Pro-Israel Speech Code for Missouri Public Schools Passes the House
On February 16th, the Missouri House of Representatives passed and sent to the Senate a proposal to create a pro-Israel speech code for Missouri public schools. Under the guise of fighting antisemitism, House Bill 2061 would legally brand as bigoted multiple types of accurate criticisms of the state of Israel. It will also outlaw the expression of objectively non-bigoted opinions, with real potential negative consequences for students and educators. (For a detailed critique of the bill, see my previous article here).
The measure passed by a vote of 109 to 21. Analyzing the vote reveals an interesting story about both the Democratic and Republican parties in the Missouri House.
For the Democrats, the vote shows that Democratic politicians are starting to catch up to their base. Last year, on an almost identical bill, out of 52 Democrats, 12 voted yes and 8 voted no. The rest were either absent or voted present. This year, only 8 Democrats voted yes, with 20 voting no, and the rest either absent or voting present.
Democratic lawmakers Bridget Walsh Moore (D – Lemay), Wick Thomas (D – Kansas City), and Elizabeth Fuchs (D – St. Louis) made impassioned speeches against the bill on the House Floor during the perfection and third read debates. After a discussion with bill sponsor George Hruza (R – Huntleigh), where Hruza seemed to be thoroughly confused about the content of his bill and existing educational anti-discrimination law, Walsh Moore correctly pointed out that if passed, the bill would create “a hierarchy amongst the minorities of who matters more”. Fuchs talked about her experience as an educator leading discussions with a diverse group of students about the subject of Israel and Palestine and how the codifying of the outsourced definition of antisemitism in the bill would stifle open discussion on that subject. She asked, ”Is the ultimate goal (of the bill) to silence teachers from naming the oppression of Palestinians?” It is – and not just teachers – but students and anyone else within a public school setting.
Over the last three years, Democratic voters’ views on Israel have dramatically shifted. A poll last fall showed that a supermajority of Democrats support sanctions against Israel similar to those that helped to bring down the South African Apartheid regime. Given this shift, it makes sense that the vote on this bill also shifted. It is out of step with the Democratic base to support a bill that, according to its sponsor, would brand a person a bigot for agreeing with Amnesty International by calling Israel an apartheid state.
The fact that so many Democrats voted “present” is probably due to the bullying tactics of groups like the Missouri Alliance Network and its leaders: Stacey Newman and open anti-Palestinian bigot Rabbi Jeffrey Abraham. They are quick to call those who disagree with them on Israel “antisemites”, and they plan to put money and resources into Democratic primary campaigns. Democratic lawmakers who voted “yes”, such as bill co-sponsors Steve Butz (D – St. Louis) and Nick Kimble (D – St. Louis), are wildly out of touch with the Democratic base. Butz, who said “I don’t know that there is any Jewish people hardly at all in my district” during the debate on the bill, has been endorsed by the Missouri Alliance Network in his campaign against Gina Mitten and Chris Clark to replace Karla May as State Senator.
Republicans voted 101 to 1 in favor of the bill, with one present. This vote represents a massive lack of ideological consistency for a party that claims the slogan “America First” and spent years railing against campus speech codes and the coddling of “snowflakes”. Over 98% of the House Representative Republicans just voted to create a speech code to shield those Jewish students and teachers who support Israel from opinions that make them uncomfortable. According to bill sponsor Hruza, stating that Israel is committing a genocide would be branded as “antisemitic”, with real negative consequences if someone determines that the use of that language created “an atmosphere of fear and intimidation”. Only Bryant Wolfin (R – Ste. Genevieve), to his credit, remained a consistent opponent of campus speech codes by voting no. I am hopeful that there are Republicans in the Senate whose previously expressed values concerning freedom of expression on campuses will keep this bill from being placed into law.
Finally, there is the strange issue of the Missouri chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union’s (ACLU) disappearing act on this issue. The national ACLU has a strong and clear position in opposition to the adoption of the IHRA definition of antisemitism for any binding educational rules. The ACLU has opposed national legislation to codify this definition of antisemitism, as well as legislation in states and municipalities throughout the country. Last year, the Missouri ACLU did not testify against the almost identical House Bill 937 in Missouri, nor did they appear to do any lobbying against the bill. They did submit testimony against the bill. This year, they didn’t even submit testimony. There is also no indication they have anyone lobbying on the issue.
While the ACLU did not weigh in on this clear attempt to abridge First Amendment rights, the Foundation of Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) did step in. The organization submitted detailed and well-reasoned testimony in opposition to the bill, coming from a civil libertarian perspective.
It is good that FIRE stepped forward to defend civil liberties in Missouri schools. The fate of House Bill 2061 is an important test for whether Missouri politicians and civil institutions are willing to stand up to the pro-Israel interests trying to destroy basic freedoms to shield a foreign state from criticism of its indefensible actions.
