{"article":{"id":294335,"heading":"Human rights Group applaudes Anti-Semitism Awareness Bill","author":"Jackson","created":"2016-12-03 05:39:02","modified":"2016-12-09 03:09:01","last_modified":"Fri, 09 Dec 2016 11:09:01","article":"

Today, the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law (LDB) commends U.S. Senators Tim Scott (R-SC) and Bob Casey (D-PA) for introducing the bipartisan Anti-Semitism Awareness Act of 2016. This landmark bill was introduced to combat increasing incidents of anti-Semitism on college campuses nationwide. LDB is a national civil rights organization, best known for its work fighting anti-Semitism in higher education through law and public policy.

The proposed legislation would adopt the primary public policy recommendation of LDB President Kenneth L. Marcus’ new book, “The Definition of Anti-Semitism” (Oxford University Press: 2015). In “The Definition of Anti-Semitism,” Marcus explained, “For American civil rights enforcement agencies, the way forward is clear. Whatever else they may do to address resurgent anti-Semitism, the first step should be to adopt the State Department ‘s definition.”

The Brandeis Center has long urged federal domestic agencies to use established definitions of anti-Semitism in the manner that this bill would establish. LDB President Kenneth L. Marcus commented, “This will be a game-changer when it comes to protecting the rights of Jewish American college students. It will provide the most important legislative protections against anti-Semitic hatred in a generation. Given the recent spike of anti-Semitic incidents, it is quite urgently needed. Senators Scott and Casey should be congratulated for their excellent work.

“Senator Scott and Casey’s bill not only does acknowledges that Title VI of the Civil Rights Act protects Jewish students from discrimination, but also directs the Department of Education to use the State Department’s definition of anti-Semitism – which includes examples of how anti-Semitism manifests with regards to Israel – in assessing anti-Semitic incidents.”

Importantly, the proposed bill states that the State Department’s definition of anti-Semitism (http:\/\/www.brandeiscenter.com\/images\/uploads\/resource\/antisemitism.pdf<\/a>) has been a valuable tool “to help identify contemporary manifestations of anti-Semitism, and include useful examples of discriminatory anti-Israel conduct that crosses the line into anti-Semitism,” and that “[a]wareness of this definition of anti-Semitism will increase understanding of the parameters of contemporary anti-Jewish conduct and will assist the Department of Education in determining whet er an investigation of anti-Semitism under title VI is warranted.”

Furthermore, it directs the Department of Education to use the State Department’s definition of anti-Semitism as part of the Department’s assessment of whether the alleged practice was motivated by anti-Semitic intent. Specifically, the bill provides as follows: “In reviewing, investigating, or deciding whether there has been a violation of title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.) on the basis of race,

color, or national origin, based on an individual’s actual or perceived shared Jewish ancestry or Jewish ethnic characteristics, the Department of Education shall take into consideration the definition of anti-Semitism as part of the Department’s assessment of whether the alleged practice was motivated by anti-Semitic intent.”

The bill also acknowledges the “Dear Colleague Letter” that LDB’s President Marcus issued in 2004 when he was delegated the authority of Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights. Marcus’ 2004 letter explains the obligations of schools (including colleges and universities) under title VI to address incidents involving “race or national origin harassment commingled with aspects of religious discrimination against Arab Muslim, Sikh, and Jewish students.”

“It is important for the federal government to speak in one voice,” Marcus continued. “It makes no sense for domestic federal agencies to ignore the important tools that our State Department is using.”

