Rutgers law professors condemn antisemitism investigation from US House Committee
Twenty-nine Rutgers Law School faculty members were among more than 500 law professors nationwide to sign a petition against the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Education and the Workforce's letter regarding claims of on-campus antisemitism, which was sent to the University on March 27.
The House letter pushed for investigations and requested documentation about the University's actions, policies and discussions pertaining to antisemitism and the treatment of Jewish students on campus. More specifically, it asked for information regarding criticisms about Rutgers—Newark's Center for Security, Race and Rights. The letter urged the University to investigate claims that its director, Sahar Aziz, a distinguished professor of law, and the Center's events are antisemitic.
Professors of law across the nation responded in a letter sent to the Committee on Wednesday, writing that the Committee's letter is a "politically motivated and viewpoint-based attack on the Center and a tenured University professor."
The professors' response also read that the Committee's letter is in line with the Senate Judiciary Committee's letter about the Center, sent February 6, to which the Rutgers chapter of the American Association of University Professors and American Federation of Teachers replied, as previously reported by The Daily Targum.
While acknowledging that the Center's events may or may not align the tastes of some, the professors' letter criticized the Committee for allegedly targeting Rutgers Law School's only Muslim Arab faculty member, as well as the Center's status as the nation's sole law-school-based facility that advocates for the Muslim, Arab and South Asian communities.
The letter called upon officers in the University, U.S. Congress and United Nations to speak against the investigation.
"We may disagree with (certain views) which have been expressed at Center-sponsored events or publications," the letter read. "However, we recognize that disagreement is an inevitable — and, yes, critically important — component of robust academic discourse."
