Trump Says Some Colleges Could Lose Accreditation Over Antisemitism if He Wins Election
“Republicans have said the protests show some Democrats are antisemites who support chaos.”
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7387f/7387f6ade4db148426a5ef6ffca784062308bb9d" alt=""
Trump should repeat this message everywhere he goes and if he wins, he should follow through on it.
Reuters reports:
Trump says US colleges could lose accreditation over ‘antisemitic propaganda’ if he’s elected
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump told Jewish donors on Thursday that U.S. universities would lose accreditation and federal support over what he described as “antisemitic propaganda” if he is elected to the White House.
“Colleges will and must end the antisemitic propaganda or they will lose their accreditation and federal support,” Trump said, speaking remotely to a crowd of more than 1,000 Republican Jewish Coalition donors in Las Vegas.
Protests roiled college campuses in spring, with students opposing Israel’s military offensive in Gaza and demanding institutions stop doing business with companies backing Israel.
Republicans have said the protests show some Democrats are antisemites who support chaos. Protest groups say authorities have unfairly labeled their criticism of Israel’s policies as antisemitic.
The Association of American Universities, which says it represents some 69 leading U.S. universities, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
In the United States, the federal government does not directly accredit universities but has a role in overseeing the mostly private organizations that give colleges accreditation.
In his speech, Trump also said he would ban refugee resettlement from “terror infested” areas like Gaza and arrest “pro-Hamas thugs” who engage in vandalism, an apparent reference to the college student protesters.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4aae0/4aae032fe5bb8949724985ed900cb1d863a76919" alt=""
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Trump is a good guy, hope he picks up his internet game so I could again call him “The President” in January.
“In the United States, the federal government does not directly accredit universities but has a role in overseeing the mostly private organizations that give colleges accreditation.”
It shouldn’t.
But I’m 100% behind the loss of money threat.
So you are ready to condemn Tucker Carlson and stop promoting and defending him?
Piss off, Danny. Stay on topic or go seek help.
He is on topic. Carlson seems to have gone full antisemite lately.
What university is Carlson in charge of?
We are discussing anti-Semitism and after 10 months of being anti-Semitic with barely any plausible deniability, highly credible allegations that he bullied Jews while working for Fox, Tucker Carlson finally came out as a Holocaust denier.
I can not and will not take you seriously as being against anti-Semitism while you are still an active defender and patron of Tucker Carlson.
Fortunately, your approval means jack-squat to me.
Good I don’t want the approval of a man who supports neo-Nazis.
I know you think your promotion of anti-Semitism is somehow different from when the left does it.
I promise you it isn’t your a POS just like the leftist anti-Semites and how dare you even be here. Let people who actually oppose anti-Semitism not suffer you you jackass.
No worries about that. I never offered you my approval.
He can’t cut funding over antisemitism. That would violate the first amendment.
But he can do it over refusal to enforce basic law and order, and allowing violence on campus. That’s viewpoint-neutral, and there’s enough in the statutes that he could probably do it without going back to Congress.
You’re WRONG on this one Milhouse. The first amendment does not guarantee that you get government funding regardless of your speech.
See Finley vs. NEA (National Endowment for Arts). Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that a decency standard for federal funding is constitutional.
Based on that, it is fair to say that not advocating for the extermination of Jews in a Second Holocaust would fall under a reasonable standard of decency.
Eric, you’re wrong. Government funding cannot be withdrawn because of someone’s protected speech. And grants must be made on a viewpoint-neutral manner.
You have completely misrepresented the finding in Finley. It did not allow a “decency standard”; it found that “decency” could be one factor in considering applications for new grants, and that the plaintiff couldn’t prove that it would cause any particular application to be denied.
Grants must be in a viewpoint-neutral manner?
Really? Is that why 100% of the grants go to Marxist propagandists? When has it ever been viewpoint neutral.
Per your viewpoint, Holocaust deniers or those advocating genocide could not be denied funding due to viewpoint. Of course a decency standard plays a part in it – a big part.
That’s easy. They don’t.
Nobody has ever managed to prove that it isn’t, because anyone who does so prove wins.
That’s right, they can’t. This isn’t even slightly controversial.
Per Finley, — the case you cited — playing a big part would make it unconstitutional.