trump cares about one thing only: Donald Trump? Certainly not Jews. Don't you see that he uses Jews and anti-Semitic rhetoric to destroy institutions that threaten his authoritarian rule? History is full of examples of people who pretended to help Jews but actually hurt them. Don't you know about the Jews who were told they were being "deported" and put in freight cars, but were actually being sent to concentration camps? What about the Jews who were told they were taking showers, but were actually being gassed? Remember Vichy France, where leader Philippe Pétain convinced Jews that his regime was protecting them, but in fact secretly colluded with Nazi Germany to strip Jews of their rights and property and helped deport 75,000 Jews to concentration camps? Or Pope Pius XII, who pretended that the Vatican was working privately to protect Jews, but failed to condemn the Holocaust, knowing full well that Jews were being exterminated and that his bishops were helping Nazi war criminals escape? Or the bogus British “White Paper” of 1939, which claimed to help Jews move to Palestine, but severely restricted Jewish immigration at a time when Jews were fleeing Nazi persecution? Or Charles Lindbergh's isolationist movement against U.S. involvement in World War II, claiming it would help Jews by preventing an anti-Semitic backlash, but then blaming Jews for pushing the U.S. into the war? These examples and many others are a warning to Jews. Wake up! Trump is indifferent to anti-Semitism. You are being used!

JK: Ben, your journey through history is valuable, but let me be the devil's advocate for a moment.

Let’s assume that Trump’s intentions are evil, as you do — he’s determined to hurt universities and law firms because he’s put them on his list of vengeful enemies. And, incidentally, he recognizes that anti-Semitism is indeed a serious problem on campuses (especially) and probably sincerely wants to address it, so he’s used his vast power in a diabolical way, as you both see, without thinking about the long-term consequences of eroding free speech and increasing anti-Semitism in the future. Still, overall, shouldn’t we be deeply concerned about the current surge in anti-Semitism (and indeed, anti-Semitism that may be lying under the guise of anti-Zionism)?

A very astute friend and staunch Zionist points out to me that anti-Semitism is always lurking in whatever Trump does — “so why should I worry that Trump is solving a serious problem in the short term while giving anti-Semites another reason to hate us? They hate us anyway.” I don’t really buy into his suggestion, but it’s not a notion that can be completely dismissed.

In an interesting April 2 article on the subject, The New York Times commented on a Los Angeles rabbi’s complaint that “for many, whether Jewish or not, it has become increasingly difficult to hold two competing ideas at once, and much easier to retreat into distinct ideological camps.” And yes, it is. And yes, I hate that Trump is so openly demanding a “do-or-die” commitment from Big Law to fight anti-Semitism from his important judicial platforms — even though they, frankly, are better at fighting it than anyone else. And I hate what he’s doing to universities, with his reckless disregard for the truth.

But still! And I wonder if I'm my own devil's advocate or myself on this complicated issue.

RE: Whether Trump is anti-Semitic or not, he is indifferent to Jews to no extent other than to the extent that it benefits him. His far-right supporters in Charlottesville, in the Capitol storming, in the “there are good people on both sides” are not friends of Jews or Israel, and he is closer to them than any Jewish stream. His friends around the world, from Saudi Arabia and Russia, would happily see the extermination of Jews. His Zionism, whatever it may be, is pragmatic and a means to ensure that money is thrown at him by Sheldon and Miriam Adelson and their associates. Jews who think Trump is indifferent to Jews are mistaken; he is only interested in what Jews and Zionism can give him in order to amass power and money.

Constitutionally protected protests about the plight of Palestinians are a useful tool for Trump to use to control universities, while universities have largely behaved shamefully in response to the hateful but protected protests. He can easily portray the Ivy League as elitist and censorious in their actions, as they have created their own form of censorship by stifling legitimate debate and selectively selecting approved speech in the name of laudable liberal values. Unfortunately, universities have made it their own, forgetting that they are the ultimate home for thought experiments, even mistakes, and new ideas, no matter how controversial and offensive. This is exactly how schools and colleges should be, and no one is defending the fundamental value of protest and debate. Universities are ultimately becoming their own worst enemies.

But the reaction to anyone or any idea that genuinely questions Israel’s actions has been distorted into accusations of anti-Semitism and, therefore, ripe fruit for Trump’s political opportunism. And so it is now clear that any Jew who sympathizes with Trump’s opportunism in undermining democratic values in the name of combating anti-Semitism is a tool that Trump uses crudely, hypocritically, but very effectively. The king is naked. Let’s be open-minded and see him and his associates naked for who they are—endless opportunists who use the battle cry of anti-Semitism as one of their shibboleths to wreak their own havoc.

BG: I agree with Richard and Joel completely. Trump is manipulating anti-Semitism, and as Richard so convincingly points out, he is also destroying free speech. And I agree with Joel that while I’m not sure that anti-Semitism has increased, it is likely that it has increased because the rhetoric has gotten so much attention and has become so intense. Jews, despite their outrage, have once again become the chosen people, now receiving special recognition, for better or worse. In fact, Jews are significantly different from the DEI people, the former seeming like good people and the latter like bad people. But of course, as Richard points out, neo-Nazis are also “very good people,” as Trump so excitedly said after Charlottesville. Trump’s attack on universities is a clear attack on free speech and the value of protest. But why is Trump also attacking law firms, and what does this have to do with anti-Semitism? Trump knows, at least from his advisors, that lawyers are likely to be the biggest obstacle to his authoritarian rule. So the attack on lawyers is understandable and expected. But what is the reason for Trump’s additional demand that law firms develop protocols to combat anti-Semitism? I think we can all agree that Trump’s opportunism is psychotic and his support for Jews is conditional. With a strong tailwind blowing at his back, given his anti-Semitic policies, Trump consistently mentions anti-Semitism in his attacks on universities, law firms, the military, the federal bureaucracy, and even golf tournaments, although he may face some resistance from his playing partners.

Conclusion: Despite some differences in our personal thinking, we agree that Trump’s attacks on free speech and the way his administration is attacking it could further metastasize anti-Semitism — whether Trump has seriously considered the possibility or not. Most Jewish groups have not asked Trump to protect them, and many, perhaps most, Jews fear the consequences. These are turbulent times for America, and those who care about whether or not they will have the president’s ear should speak out — not whisper — about the survival of our democracy, where people of different races and religions can live together in equal and inclusive ways.

Authors: Joel Cohen, Richard Emery, Bennett L. Gershman

Source: law.com