The Faculty Lounge

Drexel University Kline Law Seeks 2 VAPs

This just in from the appointments committee at my own institution:

The Drexel University Thomas R. Kline School of Law in invites applications for  two Visiting Assistant Professor positions. One position is dedicated to a faculty member who will teach and research in the area of tax. The other position is open, with a preference for someone who does research that touches on legal implications of new technology and/or someone open to teaching Torts. Each position will last two years and VAP’s are expected to fully participate in the intellectual life of the law school.

We seek candidates who hold (at minimum) a JD or appropriate equivalent degree. We are particularly interested in candidates embarking on an academic career. The Kline School of Law is committed to recruiting, developing, retaining, and rewarding faculty members who bring scholarly interests and life experiences that contribute to the diversity and success of our students, our University, and our communities.

Drexel University, founded in 1891, is an R1 comprehensive research institution located in University City, Philadelphia. Drexel established its law school in 2006, and it has rapidly developed a reputation for innovative scholarship across disciplines, a diverse portfolio of academic programs, and a focus on civic engagement. The Kline School of Law is home to the Center for Law and Transformational Technology and the Center for Law, Policy and Social Action. The law school has a vibrant scholarly culture, including an active workshop series. Kline Law has moved up steadily in the rankings and is now ranked #81 by U.S. News and #37 by Above the Law.

Applications for this position should include a CV and cover letter.

Review of applications will begin immediately, and prompt application is encouraged. Questions should be directed to Professor Bret Asbury.

Apply online via Drexel’s HR portal: https://careers.drexel.edu/en-us/job/497570/visiting-assistant-professor-kline-school-of-law.

More on the Unsupported Charges of Anti-Semitism in DEI Offices

I have a followup essay today at Social Science Space:

There Is No Proof of Rampant Anti-Semitism in University Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Offices

Published on 01/19/2022  by Steven Lubet

The right-wing Heritage Foundation has accused university Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) offices of spreading anti-Semitism on campuses, but its recently  issued report does not back up the claim. Although Heritage touts the study, titled Inclusion Delusion: The Antisemitism of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Staff at Universities, as revealing that “an overwhelming number of DEI hires are spewing antisemitic views about Israel on social media,” it is actually an instance of selective data presentation in support of a conservative cause.

The study’s authors claim that DEI offices not only fail to protect the interests of Jewish student, but instead “foment” anti-Semitism and “may be contributing to an increase in anti-Jewish hatred.” While certain DEI advocates have been inexcusably dismissive of Jewish students and faculty, sometimes veering into negative stereotypes and even overt hostility, the study’s methodology does not begin to establish its overheated assertion that “political activism of DEI staff may help explain the rising frequency of antisemitic incidents” on campuses.

The Heritage study began by identifying 2,933 DEI personnel at 65 major U.S. universities, of whom 741 had publicly accessible Twitter accounts. Those accounts were then searched for tweets, retweets, and likes that evinced, as the report put it, “anti-Israel attitudes that are so out of proportion and imbalanced as to constitute antisemitism.”

The researchers ultimately found 605 tweets with extraordinarily harsh statements about Israel, a phenomenon that may indeed coincide with anti-Semitism. Many such tweets threw down a new twist on an ancient blood libel, as in “israel (sic) has a particular loathing for children. they target them with violence specifically and intentionally every single day.”

Another charged,

Y’all love to add the word liberal in front of the most evil things and it’s unhingedddd. Wtf is a liberal Zionist? What’s next? Liberal Nazi? Liberal colonizer? Liberal murderer? Liberal imperialist? Liberal fascist?

And a third threatened, “‘from the river to the sea’ means that we will decolonize every block and every grain of sand in palestine (sic).”

In contrast to all that condemnation, there were only 28 tweets favorable to Israel, some of them only mildly so. But the imbalance does not tell the whole story, because the most important information is strangely missing from the report.

In a study of anti-Semitism among DEI personal, the most significant figure would be the number or proportion of biased staffers, not the ratio of nasty tweets. And yet, as I have explained in The Forward, the Heritage report never tells us whether the 605 troubling tweets were generated by a single person tweeting almost 600 times, by 30 DEI officers tweeting 20 times apiece, or by 300 personnel tweeting only twice each.

Although the Heritage website claims to have documented an “overwhelming pattern” of anti-Semitism – a conclusion repeated in media reports – there may well be no pattern at all. If it turns out that only a handful of DEI personnel were responsible for nearly all of the Israel bashing – which can hardly be ruled out, given the profound enmity toward Israel of some progressives – the modal number of angry tweets per staffer could easily be zero.

