IF I WERE ADVISING ELIZABETH WARREN, I’D ADVISE HER TO KEEP HER MOUTH SHUT ABOUT CRITICIZING *OTHERS* FOR USING PHONY CREDENTIALS TO ADVANCE THEMSELVES IN THE ACADEMY: Sen. Elizabeth Warren says she has ‘zero’ sympathy for parents caught in college admissions scam.

WHY IS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY SUCH A CESSPIT OF RACISM? Sanders’s deputy press secretary apologizes for questioning American Jews’ ‘dual allegiance’ to Israel.

While Jews have rightly been worrying about antisemitism from “white nationalists,” who are a small group but are prone to deadly violence, they shouldn’t be entirely preoccupied with them. It’s worth keeping in mind that the two most antisemitic demographic groups in the U.S. are Muslims (I can’t find data separating U.S.-born and immigrant Muslims, but antisemitism is almost certainly much higher among immigrants) and Hispanic immigrants. Ilhan Omar is the former, Sanders’ deputy press secretary the latter.

That’s not to impugn either of these groups, as I know many lovely people from both of them, a majority aren’t antisemitic, and assimilation will reduce the rates significantly, as a vast gap in rates of antisemitism between U.S. and foreign-born Hispanics shows. But meanwhile, we shouldn’t be shocked if views that are at least unremarkable in certain strong Democratic constituencies are repeated unashamedly in public. And the least the Democratic Party could do is make clear they are unacceptable, as opposed to hedging as the Democrats did with Omar.

UPDATE: As several people have noted to me, the purported apology wasn’t actually an apology: “In a conversation on Facebook, I used some language that I see now was insensitive. Issues of allegiance and loyalty to one’s country come with painful history.” And what white nationalist violence? Have you already forgotten Pittsburgh?

IF YOU THINK FACEBOOK HAS TOO MUCH POWER, WAIT TILL YOU SEE WHAT PRESIDENT WARREN DOES WITH THE FBI, CIA, AND NSA AT HER COMMAND:

BECAUSE OF INTERSECTIONALISM, PROMOTING RACISM AGAINST JEWS DOESN’T COUNT: The ACLU’s Shameful Role in Promoting Antisemitism.

“By spreading the false meme that no-boycott certifications amount to not just loyalty oaths, but loyalty oaths to a foreign government the ACLU has spread the canard that the pro-Israel (read, overwhelmingly Jewish) organizations and their members want to use the force of the state to require everyone to be “loyal” to Israel.”

(MOVED TO TOP to note that two days after this post first appeared, the Times’s story is still up, without even a correction posted. “Fake news,” anyone?)

NEW YORK TIMES EXPOSE ON AIPAC RELIES ON “AIPAC ACTIVIST” WHO HASN’T BEEN A MEMBER OF AIPAC FOR SEVERAL YEARS: You can’t make this stuff up.

Fiske’s role as the chairman of a pro-Israel political action committee — unaffiliated with AIPAC, which is not a PAC — was the centerpiece of The Times article…. AIPAC would not comment for the story, but I heard from insiders that Fiske has not been associated with the lobby for five years. In a telephone interview Fiske, a South Florida realtor, told me it was more like three or four years, but confirmed that he is no longer a member.

Read the whole thing.

THE CHUTZPAH OF THE ADL’S JONATHAN GREENBLATT: Twitter: “Those who truly care about the Jewish community shouldn’t politicize #antiSemitism.”

The ADL under former and long-time president Abe Foxman was liberal-leaning, but overall was a reasonably fair and nonpartisan broker in antisemitism controversies.

Former Obama staffer Greenblatt, who had no prior experience in Jewish communal work, has spent the last several years making the ADL more and more partisan, culminating in early 2017, when various ADL officials publicly blamed Trump for bomb threats to Jewish institutions that turned out to have nothing to do with him or his supporters. To my knowledge, no one at the ADL was fired or otherwise disciplined for this remarkable display of partisan bias that undermined the organization’s credibility.

The ADL also exaggerated its antisemitism stats last year to create a false impression of a massive increase in antisemitic incidents under Trump, in particular by including the bomb threats in its tally even though it knew by then that they were not antisemitic in origin.

