Socialist Protesters at Texas State Demand Sanctuary Campus, Accuse Israel of ‘Genocide’
“urged the university to send out alerts when ICE agents are near campus and to stop cooperating with federal immigration enforcement”
If a person identifies as a Democratic Socialist, you can pretty much guess their position on this issue.
Campus Reform reports:
Texas State protesters demand sanctuary campus, accuse Israel of ‘genocide’
Activists at Texas State University in San Marcos staged a pro-Palestinian protest on April 3 to demand the university sever ties with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), divest from Israel, and declare itself a “sanctuary campus” for illegal immigrants.
The demonstration, led by the Young Democratic Socialists of America (YDSA), urged the university to send out alerts when ICE agents are near campus and to stop cooperating with federal immigration enforcement.
Protesters accused Israel of committing “genocide” in Gaza and displayed signs reading, “The U.S. is Isr*el’s B***h,” “Zionism Has Got to Go,” and “Half of Gaza is Children.”
Videos from the event show demonstrators aggressively blocking walkways and shouting at bystanders. In one exchange, a protester asked a student, “What would you do if somebody blew up your house?”
Texas law prohibits public institutions from adopting sanctuary policies and mandates cooperation with immigration enforcement under Senate Bill 4, signed in 2017. Critics argue the student demands would place the university in legal jeopardy and compromise public safety.
In a statement to Campus Reform, Texas State reaffirmed its commitment to free speech but did not comment on the specific protest or policy requests.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
I too want to make unreasonable demands that will be ignored.
“What would you do if someone blew up your house?”
The correct answer is to call the police and have them arrested for making terroristic threats.
What threat? The protester did not threaten the student. S/he asked a reasonable question, and the reasonable answer is “I would bomb the crap out of them until they were no longer a threat, which is exactly what we did to Japan and Germany, and exactly what Israel is doing; apparently you would applaud them and thank them”.
Only what the law calls a “true threat” is a threat. The definition cannot be expanded, or else the law against making threats becomes invalid.
This is the key point. The constitutional right to refuse cooperation with the federal government belongs to the state, not to its individual subdivisions and institutions. The state may allow its subdivisions to make their own decision on this, as most states do; or it can forbid them from cooperation, as California does; or it can require them to cooperate, as Texas does.