"The Trials of Rasmea Odeh" Excerpted on The Daily Beast

The Daily Beast published an except last week from The Trials of Rasmea Odeh.  Here is the non-paywalled link.

Here are the intro and opening paragraphs:

Meet the Palestinian Terrorist Who Lied Her Way Into America

In his new book, The Trials of Rasmea Odeh: How a Palestinian Guerrilla Gained and Lost U.S. Citizenship, Steven Lubet tells the remarkable story of Rasmea Odeh. A Palestinian woman from the West Bank town of Ramallah, Odeh was convicted for murder in Israel in 1969, following a deadly bombing in Jerusalem’s largest supermarket. Twenty-five years later, however, Odeh was not serving a life sentence in an Israeli prison but instead starting a new life in the United States, first in Detroit and later in Chicago, eventually becoming a naturalized citizen and working as a community organizer. Her arrest by federal authorities in 2013, and subsequent trial on charges of unlawful procurement of citizenship brought progressive activists to her defense, even as the facts of the immigration case, the Israeli conviction, and Odeh's early life were obscured or ignored.

Although sentenced to two life terms in prison for her role in the Jerusalem supermarket bombing and another bombing at the British consulate, Odeh was released in a prisoner exchange with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) on March 14, 1979. Three months later she was in Geneva, testifying about her ill-treatment in Israel before a session of the UN Special Committee investigating human rights violations in the occupied territories.

Within the first minutes of her testimony, Odeh began lying about her participation in the PFLP’s guerrilla operations. She told the committee that she had never had explosives in her home, that she knew nothing about Palestinian commandos or resistance, and that she had no involvement in the Jerusalem bombings or other “military operations.” As we will see, all of these assertions were untrue and have been flatly contradicted by Odeh’s own words in later interviews as well as by other participants in the bombing.

Needless to say, I am already getting hate mail.

University of Illinois Seeks Director of Trial Advocacy

Director of the Anderson Center for Advocacy and Professionalism; Director of Trial Advocacy; and Teaching Assistant Professor

The University of Illinois College of Law is seeking a dynamic and accomplished practitioner or legal academic to serve as its inaugural director of the Kimball R. Anderson and Karen Gatsis Anderson Center for Advocacy and Professionalism and to direct the College of Law’s Trial Advocacy Program. The Anderson Center is an exciting new initiative at the College of Law, designed to foster learning and scholarship at the intersection of two key areas – advocacy and professional ethics. 

In this position, you would oversee the College of Law’s successful Trial Advocacy, Trial Team, and Moot Court programs. You would lead multiple teams of adjunct professors, including senior prosecutors, defense lawyers, and judges. You would be assisted by a legal professional with experience in these programs. You would also teach related courses, instructing students in basic and advanced trial advocacy techniques.

As the Director of the Anderson Center you would oversee the Center’s initial developmental phases and design and implement a strategic plan intended to further the “best in class” goal of the Center.  In this role, you would work closely with the Dean of the College of Law, a wide variety of senior administrative professionals in the area of admissions, career services, and advancement, various members of our world-class faculty, and a superb group of legal professionals serving as advisers on the Anderson Center Advisory Board.

Beatles' Covers (by, not of) [UPDATED]

The Beatles began as a cover band, playing American R&B songs at Liverpool's Cavern Club and at various bars in Hamburg. Here are the original artists performing of some of the songs the Beatles covered for their early albums and performances. 

Northern Kentucky University Seeks Director of Legal Research and Writing

Northern Kentucky University – Salmon P. Chase College of Law welcomes applications for appointment to the position of Director of Legal Research and Writing to help create, administer, and direct the College of Law's Legal Research and Writing Program. This is a tenure-track position in which the Director holds the rank of Assistant, Associate, or Full Professor of Legal Writing. Responsibilities of the Director include: (1) developing and implementing comprehensive research and writing curriculum for law students at all levels; (2) administering and overseeing the Legal Research and Writing program, which includes a cadre of full-time and adjunct faculty; and (3) teaching in the Legal Research and Writing program in either the day or evening program, depending on curricular need. We are looking for someone who will be able to focus on all levels of the writing curriculum so that Chase students receive wrap-around instruction throughout their time at the law school.