\t <\/p>\n","contact":"","link":"http:\/\/brandeiscenter.com\/news\/news_full\/ldb_commends_scott_and_caseys_game_changing_bipartisan_anti_semitism_awaren","address":"","phone":"","parent_id":0,"mime_type":"text\/plain","summary":"LDB Commends Scott and Casey\u2019s \u201cGame-Changing\u201d Bipartisan Anti-Semitism Awareness Act\t","numcomment":4,"fileurl":"\/uploads\/","filesize":null,"article_url":"\/news\/2016\/12\/294335.php"},"attachments":[],"comments":[{"id":294336,"heading":"Huge Victory in Senate in Fighting Campus Anti-Semitism","article":"AMCHA LAUDS U.S. SENATE PASSAGE OF ANTI-SEMITISM AWARENESS BILL, CRITICAL STEP TO COMBAT CAMPUS ANTI-SEMITISM\r\n\r\nSanta Cruz, CA, December 2, 2016 \u2013 Tammi Rossman-Benjamin, AMCHA Initiative co-founder and director, issued the following statement applauding the U.S. Senate and Senators Bob Casey (D-PA) and Tim Scott (R-SC), the bill authors, for passing the bipartisan Anti-Semitism Awareness Act late yesterday:\r\n\r\n\u201cWe applaud the Senate for unanimously passing the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act and for understanding that giving the Department of Education a proper definition of contemporary anti-Semitism is key to combatting and preventing anti-Jewish bigotry on campus. This missing link has long been a huge obstacle in the effort to stem the alarming rise of campus anti-Semitism. And we strongly commend Senators Casey and Scott for authoring and introducing this critical measure.\r\n\r\n\u201cWhat is happening to Jewish students on campuses coast to coast is ugly and frightening and it is only getting worse. And sadly it is coming from all sides. In the past month, we have documented a huge uptick in incidents involving classic, anti-Jewish stereotypes. But for many years the spike in anti-Semitism on campus has been linked to extreme anti-Israel activity, especially BDS campaigns. Our 2016 mid-year study of top 100 universities by Jewish population found a 45% increase in campus anti-Semitism as compared with the same period in 2015. And the suppression of Jewish students\u2019 speech and the disruption and\/or shutting down of Jewish events by protestors nearly doubled compared with years past. Our research showed that the presence of BDS activities, anti-Zionist student groups and anti-Zionist faculty were the strongest predictors of anti-Semitism on campus. \r\n\r\n\u201cThe State Department\u2019s definition, a definition endorsed by the world\u2019s leading scholars of anti-Semitism, is the only definition that encapsulates the way anti-Semitism presents itself on campus today, including those acts that cross the line from criticism of Israel into blatant anti-Semitism, and having the Department of Education begin using it is long overdue. We look forward to helping Representatives Roskam, Deutch, Lowey, Engel, Ros-Lehtinen, Granger, Israel, and Smith, the co-chairs of the Bipartisan Task Force for Combating Anti-Semitism, pass this legislation in the House. These Senators and Representatives have been true leaders in the battle to protect Jewish students.\u201d","author":"Jackson","parent_id":294335,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2016-12-03 05:40:48","modified":"2016-12-03 05:40:48","fileurl":""},{"id":294337,"heading":" ADL Welcomes Senate Passage of Anti-Semitism Awareness Act","article":"\r\n The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today hailed Senate passage of the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act, legislation which provides important guidance for the Department of Education and the Department of Justice for federal anti-discrimination investigations involving anti-Semitism, including on campus.\r\n\r\nThe act addresses a core concern of Jewish and pro-Israel students and parents: When does the expression of anti-Semitism, anti-Israel sentiment and anti-Zionist beliefs cross the line from First Amendment protected free expression to unlawful discriminatory conduct?\r\n\r\nADL played a central role in working with U.S. Senators Tim Scott (R-SC) and Bob Casey (D-PA) in crafting and promoting the legislation. The League also urged the House of Representatives to approve the legislation before adjournment later this month.\r\n\r\n\u201cWe welcome Senate passage of this important legislation, which will help the Department of Education and Department of Justice to effectively determine whether an investigation of an incident of anti-Semitism is warranted under federal education anti-discrimination laws,\u201d said Jonathan A. Greenblatt, ADL CEO. \u201cThis act addresses a core concern of Jewish and pro-Israel students and parents: When does the expression of anti-Semitism, anti-Israel sentiment and anti-Zionist beliefs cross the line from First Amendment protected free expression to unlawful, discriminatory conduct.\u201d\r\n\r\nThe legislation builds on a welcome Department of Education Office for Civil Rights (OCR) October 2010 Dear Colleague letter to all schools which described their responsibilities to prevent and remedy instances of discriminatory harassment, including, in some circumstances, harassment on the basis of religion. ADL and a dozen other Jewish groups had urged such OCR action to protect Jewish students from anti-Semitic harassment, intimidation and discrimination in a March 2010 letter.