Q&A
Discussion on adopting the IHRA definition of antisemitism at CUNY
3:32:16
·
74 sec
Council Member Eric Dinowitz questions Maya Gavriel about her stance on CUNY adopting the IHRA definition of antisemitism. Maya strongly supports adopting this definition, arguing that it's necessary to have a formal framework to identify antisemitic acts.
- Dinowitz notes that the Lippman report suggests IHRA as a potential definition but doesn't prescribe it
- Maya argues that a formal definition is crucial for identifying antisemitic incidents
- She states that the IHRA definition resonates with most of the community and covers globally recognized antisemitic incidents
Eric Dinowitz
3:32:16
Maya, I have a a I have a question for you.
3:32:21
You know, the report sort of clearly states the judge's opinion that Ira kinda makes the most sense, but he doesn't wanna prescribe any definition that sort of CUNY has to develop.
3:32:31
You're sort of going farther than that.
3:32:32
You you're saying affirmatively, CUNY should absolutely adopt the Ira definition of antisemitism.
3:32:40
Can you talk a little more about that, please?
Maya Gavriel
3:32:42
Yeah.
3:32:42
100%.
3:32:44
I think if we don't adopt a formal definition, how are we supposed to say, you you just targeted this Jew, you committed an antisemitic act with with no framework.
3:32:58
I think it's kind of ridiculous to say, yeah.
3:33:01
Like, we we should we should see that this is anti Semitic, but not define it.
3:33:06
And I think that this specific definition works the best.
3:33:09
I mean, it's a working definition, but because it it resonates with most of the community, and I think it covers most of what what is globally recognized as an anti Semitic incident.
Eric Dinowitz
3:33:27
Any questions?
3:33:28
Council member Yeager.
