UCLA students ask court to hold university accountable for allowing exclusion of Jews from heart of campus
Three Jewish students have filed a federal lawsuit against the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), accusing the institution of allowing antisemitic activists to prevent them and other Jewish students from accessing central campus areas. The case, Frankel v. Regents of the University of California, asserts that UCLA permitted a group of extremist students and external agitators to establish an encampment that obstructed Jewish students and faculty from reaching their classes, offices, and the library. Supported by Becket, a legal advocacy group, two law students and an undergraduate are seeking federal court intervention to hold UCLA accountable for facilitating this antisemitic encampment and the ensuing discrimination against Jewish students.
Read More
Demonstrations gained traction at UCLA after the terror attack
Following the terrorist attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023, anti-Jewish demonstrations surfaced on college campuses across the country. At UCLA, activists set up an encampment enforcing a “Jew Exclusion Zone,” barring Jewish students and faculty from entering unless they denounced Israel’s right to exist. The activists established checkpoints, issued wristbands, constructed barriers, and often linked arms to block Jewish individuals. Despite being aware of these actions for a week, UCLA’s administration allowed them to continue. Instead of dismantling the encampment, the university directed security staff to discourage unapproved students from crossing the areas obstructed by activists.
Mark Rienzi, president and CEO of Becket, criticized UCLA’s response, stating, “If masked agitators had excluded any other marginalized group at UCLA, Governor Newsom rightly would have sent in the National Guard immediately. But UCLA instead caved to the antisemitic activists and allowed its Jewish students to be segregated from the heart of their own campus. That is a profound and illegal failure of leadership.”
Jewish students were allowed to be aggressively targeted
Jewish students were aggressively targeted within the encampment. Yitzchok Frankel, a law student and father of four, experienced antisemitic harassment and had to avoid his usual routes through campus. Joshua Ghayoum, a sophomore history major, was repeatedly prevented from accessing the library and other public spaces, and was subjected to chants like “death to Jews” at the encampment. Eden Shemuelian, another law student, had her exam preparation severely disrupted as she navigated the encampment and its antisemitic atmosphere to reach the law school’s library. The plaintiffs are asking the court to ensure that Jewish students will never again encounter such bigotry at UCLA.
“This is America in 2024—not Germany in 1939. It is disgusting that an elite American university would let itself devolve into a hotbed of antisemitism,” Rienzi remarked. “UCLA’s administration should have to answer for allowing the Jew Exclusion Zone and promise that Jews will never again be segregated on campus.”
UCLA Testimony Before Congress
In response to the rising concerns over antisemitism on college campuses, including the incidents at UCLA, university officials were called to testify before Congress on May 23, 2024. During the hearing, UCLA representatives faced rigorous questioning regarding their handling of the encampment and the university’s broader approach to addressing antisemitism.
UCLA officials acknowledged the severity of the situation and expressed regret over any harm caused to Jewish students. They outlined steps the university had taken since the incident, including reviewing campus security policies, enhancing support for affected students, and implementing educational programs to promote tolerance and inclusivity.
“UCLA is deeply committed to ensuring the safety and well-being of all our students,” testified UCLA Chancellor Gene Block. “We regret that our response to the encampment was not more decisive and effective. Moving forward, we are implementing stronger measures to prevent any group from being marginalized and to foster a campus environment that is inclusive and respectful of all backgrounds.”
However, the testimony drew criticism from some lawmakers and advocacy groups, who argued that UCLA’s actions were insufficient and reactive rather than proactive. They contended that more robust measures should have been in place to prevent such an encampment from being established in the first place and to protect Jewish students from discrimination.
The congressional hearing underscored the growing national concern over antisemitism in academic institutions and the need for universities to adopt stronger policies to safeguard the rights and safety of all students. As the lawsuit proceeds, the outcomes of both the legal action and the congressional scrutiny are likely to have significant implications for how universities across the country handle similar issues in the future.