\r\n\r\nThis legislation uses a 2010 definition of anti-Semitism developed by the State Department\u2019s Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism as a reference point that can be useful in their cases, including select instances when discriminatory anti-Semitic conduct may be couched as anti-Israel or anti-Zionist. The legislation instructs the Department of Education to draw on this definition as part of its assessment of whether incidents are motivated by anti-Semitism when investigating possible violations of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 based on individuals\u2019 Jewish heritage or ethnicity. The legislation takes great pains to protect freedom of expression.\r\n\r\n\u201cTo effectively address reported anti-Jewish incidents that may violate federal education anti-discrimination laws, it is necessary to understand the evolving, current manifestations of anti-Semitism,\u201d Mr. Greenblatt said. \u201cThe State Department definition includes useful illustrative examples and can be an important resource. However, it is also vital to accurately distinguish protected speech \u2013 including disagreement and even harsh criticism of the government of Israel \u2013 from harassing, intimidating, and discriminatory anti-Semitism.\u201d\r\n\r\nThe legislation will not change the substantive rights or obligations under Title VI. But utilizing the State Department definition can help guide the Department of Education and the Department of Justice in understanding the changing nature of anti-Semitism in order to more effectively determine whether possible legal violations were motivated by targeted anti-Jewish animus.","author":"ADL","parent_id":294335,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2016-12-03 07:46:16","modified":"2016-12-03 07:46:16","fileurl":""},{"id":294338,"heading":"ANTI-SEMITISM AWARENESS ACT OF 2016","article":"in case you want full text:\r\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office \r\n\r\n ANTI-SEMITISM AWARENESS ACT OF 2016\r\n\r\n Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate \r\nproceed to the immediate consideration of S. 10, introduced earlier \r\ntoday.\r\n The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.\r\n The legislative clerk read as follows:\r\n\r\n A bill (S. 10) to provide for the consideration of a \r\n definition of anti-Semitism for the enforcement of Federal \r\n antidiscrimination laws concerning education programs or \r\n activities.\r\n\r\n There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.\r\n Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I rise today, along with my colleague from \r\nSouth Carolina, to talk about a bill we have introduced entitled the \r\n``Anti-Semitism Awareness Act of 2016.''\r\n Let me say first that I wish we were living in a time where we would \r\nnot have to introduce legislation like this, but unfortunately what we \r\nhave seen over a long period of time--and I think a problem that is \r\ngetting worse--is the rising tide of anti-Semitism in substantial \r\nsectors of our society. We have, in fact, a rise in the incidence of \r\nreligious discrimination and religiously motivated hate crimes. To say \r\nthat is unacceptable, even un-American, is an understatement.\r\n We have to take action at long last to do what we can in the U.S. \r\nSenate, and I hope in the House as well, to not just speak out against \r\nanti-Semitism but to take action which will lead to a better strategy \r\nto deal with it. What do I mean by that? Well, it is simple. It is \r\nabout definitions, and it is about making sure that Federal agencies, \r\nsuch as the Department of Education, do their job when it comes to \r\ncombating anti-Semitism. We know that one piece of legislation is not \r\nsomehow going to magically eradicate anti-Semitism. We don't have that \r\nnaive hope. But what we do believe is that if we don't take action, \r\nthis problem is only going to get worse.\r\n Some of the problem, frankly, is on our college campuses, and I know \r\nthat is true, unfortunately and regrettably, in my home State of \r\nPennsylvania. We don't have time to list every incident, every action, \r\nevery terrible example of this, but I will just provide one for the \r\nrecord.\r\n In September, students at Swarthmore College in Pennsylvania--one of \r\nour great institutions of higher education not only in Pennsylvania but \r\nacross the country--Swarthmore is a great school, but here is what they \r\nfound. They found swastikas spray-painted in a bathroom in the library. \r\nThe college leadership did the right thing in swiftly condemning these \r\nactions and removing the graffiti, and I am glad they did that.\r\n I can only try to imagine--and I can literally only try to understand \r\nbecause I have never been the victim of this kind of hate--the horror \r\nthat was experienced by those students and their families. A person \r\ncomes to a college or a university as a place where they are going to \r\nlearn and grow and live in a community, and then there are people--for \r\nwhatever reason, and I will never understand the reason anyone would do \r\nthat--painting those images and using language and taking other actions \r\nthat discriminate against people because of who they are. We have to be \r\nnot just concerned about this, as I said, but we have to figure out a \r\nway to take action.