January 2015
A Fordham University professor was
accused of discrimination and uncivil conduct for his comments related to the
American Studies Association’s recent
resolution backing the academic boycott of
Israel.
Doron Ben-Atar, a professor of
history, strongly opposes the boycott and, in a Feb. 24 meeting of faculty
affiliated with Fordham’s American studies program, urged his colleagues to
denounce the resolution on the part of the national American Studies Association
as a bigoted act. Ben-Atar advocated that the program distance itself from the
ASA — several
other American studies programs withdrew as
institutional members of the ASA in the aftermath of the boycott resolution —
and said that if it did not, he would resign from his affiliate status with the
program and “fight the American studies program at Fordham in every forum and in
every way.”
That comment would return to haunt
him. On May 2, Ben-Atar received an email from Anastasia Coleman, Fordham’s
director of institutional equity and compliance, requesting a meeting in regard
to an allegation “that you may have acted in an inappropriate way and possibly
discriminated against another person at the university.” In a subsequent email,
Coleman clarified that the complaint did not involve students and was about
“your behavior regarding American studies.”
Ben-Atar said it wasn’t until he
received a July 7 letter from Coleman resolving the complaint that he learned
more precisely what he had been accused of. The director of the American studies
program, Michelle McGee, had filed a complaint against Ben-Atar alleging that he
had “verbally harassed and discriminated against her by inferring that she was
anti-Semitic” and communicating this to outside parties. The letter also
identified as a matter of concern Ben-Atar’s statement at the February faculty
meeting that he would fight against the American studies program.
The investigation found that
Ben-Atar’s statements did not constitute discrimination.
“However,”
Coleman
wrote in the
letter, “I
also reported to the Office of the Provost that your words and actions
about ‘fighting’ the American studies program in every forum if the program did
not comply with your demands, created an atmosphere of incivility that could
lead one to make a claim of intimidation or harassment. Because you initially
refused to participate in the investigation without your attorney present, and
in the absence of your explaining or clarifying what you meant by your stated
intention to ‘fight’ against the program, you subject yourself to a possible
violation of relevant sections of the University Code of Conduct, including
Section 6-03.01(h) which reads ‘Engaging in, or inciting others to engage in,
conduct which interferes with or disrupts any University function.’ ”
Ben-Atar — who said that his
lawyer had in fact informed Fordham’s lawyer of Ben-Atar’s willingness to meet
individually with Coleman — was, as punishment, sent to the principal’s office
(or provost’s office in this case) for a chat over coffee. “I didn’t realize
that this was a disciplinary conversation. We discussed the episode and I said
to him I think that I did nothing wrong.”
Asked what he meant when he said
he would “fight” the program, Ben-Atar responded, “Obviously the way academics
and intellectuals fight for their ideas — by speaking up, persuading, writing
and all the other intellectual tools in my arsenal. No one has ever asked me
what I meant and to pin the case on that word is terribly disingenuous.
Clearly no violence was implied — there isn’t a trace of it anywhere.”
Ben-Atar objects to what he
describes as the deployment of the university’s investigatory machinery to
settle a debate among academics over the merits of the movement to boycott
Israel.
“Administrators and colleagues
failed to protect my First Amendment rights, and fed the assault on my
character,” Ben-Atar wrote in an
op-ed on the topic he published in Tablet.
“A person utterly unqualified to understand anti-Semitism sat in judgment of a
scholar who publishes on and teaches the subject. A report has been issued
without letting me even defend myself. My choice to have legal representation
has been cited as proof of my guilt. Most painful was realizing that my
commitment to fighting anti-Semitism, so central to who I am, has been used
against me in a most unethical manner not only by the member of the faculty who
filed the baseless charge, but also by the office of the university counsel.”
McGee did not respond to several
email and phone messages seeking comment on Tuesday. Fordham’s media relations
office released the following statement: “Dr. Ben-Atar is a highly respected
member of Fordham University’s faculty. He was accused by another highly
respected member of the university faculty of violating Fordham’s code of
civility. By statute and in keeping with the long-established norms of academia,
the university was required to investigate the allegations against Dr. Ben-Atar.
Such investigations are by their nature confidential, both to protect the
reputations of the accused and the privacy of the accuser. At the end of the
investigation undertaken by the University, Dr. Ben-Atar was not sanctioned nor
reprimanded, and continues to enjoy the full rights and privileges of a faculty
member at Fordham.”
Debates over the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict generally and the boycott, divestment and sanctions
movement against Israel specifically have
been heating up on U.S campuses. And the
Fordham case comes amidincreasing debate
about whether rules governing civility in
faculty conduct may undermine academic freedom and serve to squelch unpopular
speech.
A colleague of Ben-Atar’s who was
present at the American studies program meeting — and who joined him in
resigning from her affiliation with the program after it opted not to distance
itself from the ASAboycott resolution — said she found it “astonishing” that
Ben-Atar’s comments during the meeting became the subject of a university
disciplinary investigation. “The meeting was called to discuss anti-Semitism,
generally, the boycott, Fordham’s role and so forth,” said Elaine F. Crane, a
distinguished professor of history.
“I thought it was a wonderful
meeting that laid things out on the table,” she said. “There have been issues
that have arisen over the years that were very tender, and this was one of them,
but the meeting with diverse members of the faculty who had different opinions
was very civil given the sensitive nature of the issue.”
InsideHigherEd, October 15, 2014.
Help us maintain freedom in teaching, research and scholarship by joining SAFS or making a donation.
