The three Brooklyn College students who were expelled from the Brooklyn College pro-BDS event and not allowed to express their dissenting views, have turned to legal means to address their grievances after the college's investigation into the incident tried to whitewash and play down what occurred when an ill-conveived anti-Israel event became a discriminatory assault on free speech.
The attorney's letter to CUNY and Brooklyn College administrators is presented below. It speaks for itself.
To:
Dr. Matthew Goldstein, Chancellor, the City University of New York
Dr. Karen L. Gould, President, Brooklyn College
Re: February 7, 2013 Incident at Brooklyn College
Dear Chancellor Goldstein and President Gould:
I write on behalf of my clients Ari Ziegler, Michael Ziegler, and Melanie Goldberg, current students at Brooklyn College who were wrongfully expelled from a February 7, 2013 BDS event at Brooklyn College.
In a letter dated February 25, 2013 (attached), I outlined the students’ positions regarding the February 7 incident and communicated their willingness to help with CUNY’s investigation into the matter. Subsequently, the students were interviewed by Mr. Schaffer as part of CUNY’s investigation. On April 12, 2013, Mr. Schaffer provided us with a copy of a report summarizing his findings (also attached).
While the report acknowledges that the three Jewish students were wrongfully expelled from the February 7 BDS event, the report ignores the obvious discriminatory motives behind the expulsion and fails to hold accountable the individuals and groups who were responsible for the incident. By issuing such a report, the University dodges the most critical issues surrounding the students’ expulsion and shirks its responsibility both to the three students who were victimized and to the University community at large. If this report constitutes the conclusion of the investigation into this matter, CUNY and Brooklyn College will have damaged their reputation.
After a careful review of the report, we were very disappointed to discover that its findings and conclusions fail to address three crucial issues. First, the report does not reach a conclusion as to why the students were expelled and whether their expulsion was a product of discrimination based on their political beliefs. Additionally, the report does not include any recommendations for disciplinary action against the students and administrative personnel who took part in, facilitated, or sanctioned the wrongful expulsion of Ari, Michael, and Melanie from the event. Finally, the report fails to acknowledge that a public statement made by a Brooklyn College spokesman in the immediate aftermath of the event, which erroneously blamed the students for causing a disturbance, was wrongful and mishandled.
We are deeply troubled by CUNY’s failure to include these critical elements as part of the public report. In light of all of the facts and circumstances, there is no reasoned basis for CUNY to ignore the connection between the admittedly unjustified expulsion and the fact that the expelled students were identifiably Jewish and pro-Israel.
While the report correctly concludes that “there was no justification for the removal of the four students” and that the students “did not create a ‘disturbance,’” it chooses to “credit the sincerity” of Carlos Guzman, the instigator of the incident, who claimed (in his ex post facto interview with Mr. Schaffer) that he “was concerned to avoid anything that might lead to a major disturbance.”
It is hard to understand how Mr. Schaffer could find that explanation satisfactory when, at the same time, Mr. Schaffer himself concluded that there was no disturbance to begin with. Moreover, the report fails to reconcile why Mr. Guzman would choose to impose his baseless “concern” on four students who were identifiably Jewish and pro-Israel, and why his initial threats were indisputably focused on the students’ pro-Israel fact sheets, rather than the students themselves.
CUNY’s failure to acknowledge the obvious discriminatory motives behind the students’ expulsion indicates a basic unwillingness to engage in serious self-criticism, and calls into question the very motives behind, and legitimacy of, the University’s investigation.
The University’s unwillingness to recommend or even address potential disciplinary action against those who were responsible for the expulsion is also perplexing. Mr. Schaffer’s report makes clear that Ari, Michael, and Melanie were unjustifiably expelled from a campus event at the behest of an individual who, it turns out, was not even affiliated with the University at the time of the event.
Putting aside Mr. Guzman’s wrongful conduct, the mere fact that an outside, third-party individual was allowed to detain four students against their will is a plain violation of basic institutional security norms that warrants concrete repercussions.
Similarly, the undisputed failure of administration officials to intercede and question the legitimacy of Guzman’s action indicates a basic lack of concern for the safety and welfare of Brooklyn College students. It is paradoxical for the University to admit, on the one hand, that an unjustified expulsion occurred while, on the other hand, refusing to hold the responsible parties accountable for their unjustifiable conduct.
Finally, we are disappointed by Brooklyn College’s failure to take responsibility and apologize for the erroneous and defamatory public statement made by spokesman Jeremy Thompson in the immediate aftermath of the event. That statement, which erroneously blamed the students for causing a disturbance, was clearly misguided and caused significant damage to Ari, Michael, and Melanie’s reputations. But Mr. Schaffer has not acknowledged this in his report, nor has the College issued an apology for the statement.
Indeed, the only public apology that Ari, Michael, and Melanie have received — contained in an April 15 email from President Gould to the College’s student body — offers them little solace. This email, which has not been disseminated to the press, fails to address Mr. Thompson’s erroneous statement. To make matters worse, the email does not even refer to Ari, Michael, and Melanie by name and downplays the February 7 expulsion by stating that the students “were not permitted to remain at the event.” Such an account is simply misleading — Ari, Michael, and Melanie were physically removed from the BDS event against their will with the assistance of College administrators and personnel.
In light of the above, I respectfully urge you to reconsider the report’s conclusions and do the right thing. Given Mr. Schaffer’s finding that Ari, Michael, and Melanie were wrongfully expelled from the February 7 event, the University would be well served by taking a strong stance against the underlying cause of the incident — political and religious discrimination — and by holding itself fully accountable for what transpired.
In addition to seeking reconsideration of Mr. Schaffer’s report, the students regard the following as essential components to any successful resolution of this matter:
A public apology from CUNY and Brooklyn College mentioning Ari, Michael, and Melanie by name and explicitly acknowledging the College’s violation of their rights to free speech. Additionally, in order to properly ameliorate the reputational damage suffered by the students, the University’s apology should explicitly reference Mr. Thompson’s erroneous public statement and should be disseminated to New York media outlets, including relevant Jewish publications.
The initiation of disciplinary proceedings against (1) the Brooklyn College chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine, for allowing a third-party individual unaffiliated with the University to serve as a principal organizer and apparent admissions czar for the February 7 event; (2) College administration officials who failed to intercede in the forced expulsion of Ari, Michael, and Melanie from the event; and (3) College officials responsible for the erroneous and defamatory public statement issued in the immediate aftermath of the event.
I am available to discuss the above at your convenience.
Respectfully,
Jay P. Lefkowitz, P.C.