\r\n This particular piece of legislation is aimed at a terrible \r\nmanifestation of this problem. When anti-Semitic views lead to \r\ndiscrimination against students of Jewish faith or Jewish ancestry, \r\nthat is the result, and they are the victims of this. The intent here \r\nis simple and narrowly circumscribed to make sure we are getting at the \r\nproblem as best we can to define anti-Semitism at long last--this \r\nhasn't been done before--to define anti-Semitism so that the Department \r\nof Education can effectively investigate allegations of discrimination \r\nmotivated by anti-Semitism under the Civil Rights Act. The bill does \r\nnot infringe on the First Amendment. It does not infringe on those \r\nrights of free speech. It is intended to help protect students from \r\ndiscrimination on the basis of their faith.\r\n We all agree that religious discrimination has no place on campuses, \r\nhas no place in our society, and we have to do more than just speak out \r\nagainst it. That is fundamental, but we can do more than just speak \r\nout; we can define it and thereby give in this case one Federal \r\nGovernment agency one tool it needs to deal with this issue. This is a \r\nbill which is timely not only because of what is happening on college \r\ncampuses but unfortunately what has happened in too many parts of our \r\nsociety. We want to make sure the Department of Education has at least \r\none of those tools to deal with this problem.\r\n Because of the nature of this problem, we have people on both sides \r\nof the aisle here who are very concerned about it. I am particularly \r\ngrateful that I am joined by my colleague from South Carolina, Senator \r\nScott, who is joining with me. We are a Democrat and a Republican from \r\ndifferent parts of the country and a different point of view on a lot \r\nof issues. On this issue we are unified, and we have a solidarity about \r\nnot just the problem, but there is a solidarity and a consensus about \r\none of the things we can do to take action on this issue.\r\n I am grateful to be joined by my colleague from South Carolina.\r\n I yield the floor to him.\r\n The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.\r\n Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, I thank Senator Casey for joining me on the \r\nfloor.\r\n There is no question that much of our country yearns for a day when \r\nRepublicans and Democrats come together on issues that impact who we \r\nare as a nation. I am thankful that Senator Casey has joined me in this \r\nobjective of making sure hate is pushed out of this Nation every single \r\nday.\r\n Today I come to speak about an alarming issue--the issue of hate. It \r\ntruly tears at the very fabric of our great Nation and should inspire \r\nall of us to stand up and be counted on the side of justice, on the \r\nside of common sense, and on the side of making sure this great \r\nAmerican family remains one Nation.\r\n Over the past several years, there has been a sharp rise in \r\nreligiously motivated hate crimes, particularly on our college and \r\nuniversity campuses all over America. According to the FBI, close to 60 \r\npercent of these crimes were due to anti-Jewish sentiments. From 2014 \r\nto 2015, we saw the number of reported incidents double. Let me say \r\nthat one more time. In a year, we saw a doubling of the incidence of \r\nreligious discrimination on college campuses, and the vast majority of \r\nthose issues and situations focused on the Jewish community. There were \r\n90 anti-Jewish incidents reported at 60 schools last year, compared \r\nwith 47 incidents on 43 campuses just the year before. These numbers \r\nare staggering.\r\n Senator Casey noted that there have been college campuses and \r\nbuildings on college campuses where we have seen swastikas. We have \r\nheard protests that call for Zionists to leave the school, and we have \r\nheard references being made to burning in Auschwitz. I am stunned and \r\nsaddened by the careless and hateful reminders of such an incredibly \r\ndark and daunting time in our world's history, but I also feel \r\nempowered and committed to taking a stand against hate. No one, not a \r\nsingle person should ever have to experience being singled out because \r\nof who they are or attacked based on the religion they choose to \r\nfollow. There is simply no place in our country for this kind of \r\nintolerance, especially not in our country, the greatest country on \r\nEarth.\r\n As citizens of this great Nation, it falls on us to stand up and do \r\nmore to protect our students from being targeted by any form of hate \r\nand bigotry.