Select Board right to leave aside IHRA’s examples of antisemitism
Understanding the scope of Acton’s IHRA adoption is important.
During its recent discussion of the IHRA adoption, Select Board members clarified that the January proclamation adopted the definition of antisemitism but did not adopt the examples. Paul Boehm, for example, noted the separation between the definition and the examples in the IHRA document and stressed that adopting the examples “was not the intent then, nor is the intent now.” Wendy Rovelli agreed, stating that the intent was to adopt the “two-sentence” definition and “did not include the associated examples.”
While the Board ultimately concluded that “wordsmithing” the proclamation would be unproductive, Chair Mark Howell recognized that for most of the Board, “the examples were not part of the adoption in the first place.”
I’m relieved that the board did not endorse the examples. As the ACLU explained in its letter to the board, the IHRA examples encompass “constitutionally protected political criticism of Israel” and have been “used to undermine the free expression rights of pro-Palestinian activists and scholars.”
In Massachusetts, a presidential executive order that adopted IHRA was the basis for the detention of Rümeysa Öztürk after she co-authored an op-ed critical of Israel’s policies. The IHRA examples were also invoked to label Amnesty International antisemitic for concluding that Israel’s oppression of Palestinians is apartheid.
Understanding the scope of Acton’s IHRA adoption is important. Community members advocating for Palestinians have been accused of antisemitic animus for criticizing the ADL, for screening a documentary about the West Bank, and even for challenging some of the IHRA examples. Such false accusations of antisemitism cause stress and reputational harm and can also jeopardize livelihoods, educational opportunities, and immigration status. These risks already deter many from speaking about Palestine.
It’s therefore good that the board did not endorse and did not codify a framework that deems it hateful to wholeheartedly defend Palestinian human rights.
Mahreen Hoda
Oak Knoll Road, Carlisle