This position is a full­-time, tenure-track or tenured faculty position. The Director of Legal Research and Writing position is a twelve-month position. Applicants for this position must possess a JD degree from an ABA-accredited law school and be admitted to the bar in any state. Ideally, applicants should have at least two or more years of teaching experience at the law school level; a demonstrated commitment to teaching Legal Writing; excellent academic and professional credentials (including judicial clerkships); and a demonstrated commitment to teaching, scholarship, and service.

NKU is a growing metropolitan university of more than 15,000 students served by more than 2,000 faculty and staff on a thriving campus near Cincinnati. Located in the quiet suburb of Highland Heights, Kentucky—just seven miles southeast of Cincinnati—we have become a leader in Greater Cincinnati and Kentucky by providing a private school education for a fraction of the cost. While we are one of the fastest growing universities in Kentucky, our professors still know our students' names.  For more information about NKU and Chase, please visit nku.edu and chaselaw.nku.edu.  NKU is an Equal Opportunity/Equal Access/Affirmative Action institution. We embrace inclusiveness, equity, and global awareness in all dimensions of our work and seek excellence through diversity among our students, administrators, faculty, and staff. Application by members of diverse groups is highly encouraged.

The Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky metro area has a population exceeding 2.1 million. The region is an enjoyable place to live that is undergoing exciting urban revitalization and economic growth. The area includes a great variety of attractions, such as museums (art, historic, children’s, and more), a plenitude of live music venues, professional sports, riverfront parks, biking trails, a fantastic zoo, large aquarium, and many festivals. Educational options for children are diverse, and affordable housing options range from downtown lofts to renovated turn-of-the-century homes to quaint farmhouses.

Application Procedure:

If you are interested in this position, please apply through jobs.nku.edu.  Review of applications will begin immediately and will continue until the position is filled.

Liz Magill named President of Penn

The University of Pennsylvania has announced that its new president will be M. Elizabeth Magill.  Magill has served as the Executive Vice President and Provost of the University of Virginia since 2019 and previously served as the dean of  Stanford Law School.  She will assume the Penn Presidency on July 1, 2022.

Washburn Seeks Clinical VAP

WASHBURN UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW invites applicants for a visiting assistant professor for the 2022-23 academic year to teach in the Washburn Law Clinic and may assist in the Third Year Anywhere™ program, which allows students to increase their practice-readiness by externing in the geographic area where they plan to practice after graduation. We are particularly interested in applicants who wish to teach a transactional law clinic, but all subject areas will be considered, including criminal law. The position could convert to a tenure track position after the 2022-23 academic year. We seek engaging candidates who value and demonstrate a commitment to diversity, equity, inclusion, belonging, and to pursuing teaching excellence at Washburn University, including a dedication to developing inclusive teaching practices.

Founded in 1970, Washburn University School of Law’s in-house, live client clinical program has been an integral part of the law school curriculum staffed by tenured and tenure-track positions. Our current clinical offerings include Family Justice & Immigration Law, Civil Litigation, and Small Business & Nonprofit Transactional (SBNT) Law. Washburn also hosts a Criminal Appeals Advocacy section of the Clinic administered in cooperation with the Appellate Defender Office. The SBNT Clinic was initiated in 2005 and continues to be the only law school clinic in Kansas that represents businesses and nonprofit organizations. 

The Washburn campus is located in the heart of Topeka, Kansas, blocks from the historic state capitol. Topeka features affordable housing; beautiful, historic neighborhoods filled with well-maintained parks; and a nationally recognized public library. It is also the home of the Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Site. 

Washburn University School of Law is committed to diversity in its faculty and encourages applicants whose backgrounds will enrich the law school. We offer competitive wages, an excellent benefits program, a supportive leadership team, and a healthy work/life balance. At Washburn, we strive to ensure a campus climate that supports the success of every employee and appreciates the unique skills and expertise each contributes to serving our students. 

Required Qualifications: 

• A JD degree from an ABA accredited law school.
• A demonstrated commitment to clinical legal education.
• Must have a Kansas bar license or be eligible to apply for a restricted license to practice in a clinical setting for the length of the appointment, which does not require the taking of the Kansas state bar exam.
• A demonstrated commitment to developing inclusive teaching practices that engage students from diverse backgrounds.

