Northwestern University has used that claim as a justification for requiring students to undergo a controversial antisemitism training program. That move has met with huge backlash, preventing at least 300 students from registering for classes. The Jewish United Fund (JUF) filmed videos of pedestrians for the training. In response to these allegations of bias and factual inaccuracy, students across the country have been mobilizing in an enormous wave of protests.
The university’s SB-155 training program includes a video focused on antisemitism as well antisemitism with one focusing on anti-Arab bias. Students have protested the content, claiming it promotes pro-Israel narratives and propagates blatant misinformation. Key points of contention include the video’s comparison of critics of Israel to former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard David Duke and its use of a contentious definition of antisemitism.
The film claims that Israel was created “on British land.” It refers to the occupied West Bank as “Judea and Samaria.” What’s more concerning is the fact that it horrifies the students. They contend that the training focuses more on shutting down critical views than fostering civic education and preventing antisemitism.
University administration has indicated that noncompliance with the training may result in disciplinary measures by the university, up to and including holds on registration. According to a university spokesperson, “Students are not required to agree with the training modules but must attest that they will abide by the student code of conduct, as well as the university’s policy on discrimination, harassment and sexual misconduct.”
Only, if you refuse the training, the consequences are dire. Many students would be putting their employment, visa status, stipends and health insurance in danger. The Trump administration previously cut $790 million in research funding from Northwestern and other institutions, underscoring the university’s commitment to adhering to federal policies, including President Trump’s executive order aimed at combating antisemitism.
Most of the students who are protesting this training, including the Jewish students, have been very clear in their opposition. Salma Moustafa, a PhD student in sociology, criticized the initiative, stating:
“The training is not just about silencing speech, but achieving consent so that we are complicit.”
Moustafa said that Northwestern’s approach is an attempt to sweep the problem under the rug. Rather, it gobbles up propaganda that explains and justifies the Israeli Zionist occupation project.
An open letter signed by several students articulated their stance against the training, asserting that it “reinforces, rather than reduces, the proliferation of discriminatory bias in our communities.”
In response to mounting criticism, a spokesperson from the JUF remarked on the importance of distinguishing between legitimate criticism of Israel’s policies and questioning its right to exist:
“There is a critical difference between criticizing policies of the state of Israel versus questioning Israel’s right to exist – and demonizing Jewish students for their connections to Israel.”
As the June 30th deadline for completing the training approaches, concerns and tensions still grow inside Northwestern University. Here their circumstances raise all sorts of troubling questions regarding free speech and academic freedom. It inspires us to ensure that educational requirements do as much as possible to open doors.