Greenblatt is nevertheless right that we shouldn’t politicize antisemitism. But to suddenly announce that conclusion when Democrats are under fire, after wildly politicizing antisemitism in opposition to Trump, takes some chutzpah.

DEMOCRATS FAIL THE TOLERANCE TEST: Josh Krasuhaar: Make no mistake: Omar and her progressive allies won this battle. 

With any luck, this will turn out as well for the Democrats as the McGovern campaign.

I GOT SOME EMAILS REQUESTING A SOURCE FOR THE CHART BELOW, which I reprinted earlier today. Here it is.

THE ACLU’S SHAMEFUL ROLE IN THE CURRENT WAVE OF LEFTIST ANTISEMITISM: A Twitter thread.

I’m ambivalent about laws requiring state contractors to certify that their businesses don’t boycott Israel-related entities, but such certifications no more constitute a “loyalty oath” to Israel than certifications that a business uses union labor as required by state law are a “loyalty oath” to unions, or than certifications that a business does not discriminate against African Americans, gays, or women as required by state law are “loyalty oaths” to African Americans, gays, or women. The ACLU should be ashamed of itself for repeatedly suggesting otherwise.

REPS. OMAR, TLAIB AND CARSON SUPPORT HOUSE RESOLUTION INTRODUCED IN RESPONSE TO OMAR’s ANTISEMITISM: When the Congresswoman whose persistent antisemitic comments prompted the resolution, BDS supporter Tlaib, and Farrakahn buddy Carson all praise your resolution on antisemitism, I suspect you are doing it wrong.

PAUL KRUGMAN, MEET DATA. DATA, MEET PAUL KRUGMAN: Does Krugman not know this, or is he in such a bubble that he thinks “it can’t happen here?”

DEMOCRATIC WHIP CLYBURN SCOLDS CHILDREN OF HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS: Your dad survived Auschwitz and you’re disturbed by Ilhan Omar’s antisemitism? Check your privilege.

THIS WILL HELP–A LOT: Antonin Scalia Law School Receives Gift of Over $50 Million.

Conservatives have been justifiably grousing about ideological bias in the academy for decades, but for decades my law school, a very rare secular institution in which the faculty leans right, was among the worst-funded law schools in the country and received almost no assistance from the donor class. Fortunately, that has started to change.

A MODEST PROPOSAL: I propose that every Harvard student who is protesting Professor Ronald Sullivan for representing a client they think is guilty take a public pledge that if they are ever charged with a crime, they will plead guilty and not hire an attorney. We can start with the students who are vandalizing Harvard property, who hopefully will need lawyers soon.

WHEN YOU CAN’T TELL THE NEW YORK TIMES EDITOR FROM THE KLANSMAN: H/T Alex Van Ness.

UPDATE: Related:

ILHAN OMAR’S MEDIA COLLABORATORS: With the help of willing collaborators in the media, Omar and her supporters have managed to turn her antisemitic comments about Jews buying Congress’ loyalty to Israel into a referendum on the pro-Israel lobbying group AIPAC. So much so that the New York Times has this headline today:  “Ilhan Omar’s Criticism Raises the Question: Is Aipac Too Powerful?”

Let’s pause to recall what actually happened, as detailed here.  Key lines:

The context of the controversy, in other words, was not a debate about a specific Israeli policy, nor about the general influence of AIPAC, but about a leading Republican calling out two leftist Democrats for comments that were widely perceived to be anti-Semitic, and for which one of the Democrats had already apologized.

So the anti-Semitic implications of Omar’s initial tweet are rather clear: ‘[House Minority Leader] McCarthy isn’t criticizing me because it’s an obvious political move for a Republican to criticize anti-Semitism among Democrats, but because he’s been bought off by Jewish money. And, moreover, that calling out anti-Semitism in this particular context constitutes loyalty to a foreign country.’

She then tried to save herself by suggesting that she wasn’t referring to Jewish money in general, but specifically to AIPAC, the leading pro-Israel lobby group [which, btw, does not donate money to candidates]. And in fact she partially succeeded in redirecting the debate to one over AIPAC’s influence.

Meanwhile, next up in the Times: Northam’s KKK Costume Raises the Question: Was Lynching Really So Bad?

