JUDGE SHOWDOWN: Antisemitism Crisis Forces Emergency Court Battle!

A groundbreaking forum is set to unfold next week as federal judges prepare to directly address the escalating issue of antisemitism. This unprecedented event, taking place at the Federalist Society’s annual National Lawyers Convention, will feature a multi-judge panel – a departure from the convention’s traditional single-lecturer format. The shift reflects a growing urgency to confront the surge in antisemitism following the October 7th attacks on Israel. U.S. District Judge Roy Altman, who will moderate the discussion, emphasized the timeliness of the conversation. He believes it’s a crucial moment to reaffirm Western values and champion the power of open dialogue, echoing the principles championed by the late Judge Robert Bork. Notably, Bork himself once intervened to challenge a law firm’s discriminatory hiring practices against Jewish lawyers. The panel boasts a diverse group of judges, including seven appointees of former President Trump, one from the Bush administration, and a justice from the Texas Supreme Court. Judge Altman, a vocal advocate within the judiciary, has personally spearheaded numerous trips to Israel for fellow judges of various faiths since the attacks. These journeys were intended to foster understanding and provide firsthand perspective. Altman observed that initial conversations surrounding Israel were largely confined to college campuses, but quickly realized the judiciary had a vital role to play. The intense debates surrounding the conflict raised complex legal questions demanding careful consideration. He identified key issues being debated – accusations of violations of the laws of war, claims of apartheid, and disputes over land ownership – as fundamentally legal in nature. The judges intend to share their personal experiences engaging with individuals of different faiths regarding antisemitism. They will also delve into the delicate balance between free speech and the need to address antisemitic expression, navigating the complexities of First Amendment protections. This discussion arrives at a time when the government is actively scrutinizing the speech of non-citizens, particularly regarding criticism of Israel. Concerns are mounting that this scrutiny could infringe upon constitutional rights. The case of Mahmoud Khalil, a flashpoint in this debate, is currently testing the extent of First Amendment protections afforded to non-citizens. Altman has also witnessed a troubling trend of suppressed pro-Israel expression, particularly on university campuses. He recounted his shock at discovering widespread misinformation about Israel among young people, and the lack of genuine debate where only one narrative prevailed. The recent cancellation of a talk by Jewish legal scholar Ilya Shaprio at New York University, citing security risks from protesters, underscored this imbalance and fueled his determination to address the issue within the legal community.