\r\n\r\n[[Page S6650]]\r\n\r\nIt is important that we work together to stamp out anti-Semitism and \r\nother forms of religious discrimination. Our students should be able to \r\ngo to school, to grow, to learn, and to develop without having to worry \r\nabout being discriminated against. Although the Department of \r\nEducation's Office of Civil Rights has stated that they will not \r\ntolerate incidents such as these, there exists a lack of firm guidance \r\non what constitutes anti-Semitic acts. That is why Senator Casey and I \r\nstand before you today to introduce the bipartisan Anti-Semitism \r\nAwareness Act. We have come together to ensure that the U.S. Department \r\nof Education has the necessary tools at their disposal to investigate \r\nanti-Jewish discrimination.\r\n\r\n Our proposed legislation uses the very definition of anti-Semitism \r\nadopted by the U.S. State Department's Special Envoy to monitor and \r\ncombat anti-Semitism. This important clarification will provide \r\nnecessary direction to assist officials and administrators to \r\nunderstand when anti-Semitic activities are occurring. By clarifying \r\nexactly what anti-Semitism is, we will leave no question as to what \r\nconstitutes an illegal anti-Semitic incident.\r\n As we seek to tackle this concerning issue, it is important to note \r\nthat this act will in no way infringe on any individual right protected \r\nunder the First Amendment of the Constitution. I think we have to \r\nemphasize that. Our legislation in no way, shape, or form infringes \r\nupon any individual rights protected under the First Amendment of the \r\nConstitution. It simply and specifically provides clarity on the \r\ndefinition that the Department of Education can and will use for \r\ndefining anti-Semitic acts.\r\n We must act now. This increase in religiously motivated hate crimes \r\nmust be addressed. It must be addressed by the entire American family, \r\nand it ought to start here. We will come together because we will not \r\nallow others to tear us apart. We must hold to the ideals that our \r\nNation was founded on and promote freedom of religion. We must protect \r\nthat freedom and encourage it. We must--as a Nation, as an American \r\nfamily--call out hate wherever and whenever we see it.\r\n I thank Senator Casey for his involvement and leadership on such an \r\nimportant issue.\r\n I yield the floor.\r\n Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. President, I would like to thank Senators Scott and \r\nCasey for their work on the antidiscrimination legislation, \r\nparticularly as it relates to anti-Semitism. I support them in that \r\neffort and look forward to getting something done in Congress to help \r\naddress the definition of anti-Semitism for the Department of \r\nEducation.\r\n Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be \r\nread a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered \r\nmade and laid upon the table.\r\n The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\r\n The bill (S. 10) was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was \r\nread the third time, and passed, as follows:\r\n\r\n S. 10\r\n\r\n Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of \r\n the United States of America in Congress assembled,\r\n\r\n SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.\r\n\r\n This Act may be cited as the ``Anti-Semitism Awareness Act \r\n of 2016''.\r\n\r\n SEC. 2. FINDINGS.\r\n\r\n Congress makes the following findings:\r\n (1) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (referred to \r\n in the section as ``title VI'') is one of the principal \r\n antidiscrimination statutes enforced by the Department of \r\n Education's Office for Civil Rights.\r\n (2) Title VI prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, \r\n color, or national origin.\r\n (3) Both the Department of Justice and the Department of \r\n Education have properly concluded that title VI prohibits \r\n discrimination against Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, and members of \r\n other religious groups when the discrimination is based on \r\n the group's actual or perceived shared ancestry or ethnic \r\n characteristics or when the discrimination is based on actual \r\n or perceived citizenship or residence in a country whose \r\n residents share a dominant religion or a distinct religious \r\n identity.\r\n (4) A September 8, 2010 letter from Assistant Attorney \r\n General Thomas E. Perez to Assistant Secretary for Civil \r\n Rights Russlynn H. Ali stated that ``[a]lthough Title VI does \r\n not prohibit discrimination on the basis of religion, \r\n discrimination against Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, and members of \r\n other groups violates Title VI when that discrimination is \r\n based on the group's actual or perceived shared ancestry or \r\n ethnic characteristics''.\r\n (5) To assist State and local educational agencies and \r\n schools in their efforts to comply with Federal law, the \r\n Department of Education periodically issues Dear Colleague \r\n letters. On a number of occasions, these letters set forth \r\n the Department of Education's interpretation of the statutory \r\n and regulatory obligations of schools under title VI.