Virginia Tech considers classifying some criticism of Israel as antisemitic (copy)
BLACKSBURG — Next week, Virginia Tech’s Board of Visitors will consider adopting a definition of antisemitism that classifies some criticism of Israel as antisemitic.
If approved, Virginia Tech would become the third public university in Virginia to adopt the nonbinding working definition, which has drawn the ire of students, activists and faculty at universities nationwide, as well as support from pro-Israel Jewish groups.
The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance defines antisemitism as “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews.”
The definition further states that “rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”
The IHRA also includes contemporary examples of antisemitism that fall under the definition. More than half relate to Israel and include examples such as “claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor” and “drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.”
What’s in Tech’s proposal?
The university’s “Resolution Combatting Antisemitism and Anti-Religious Bigotry,” which the board will consider next week, cites an executive order issued by former Gov. Glenn Youngkin more than a year ago as the basis for the proposal.
Executive Order 48 directed the secretary of education, the Virginia Department of Education and the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia to develop resources to help local school divisions, colleges and universities prevent, track, report and respond to incidents of antisemitism and anti-religious bigotry.
It also directed SCHEV to create a model resolution for universities to consider adopting. Virginia Tech’s proposal mirrors the model drafted by SCHEV and includes three additional provisions alongside the IHRA definition.
First, the university would treat harassment and discrimination motivated by antisemitic intent — as defined by the IHRA — in the same manner as other forms of discrimination prohibited by state or federal law.
Second, Virginia Tech would add antisemitism to its student code of conduct as prohibited behavior addressed through university policy and state and federal law.
Finally, the resolution states that it will not be implemented in a way that violates the First Amendment or any other rights protected by the U.S. Constitution or Virginia law.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act already prohibits discrimination based on race, color or national origin and extends to Jewish students. Virginia Tech’s current code of conduct also states that students will be “treated fairly and with dignity” regardless of religion or other identities.
The code further states that violations motivated by discrimination may be considered “an aggravating factor” and subject to harsher discipline. Disciplinary action for violations of the student code of conduct can range from a formal warning to suspension.
Impact on campus
George Mason University and Virginia Commonwealth University also have adopted the IHRA definition of antisemitism.
In November, the George Mason student government condemned the university’s adoption of the definition, and a pro-Palestinian student group threatened legal action after administrators cited the definition in demanding the removal of a social media post.
Supporters of the definition, including the Combat Antisemitism Movement, describe it as “a practical tool used worldwide” to “delineate antisemitism in all its modern-day forms.”
Opponents characterize it differently. The anti-Zionist organization Jewish Voice for Peace has described the definition as “a direct censorship threat to Palestinians and Palestinian rights advocates,” adding that it “can easily be used as a censorship tool that falsely conflates attempts to hold the Israeli government accountable with antisemitism.”
At Virginia Tech, the resolution’s language indicates the definition would be incorporated into the student code of conduct and treated as an addition to the university’s nondiscrimination policy. University officials declined to comment on how the resolution would be implemented, writing that “it’s our practice not to comment on board matters until the board takes action.”
Some students say they fear the definition could be used to limit speech.
“If Virginia Tech adopts such a definition, it risks reducing academic freedom and limiting public discourse,” wrote Tristan Reeves, a member of Students for Justice in Palestine at Virginia Tech.
“Anti-Zionism and antisemitism are not, and should not, be treated as the same thing,” he added.
In April 2024, Virginia Tech was the site of what was among the state’s largest law enforcement actions against pro-Palestinian protesters when police arrested 82 students and faculty members participating in a Gaza solidarity encampment on campus.
“Virginia Tech values free speech and the protesters’ right to be heard, but only if the rights of others and public safety can be assured,” university officials said at the time.
Since then, demonstrations organized by some of the same student groups have focused primarily on President Donald Trump.
University officials also declined to comment when asked why Virginia Tech is moving to adopt the definition now, more than a year after Youngkin’s executive order and nearly six months after he left office.
Virginia Tech’s Board of Visitors will meet Monday and Tuesday.