Responsibilities:

• This visitor will fulfill teaching expectations associated with an appointment as a visiting assistant professor and as outlined in the faculty handbook. They will teach full-time in the clinic and/or part-time in the clinic with other courses as assigned.
• If the position is converted to a tenure-track appointment, the incumbent is responsible for fulfilling teaching expectations associated with a tenure-track appointment. Teach a full workload as outlined in the faculty handbook.
• If the position is converted to a tenure-track appointment, the incumbent is responsible for fulfilling scholarship expectations associated with a tenure-track appointment.
• This visitor will fulfill service expectations by engaging in service activities in the department, university, and profession.
• If the position is converted to a tenure-track appointment, the incumbent is responsible for fulfilling service expectations associated with a tenure-track appointment.

Application Procedures:

• Review of applications will begin January 14, 2022, and continue until the position is filled. (All faculty appointments are contingent upon funding.)
• Interested candidates should send a resume, a cover letter and the names/addresses/phone numbers of three professional references to facultytalent@washburn.edu and include “Visiting Assistant Professor, F2771221” on the subject line.
• If you have questions about the position, please contact Professor Michelle Ewert, Chair, Clinic VAP Screening Committee, at michelle.ewert@washburn.edu.
• The successful candidate will be required to submit to a background check prior to hire.
• Official transcripts are required once hired.

Washburn is an EOE and is dedicated to providing a student-centered and teaching-focused academic and work environment. We seek candidates who are committed to Washburn’s efforts to create a campus climate that fosters the growth and development of a diverse student body, and we encourage applications from members of groups that have been historically underrepresented and/or marginalized in higher education.

Washburn University provides equal access to and opportunity in its programs, facilities, and employment without regard to race, color, religion, age, national origin, ancestry, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, genetic information, veteran status, or marital or parental status.

The full annoucement is here.

Lisa R. Freudenheim Named Dean of New England Law

New England Law | Boston has announced that Lisa R. Freudenheim, co-acting dean for the fall 2021 semester and professor of law at New England Law, will become its next dean.  Freudenheim, who holds a JD from NYU, took over this month.

Guest Post: In Defense of the Emory Law Journal

This guest post by John K. Wilson originally appeared on the AAUP's Academe Blog:

In Defense of the Emory Law Journal

John K. Wilson /

BY JOHN K. WILSON

This week, there was what Jonathan Turley called a “major controversy brewing over free speech and censorship at Emory Law Journal.” Robert George argued, “It’s hard to think of a stupider, more self-defeating idea than imposing political litmus tests on articles submitted to major law reviews. But that’s what the Emory Law Journal has done, rejecting on ideological grounds an essay by the brilliant legal scholar Lawrence Alexander.”

George is wrong on every count. The Emory Law Journal did not reject Alexander’s essay. They did not declare any ideological grounds and in fact expressly stated that they would happily publish views that most of the editors disagreed with. There is no political litmus test that the Emory Law Journal has ever stated or hinted at. 

Here’s what really happened: Larry Alexander submitted an embarrassingly bad article partly copied from one of his rants on a blog, and when the editors asked him to edit it and provide citations for some of his dumbest arguments, he refused to make any changes and instead tried to present himself as a victim of censorship.

Gail Heriot wrote in defense of Alexander at Instapundit: 

Editor-in-Chief Danielle Kerker sent an ultimatum to Larry: Either “greatly revise” the essay or the ELJ will have to “withdraw[] our publication offer.” Larry understood how destructive to academic values it would be to cower under such pressure. He declined to revise the article.

No, revising an article is not destructive to academic values; it is the essence of academic values. This is standard operating procedure for any publication: If you refuse to make any changes, the editors can refuse to publish it.

Here were the changes Emory Law Journal editor-in-chief Danielle Kerker asked for in an email to Alexander:

I shared the piece with my Executive Board, and they unanimously stated they do not feel comfortable publishing this piece as written. We think there are fair points of intellectual disagreement that would not necessarily warrant the extreme action of withdrawing our publication offer. However, we believe this piece would need to be greatly revised to be published in our journal.

We take issue with your conversation on systemic racism, finding your words hurtful and unnecessarily divisive. Additionally, there are various instances of insensitive language use throughout the essay (e.g., widespread use of the objectifying term “blacks” and “the blacks” (pages 2, 3, 6, 8, etc.); the discussions on criminality and heredity (pages 11 and 14), the uncited statement that thankfully racism is not an issue today (page 18)).  And, crucially, the discussion on racism is not strongly connected to your commentary on Professor Perry’s work, which is the focus of the Issue and the purpose behind the publication opportunity offered.

Can you please modify the piece, removing Part III and focusing on building Parts I & II to discuss the merits of Professor Perry’s work, by Sunday, December 19? We would welcome a manuscript revised along the lines we have suggested, but, absent those revisions, ELJ will not publish this contribution to the festschrift.