\r\n (6) On September 13, 2004, the Department of Education \r\n issued a Dear Colleague letter regarding the obligations of \r\n schools (including colleges) under title VI to address \r\n incidents involving religious discrimination. The 2004 letter \r\n specifically notes that ``since the attacks of September 11, \r\n 2001, OCR has received complaints of race or national origin \r\n harassment commingled with aspects of religious \r\n discrimination against Arab Muslim, Sikh, and Jewish \r\n students.''.\r\n (7) An October 26, 2010 Dear Colleague letter issued by the \r\n Department of Education stated, ``While Title VI does not \r\n cover discrimination based solely on religion, groups that \r\n face discrimination on the basis of actual or perceived \r\n shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics may not be denied \r\n protection under Title VI on the ground that they also share \r\n a common faith. These principles apply not just to Jewish \r\n students, but also to students from any discrete religious \r\n group that shares, or is perceived to share, ancestry or \r\n ethnic characteristics (e.g., Muslims or Sikhs).''.\r\n (8) Anti-Semitism remains a persistent, disturbing problem \r\n in elementary and secondary schools and on college campuses.\r\n (9) Jewish students are being threatened, harassed, or \r\n intimidated in their schools (including on their campuses) on \r\n the basis of their shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics \r\n including through harassing conduct that creates a hostile \r\n environment so severe, pervasive, or persistent so as to \r\n interfere with or limit some students' ability to participate \r\n in or benefit from the services, activities, or opportunities \r\n offered by schools.\r\n (10) The 2010 Dear Colleague letter cautioned schools that \r\n they ``must take prompt and effective steps reasonably \r\n calculated to end the harassment, eliminate any hostile \r\n environment, and its effects, and prevent the harassment from \r\n recurring,'' but did not provide guidance on current \r\n manifestation of anti-Semitism, including discriminatory \r\n anti-Semitic conduct that is couched as anti-Israel or anti-\r\n Zionist.\r\n (11) The definition and examples referred to in paragraphs \r\n (1) and (2) of section 3 have been valuable tools to help \r\n identify contemporary manifestations of anti-Semitism, and \r\n include useful examples of discriminatory anti-Israel conduct \r\n that crosses the line into anti-Semitism.\r\n (12) Awareness of this definition of anti-Semitism will \r\n increase understanding of the parameters of contemporary \r\n anti-Jewish conduct and will assist the Department of \r\n Education in determining whether an investigation of anti-\r\n Semitism under title VI is warranted.\r\n\r\n SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.\r\n\r\n For purposes of this Act, the term ``definition of anti-\r\n Semitism''--\r\n (1) includes the definition of anti-Semitism set forth by \r\n the Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism of the \r\n Department of State in the Fact Sheet issued on June 8, 2010, \r\n as adapted from the Working Definition of Anti-Semitism of \r\n the European Monitoring Center on Racism and Xenophobia (now \r\n known as the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights); \r\n and\r\n (2) includes the examples set forth under the headings \r\n ``Contemporary Examples of Anti-Semitism'' and ``What is \r\n Anti-Semitism Relative to Israel?'' of the Fact Sheet.\r\n\r\n SEC. 4. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION FOR TITLE VI OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS \r\n ACT OF 1964.\r\n\r\n In reviewing, investigating, or deciding whether there has \r\n been a violation of title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 \r\n (42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.) on the basis of race, color, or \r\n national origin, based on an individual's actual or perceived \r\n shared Jewish ancestry or Jewish ethnic characteristics, the \r\n Department of Education shall take into consideration the \r\n definition of anti-Semitism as part of the Department's \r\n assessment of whether the alleged practice was motivated by \r\n anti-Semitic intent.\r\n\r\n SEC. 5. CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS.\r\n\r\n Nothing in this Act, or an amendment made by this Act, \r\n shall be construed to diminish or infringe upon any right \r\n protected under the First Amendment to the Constitution of \r\n the United States.\r\n\r\n Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.\r\n The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\r\n The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\r\n Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for \r\nthe quorum call be rescinded.\r\n The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.","author":"ANTI-SEMITISM AWARENESS ACT OF 2016","parent_id":294335,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2016-12-03 08:06:33","modified":"2016-12-03 08:06:33","fileurl":""},{"id":294358,"heading":"Is this the anti bds law?","article":"If so, it is not a good idea.","author":"Volunteer","parent_id":294335,"mime_type":"","created":"2016-12-09 03:09:01","modified":"2016-12-09 03:09:01","fileurl":""}]}