The rise of antisemitism on college campuses across the United States has reached alarming levels, demanding immediate and decisive action. Central to these troubling developments is the group known as Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), implicated in numerous incidents that extend beyond free speech into coordinated harassment and intimidation. While purporting to advocate for Palestinian rights, SJP repeatedly crosses legal boundaries that protect the civil liberties of Jewish students and students of Israeli national origin. Given the severity and organized nature of their actions, a class action lawsuit under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) emerges as a necessary legal remedy.
RICO provides a powerful tool for addressing wrongful acts done as part of an ongoing criminal organization. Originally designed to combat organized crime, legal practitioners have successfully applied RICO in various civil contexts, including dismantling the Ku Klux Klan and curtailing aggressive tactics by anti-abortion groups. These precedents illustrate RICO's applicability to organizations that, under the guise of advocacy, engage in systematic violations of individuals' rights.
In the context of SJP, applying RICO is appropriate due to the alleged coordinated nature of their activities across state lines, which affects a national population of students. The statute specifically targets patterns of racketeering activity—defined as the commission of multiple acts indicative of an ongoing, organized conspiracy to commit fundamental breaches of the law. SJP's repeated engagements in tactics that intimidate, harass, and silence Jewish students and supporters of Israel fit the legal definition of racketeering activity.
A class action lawsuit is particularly suitable for addressing the widespread influence of SJP's alleged misconduct. This strategy allows for the collective representation of all affected Jewish students and students of Israeli national origin, thereby addressing the scope of the issue across multiple educational institutions. By preventing the fragmented litigation of similar claims, this approach can lead to consistent rulings and standards of proof across different jurisdictions.
Including all affected students in the lawsuit emphasizes the systemic nature of the grievances and could help in securing a broad-based injunction that provides clear, consistent protections. Moreover, it enhances the enforceability and influence of the court's rulings, potentially setting a precedent that could deter similar behaviors in other organizations.
A proposed model lawsuit compiled by the Middle East Forum catalogs over 100 specific incidents involving SJP, ranging from physical intimidation to the disruption of academic events and systemic harassment. These incidents collectively suggest a pattern of behavior that aligns with RICO's provisions against sustained and organized harassment. The lawsuit would seek to halt these activities through injunctive relief, secure punitive measures to deter future misconduct, and obtain compensatory damages for those affected.
By establishing SJP as a RICO violator, the lawsuit could lead to significant structural changes within the organization, potentially curtailing its presence and activities on campuses. Such a legal designation would not only penalize past actions but could also precipitate the dissolution of—or significant operational limitations on—SJP on campuses nationwide.
Individual members of SJP could face severe consequences if found liable under a RICO-based lawsuit. These include significant financial penalties like triple damages and legal costs, injunctive relief that could restrict their activities or dissolve SJP chapters, personal civil liability for damages caused, and potential criminal implications if overlapping criminal behaviors are identified. Additionally, they could suffer reputational damage and educational repercussions such as disciplinary actions from their institutions. Collectively, these consequences would not only penalize the involved individuals, but also serve as a strong deterrent against similar future misconduct, aiming to restore a safe and respectful environment on campuses.
If members of SJP are found liable under a RICO-based lawsuit, regrouping under a new name would not shield them from legal consequences due to the comprehensive nature of RICO. This statute allows for broad injunctive relief that can prohibit similar future activities regardless of the organization's name by focusing on dismantling the underlying "enterprise" involved in the racketeering activity. Such a ruling would include close monitoring and stringent compliance measures to prevent the continuation of illegal conduct, thereby making it legally risky and less attractive for the same group to rebrand and continue operations. Additionally, the personal liabilities incurred by individual members would follow them, further deterring reformation under a new guise and significantly hindering the viability and continuity of their movement.
Pursuing legal action against SJP would affirm the American legal system's commitment to protecting students from discrimination and harassment based on national origin and religion. It would also emphasize the seriousness with which the legal system treats such cases, potentially encouraging other educational institutions to take more proactive measures in preventing similar behaviors.
The consequences of inaction are clear: a continuation of the hostile environment that stifles academic freedom and undermines the educational experiences of countless students. Conversely, successful litigation of this case could fundamentally reshape campus dynamics, fostering an academic environment where open dialogue and safety are guaranteed for all students, regardless of their background or political beliefs.
To ensure an effective resolution to the rampant antisemitism on college campuses, it is imperative to address the root of the problem. While individual Title VI claims against universities for allowing a hostile environment have merit, these efforts may be better channeled into a unified and strategic legal approach. Therefore, lawyers and plaintiffs currently pursuing such claims should consider redirecting their focus and resources toward directly confronting the primary purveyor of these antisemitic activities: Students for Justice in Palestine. By initiating a comprehensive RICO-based lawsuit against SJP, attorneys can target the core structure and activities that perpetuate discrimination and hostility. This consolidated action would not only amplify the impact but also enhance the likelihood of achieving significant systemic change, thereby safeguarding the rights and well-being of Jewish and Israeli students across the nation.
To effectively combat the surge of campus antisemitism, a unified legal front against SJP through a class action RICO lawsuit is essential. This approach is not merely legally sound—it is a moral imperative that tackles the core of this national issue, aiming to deliver justice for the victims and set a powerful precedent to ensure the safety and dignity of all students across the nation's campuses. Decisive action is required now. Lawyers, plaintiffs, and all stakeholders committed to civil rights and academic freedom must unite their efforts and resources on this critical battle. It is crucial that the courts rigorously assess and act upon these claims. By standing firm in this pivotal moment, the networks of hate can be dismantled, and a commitment to a safe and inclusive academic environment can be reaffirmed. The time has come to turn the tide against antisemitism in American educational institutions once and for all.
Gregg Roman is director of the Middle East Forum.