WHY ARE LEFT-WING INSTITUTIONS SUCH CESSPOOLS OF INTOLERANCE: I Thought I Could Be A Christian And Constitutionalist At Yale Law School. I Was Wrong. I enjoyed my time at YLS, but it was a cesspool of intolerance even then, with a cadre of some of the nastiest, smarmiest people I’ve ever encountered. They weren’t that high a percentage of the class, but the “normals” allowed them to denigrate, harass, and conduct whisper campaigns against students disfavored for ideological reasons without any pushback. The faculty, by contrast, were almost universally lovely.

UPDATE (FROM GLENN): When I was at Yale Law, we called that bullying crowd “the Thought Police.” It was bad then, and it’s clearly worse now.

WHAT COULD GO WRONG?: Oregon Gov. Kate Brown signs nation’s first statewide rent control law.

THIS MAY BE THE FUNNIEST VIDEO YOU SEE THIS MONTH: Pint-sized Picasso Making Waves in the Art World. It would be hilarious if came from The Onion. It’s even funnier because it’s not meant to be satire.

NO RELIGIOUS TESTS FOR PUBLIC OFFICE: My colleague and friend Neomi Rao’s nomination is to the D.C. Circuit is pending. Nothing she has written conflicts with standard conservative judicial views, and the D.C. Circuit handles primarily administrative law cases, with no choice but to obey Supreme Court precedent on abortion if that issue ever comes before it. Yet Sen. Josh Hawley has suddenly been raising questions about Rao’s views on abortion and Roe v. Wade. I’ve been trying to figure out why, and the only thing I’ve come up with is that she is not a Christian by either background or practice, and therefore she is deemed potentially untrustworthy. I hope I’m wrong, though I just noticed that the Wall Street Journal just published an editorial implying the same thing. Conservatives have been rightly appalled at pointed questions aimed at nominees’ Christianity, and they should be equally appalled if someone’s judicial bona fides are being questioned because she is not a Christian.

UPDATE (FROM GLENN): I haven’t followed this closely, but I can’t think of any reason whatsoever not to confirm Neomi Rao posthaste.

I’M SO OLD I REMEMBER WHEN GAY RIGHTS ACTIVISTS ACTUALLY SUPPORTED GAY RIGHTS: Trump’s Plan to Decriminalize Homosexuality Is an Old Racist Tactic.

Related: a group of  [LGBT] activists holding Palestinian flags took the stage and led a 13-minute protest for Palestinian liberation and against Zionism.  The Palestinian territories are among the most hostile places for gay people on earth.

“ARE CORPORATIONS PEOPLE?” IS NOT THE RIGHT QUESTION: At SSRN, my review of Adam Winkler’s We the Corporations: How American Businesses Won Their Civil Rights.

As the review details, the book has its pluses and minuses, but establishes a fact that many readers, especially on the left, will find surprising and counter-intuitive: when courts hold that corporations are “people” for constitutional purposes, they generally do so to limit corporate rights. In Citizens United and other cases in which corporations’ constitutional rights have been established, the Court is protecting the rights of the corporations’ human owners, not the corporation itself.

Bonus factoid: The supposedly “reactionary” pre-New Deal “Lochner Court” tried to limit corporations’ ability to assert constitutional rights, but the “liberal” New Deal Court, keen to broaden first amendment protections for corporate-owned newspapers, expanded them.

[Bumped because the link mysteriously disappeared from the original posting]

OVER AT VOLOKH, Everything you wanted to know about anti-BDS laws, part I.

Key point: State laws that require state contractors to certify that they don’t boycott Israel-related companies and individuals are not unconstitutional infringements of freedom of speech under existing Supreme Court precedent, and it’s not a close call. Rightly or wrongly, a string of Supreme Court precedents hold that refusals to deal, even for ideological reasons, are not considered speech.

Perhaps the most interesting thing about the ACLU’s jihad against anti-BDS laws is that it’s willing to risk undermining antidiscrimination laws if that’s necessary to take down the anti-BDS laws. The national ACLU has become a far left organization, and the far left’s pathological hatred of Israel overrides other considerations.

OVER AT VOLOKH, I discuss the dangers of government by executive. Lots of people who vociferously defended Obama’s abuses of executive power have suddenly gotten religion.

OVER AT VOLOKH, a brief defense of D.C. Circuit nominee of Neomi Rao against tendentious criticisms of her student writings.