The use of terms such as “insensitive,” “hurtful,” and “divisive” attracted angry attacks from conservatives. Personally, I don’t think “hurtful” or “divisive” is a good argument against scholarly work, and I wish the editors had focused exclusively on the essay’s intellectual flaws. But I suspect the editors were just trying to be polite by suggesting that Alexander was unintentionally offensive. We don’t know exactly what the editor was talking about, but if I had to guess it would be the section where Alexander argues that Disparate Racial Impact theory is “more in line with regimes such as Nazi Germany than with the literal ethos to which most Americans adhere.” (I think Alexander meant “liberal” and not “literal,” but I don’t want to censor him by doing any editing.) Comparing scholars concerned about racial disparities to Nazis is not merely “hurtful” and “divisive.” It’s also intellectually lazy, idiotic, and morally repugnant. I don’t think that requesting an author to edit out dumb and offensive Nazi comparisons is a form of censorship. I think it’s good editing.

The Chief Justice's Bad Math

My new column on The Hill posted this morning. Here is the gist:

The Hill

Chief Justice Roberts's bad math

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has a math problem. In his recently issued Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary, the chief made a basic mistake that would be obvious to anyone who encounters simple math concepts – ratios, proportions, averages – in their work or pastimes, including sports fans, teachers, fulfillment center operators, bakers, mechanics, even lawyers and many others. Roberts’s miscalculation matters because it downplays an ethics problem among federal judges, as I will explain below. 

The Journal’s comprehensive review of dockets discovered that 131 U.S. judges participated in at least 685 cases where they were clearly disqualified under the law during the period 2010-2018.

According to Roberts, “the 685 instances identified amount to a very small fraction—less than three hundredths of one percent—of the 2.5 million civil cases filed in the district courts in the nine years included in the study. That’s a 99.97% compliance rate.”

That was bad math, resulting in an overstated compliance figure, because it used the wrong denominator.

The total number of civil cases over nine years is completely irrelevant to the calculation of a “compliance rate” because there was never any reason for recusal in the overwhelming majority of those matters (either because the judge owned no stocks or because there were no corporate parties involved).

My understanding is that the researchers looked at 80,000–100,000 cases from which they identified the 685 recusal violations. The true rate of noncompliance is thus somewhere between .7 and .85 percent. That may not seem like a lot, but it is roughly triple the mortality rate from COVID-19 in the U.S., and about 25 times greater than Roberts’s own estimate of recusal failures. 

There is more to it, including his famous reference to statistical evidence as "sociological gobbledygook," and you can read the entire essay here.

Teaching Fellow: Stanford Law School LLM Program in Environmental Law & Policy

Stanford Law School is looking for a Teaching Fellow for the Stanford Law School LLM Program in Environmental Law & Policy.  You'll find the announcement here. 

Montana Law Seeks Dean

This just in: 

The University of Montana (UM) invites nominations and applications for the position of Dean of the Alexander Blewett III School of Law from interested individuals with diverse perspectives and backgrounds. This is an important opportunity to lead Montana's only law school and the only law school in the nation with an embedded Department of Public Administration and Policy. If you have an ability to foster collaboration and strategic partnerships with internal and external stakeholders, sharp budgeting and planning acumen, and a strong passion for how law and policy can work in tandem to improve society and honor the rich cultural landscape of Montana we encourage you to apply for this position.

Reporting directly to the Provost and Executive Vice President, the dean is the chief academic and administrative officer for the Blewett School of Law. The dean is responsible for administering the School's departments and programs, including maintaining accreditation by the American Bar Association (ABA) and the Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs and Administration (NASPAA), developing and implementing strategies to enhance academic innovation and quality, recruiting students and members of the faculty and staff, and managing organizational and financial structures that promote excellence in teaching, research and service.

A profile for this search with information about UM and the qualifications, preferred attributes, and key opportunities of the position can be found here. Potential candidates are invited to initiate a conversation about this opportunity through a preliminary contact (email or phone) with either Richard Wueste or Kimberly Templeton prior to submitting materials.

The Search Committee will begin a review of applications immediately and continue its work until an appointment is made. For best consideration, application materials should be received by February 22, 2022.

Application materials must include: 1) a letter of interest; 2) curriculum vitae and 3) names, addresses, telephone numbers, and email addresses for five (5) professional references, including a brief description of your relationship to that individual, who will be contacted only after candidates are notified.

