Notes:

• The problem with student fees:

  • USAC is an old institution with bylaws and mission statements that require it to represent all students. There are also accountability measures that students have tried to invoke, to no avail.

    CAC is the USAC arm of SJP. Together they have “institutionalized” anti-Israel rhetoric based on past positions (incidents really), consistent measures against Israel, and an unwillingness to work with Jewish organizations. When there have been calls for USAC to work with Jewish organizations, and calls for the impeachment of Verdugo, the USAC has done nothing. Verdugo was even called out by the Daily Bruin, and still nothing. In fact she was elected to another term shortly thereafter. Despite systems in place to handle Verdugo’s misconduct, no action has been taken, making all USAC members complicit.

    If fees are mandatory, and the Jewish and more specifically Israeli population are too small a voting bloc to be represented, is this made clear when a student signs a contract to attend the university? More relevant to these matters, because anti-Israel rhetoric has now been institutionalized within USAC, has this been made clear when a student agrees to attend the university? If the student government is consistently biased against a certain group, then the government is now an “anti-Israel” government, and it is no longer a question of whether an Israeli or Jewish student will “at times” not be represented, or “at times” be targeted. The question is now, is the student willing to “at all times” be targeted by the student government at UCLA? Is the student willing to renounce Israel to attend the university?

    “Anti-Israel” does not mean anti-war, it does not mean anti-occupation, it means anti-state of Israel.

• The problem with UCLA handling:

  • Rather than offer ‘rhetorical guidance,’ they claim a ‘hands-off approach’ to allow for the ‘free exchange of ideas.’ But in the qualification of unprotected incidents as ‘worthy’ of a response or not, this is in and of itself an ‘administrative position’ whereby this ‘position’ has forfeited the ‘free exchange’ for ‘administrative bias.’

• Solution:

  • Force the school to engage in the same way they force students to engage. Withhold the fees.

• USAC is corrupt:

  1. They’re discriminating

     • CAC is discriminating

  2. Their resolution is unconstitutional

     • By the preamble

  3. Violating II.B.3.a of their constitution

     • Students have a right to the fair hearings of grievances

  4. They are not holding members accountable (bylaws)

     • Abuse of power

• CEC and CAC participated in the protest:

  • The protest violated Title VI by blockading free movement of other students

  • Assume they were there in an official capacity

    • doesn’t matter if they appropriated funds towards the encampment

    • student fees pay for their employment (Reddit post)

    • 86.11 Conditions for Support “Particular programs and activities of a Registered Campus Organization funded from compulsory campus-based student fees shall be open to participation by the entire campus community.”

    • Violating II.B.3.a of their constitution

      • Students have the right to participate in all ASUCLA - sponsored activities

• UCLA negligence is creating administrative bias against both groups of students

  • Conflating protected and unprotected activity

    • By not “protecting” protected activity, outcome—violence

      • SJP initial teach-in

      • Incidents on campus where any physical altercations take place

      • The protest

    • By not reacting to “unprotected” (by conduct policy, by United States law, or by USAC constitution), outcome—discrimination

      • the protest: they didn’t offer the proper “manner” guidance to protesters

      • office of EDI is not responding to Hillel complaints

      • complaints that USAC will not work with the Jewish community on campus

      • they aren’t removing or condemning acts of hate and discrimination on campus

        • all the signs at the protest

        • the BDS protest in March and the pig effigy

Things that need to be addressed from an opinion standpoint

• Campus community

  • Blocking pathways, reddit etc

  • Definition of Zionism

    • International Hillel vs that Bruin article (“Protest Demands”) vs JVP vs Reddit vs ADL

    • Why won’t SJP define Zionism? The omission leaves people to assume the worst—the omission is deliberate.

    • General student population caught in the middle

    • Students looking for moderate rhetoric, ie a 2-state solution, have no outlet

  • Identity first positions

    • message activism over identity activism

• Kids shouldn’t be trusted with so much responsibility

  • J1 they were against, yet they want to censor other viewpoints? This is not “content-neutral”

  • Freedoms for universities in any country to work together

  • Microcosm of what is happening on national level

• • To a certain extent, because the administration allowed the pro-Israel agitators to repeatedly threaten the students, this caused them to start blockading

• Why are they accepting fees from “Zionist” students anyways? Isn’t any money from a self-proclaimed “Zionist” blood money?

• Title VI and Title IX training

  • These are basic needs issues. No educating can occur until these kids are “satisfactorily” helped to adulthood. This “education” may be the most important education kids get at college. Yet somehow their brains are filled with everything but, while this vitally important part is left confused and underdeveloped.

  • It looks like with Title IX, based on legal obligations to inform students of their rights, a literacy component is provided. With respect to Title VI, is there a legal obligation to inform students of their rights? Or is there only a legal obligation to “protect” students’ rights? If part of that protection mechanism relies on the student then, like Title IX, they should be made literate and informed of their rights.

“I heard someone say earlier today UCLA is a bank that has classes sometimes,” Paul said. “Ultimately, we pay them hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to listen to student interests, and they simply are not.” article