Nominations and applications should be sent electronically (MS Word or PDF format) to: MontanaDeanLaw@agbsearch.com. All applications, nominations and inquiries will be handled in confidence.

Hiring Announcement: University of Arkansas Seeks Clinical Professor (Immigration)

The University of Arkansas School of Law (Fayetteville) invites applications from both entry-level and lateral candidates for a tenure track teaching position. The law school is focused on hiring an individual to direct our existing and successful Immigration Clinic. This is a nine-month position and would begin in Summer 2022. 

In furtherance of the law school’s fundamental commitment to experiential learning and equity, clinical professors have full tenure rights and equal voting privileges on all issues. They also have equal access to support for their scholarship, including research assistance and research grants.   

All applicants for the position should ideally have meaningful practice experience in immigration or asylum law and some familiarity with supervising law students or new attorneys. Additionally, candidates should ideally have demonstrated scholarly promise, strong teaching or mentorship skills, a distinguished academic record, and a commitment to service within the law school, university, and broader community. Any successful applicant will be expected to gain admission to the Arkansas bar.

   
The University of Arkansas-Fayetteville, located in the northwest corner of the state, is the flagship campus of the University of Arkansas. U.S. News & World Report has consistently ranked the city of Fayetteville as one of the “top five” places to live in America. The region is welcoming, forward-thinking, and full of opportunities for outdoor recreation. The University of Arkansas School of Law is committed to attracting a diverse workforce and is proud to be an equal opportunity, affirmative action institution. We welcome applications without regard to age, race/color, gender, pregnancy, national origin, disability, religion, marital or parental status, protected veteran status, military service, genetic information, sexual orientation or gender identity. Persons must have proof of legal authority to work in the United States on the first day of employment. All applicant information is subject to public disclosure under the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act. Questions and applications should be directed to Steve Clowney, Chair of the Faculty Appointments Committee, at sclowney@uark.edu.

Emily Janoski-Haehlen Named Dean of Akron Law

The University of Akron School of Law has announced that Emily Janoski-Haehlen, Associate Dean of Academic Affairs and Law Technology Programs and Director of the Law Library at Akron Law, will become its next dean.   She holds a JD from Northern Kentucky.  Janoski-Haehlen will take over on February 21, 2022.

 

 

 

 

What the Heritage Foundation Gets Wrong abut DEI and Anti-Semitism

Readers may recall that I have never hesitated to identify anti-Semitism in progressive quarters, but it is equally important to avoid making unsupported accusations. My new essay in The Forward dismantles the Heritage Foundation's recent claim that campus DEI offices are rife with anti-Semitism.

Here is the gist:

A recent Heritage Foundation report claims that university Diversity, Equity and Inclusion offices are so suffused with antisemitism that they might even be responsible for increased campus violence against Jews. Although the study has received some favorable coverage, it was so poorly executed that it reveals nothing more than how easily data can be manipulated to score a political point.

There have been some reported incidents of DEI advocates displaying troubling callousness or even hostility toward the interests of Jewish students, but the Heritage Institute’s methodology doesn’t establish any widespread “encouragement” of antisemitism.

The researchers found plenty of tweets by DEI staffers that evinced a hostile obsession with Israel, which often overlaps with antisemitism.

These are disturbing sentiments, but the overall numbers are insignificant. Among the 2,933 DEI staff surveyed, there were only 741 accessible Twitter accounts, from which there had been 605 anti-Israel tweets, retweets and likes (compared to only 28 favorable).

Although the imbalance is striking, the report never says how many unique accounts generated the 605 problematic tweets. Was it one DEI staffer tweeting 600 times, 20 staffers tweeting 30 times apiece or 200 staffers tweeting three times each?

Given the unrelenting enmity toward Israel of certain progressive activists, it is highly likely that a handful of DEI staffers were responsible for a great majority of the invectives. If so, the most common number of hostile tweets per person is probably zero.

It is bizarre that the authors of the Heritage Report – a Harvard PhD and a doctoral fellow at the University of Arkansas – withheld information so crucial to their hypothesis. Given the nature of their data collection, the Heritage Report authors could easily have provided the total number of supposedly anti-Israel tweeters, and specified the study’s time span, if that had been helpful to their case. The wobbly presentation of this study is indicative of the Heritage Foundation’s mission to delegitimize university DEI programs as a whole, having published multiple reports and op-eds calling for reductions in staffing and greater control by state legislatures.

You can read the entire piece here.