Jewish MIT Students Prevail in Right to Work Settlement, No Longer Required to Pay Dues to Anti-Israel Union

The settlement of a federal discrimination suit filed by Jewish students of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has severed their obligation to pay dues to the school’s Graduate Student Union (GSU), a major victory precipitated by the union’s endorsement of the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel.

Represented by the National Right to Work Foundation (NRTW), a nonprofit founded in 1968 which aims to abolish mandatory union membership, the students filed their complaint against GSU in March, arguing that its embrace of anti-Zionism discriminated against them as Jews as well as their religious belief that the Jewish people were always destined to return to their homeland.

The students had attempted to resist financially supporting GSU’s anti-Zionism, refusing to pay dues, but union bosses attempted to coerce their compliance, telling them that “no principles, teachings, or tenets of Judaism prohibit membership in or the payment of dues or fees to a labor union.”

With the settlement, they are released from an obligation which they said violated their core beliefs and freedom of association.

“The foundation-backed MIT graduate students who fought these legal battles have earned well deserved victories,” the organization’s president, Mark Mix, said on Wednesday. “Forcing GSU union officials to abandon their blatantly discriminatory dues practices is only the tip of the iceberg: because Massachusetts lacks Right to Work protections, GSU still has the power to force the vast majority of MIT graduate students to subsidize some portion of their activities.”

Mix added that NRTW intends to challenge compulsory union membership in unions pursuing controversial political aims at other universities, including the University of Chicago and John Hopkins University.

“Foundation attorneys are continuing to provide legal aid for all those who challenge the imposition of radical union agendas at the University of Chicago, Dartmouth, and John Hopkins, and they are doing so for adherents of both Judaism and Christianity,” he continued. “But this ordeal at MIT should remind lawmakers that all Americans should have a right to protect their money from going to union bosses they don’t support, whether those objections are based on religion, politics, or any other reason.”

NRTW is currently litigating another similar case brought by six City University of New York (CUNY) professors who sued to dissolve their membership in the Professional Staff Congress (PSC) public sector union after it passed an anti-Israel resolution during the country’s May 2021 war with Hamas. The measure declared solidarity with Palestinians and accused the Jewish state of ethnic cleansing, apartheid, and crimes against humanity.

The professors had resigned from PSC, but because of New York State’s “Taylor Law,” they remained in its “bargaining unit” — which, they maintain, is coercive, denying their right to freedom of speech and association by forcing them to be represented in collective bargaining negotiations by an organization they claim holds antisemitic views. Beyond the plaintiffs, 263 other professors and staff have resigned from the union as well, according to the website of the Resign.PSC campaign, which accuses the body of having “violated its mandate” by weighing in on a contentious political issue.

A New York district judge dismissed the professors’ suit in November 2022, ruling that several previous cases have affirmed the constitutionality of compulsory union representation and rejected the argument now advanced by NRTW. In July, NRTW and the Fairness Center asked the US Supreme Court to hear the case, arguing that the dismissal was “misguided.” They are betting on the nation’s highest court, which holds a 6-3 conservative majority, sharing its view of the matter.

“The core issue in this case is straightforward: can the government force Jewish professors to accept the representation of an advocacy group they rightly consider to be antisemitic?” the attorneys argued in their petition. “The answer plainly should be ‘no.’ The First Amendment protects the rights of individuals, and especially religious dissenters, to disaffiliate themselves from associations and speech they abhor.”

Coming ahead of the academic year, the MIT settlement progresses the efforts of Jewish students and advocacy groups to compel colleges and universities to recognize Jews’ civil rights and grant Jewish students the same protections accorded to other minority groups. Having achieved favorable outcomes and rulings in other cases involving New York University, Columbia University, University of California, Los Angeles, and Harvard University, they were notably set back when earlier this month a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit against MIT which alleged that it failed to protect its Jewish students from an explosion of antisemitism on campus that followed Hamas’ massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7.

Filed in March by the StandWithUs Center for Legal Justice, the suit sought injunctive relief, which would have required MIT to enforce rules proscribing discrimination based on race and ethnic origin.

However, US District Court Judge Richard Gaylore Stearns — who was appointed to the bench in 1993 by former US President Bill Clinton (D) and served as a political operative for and special assistant to Israel critic and former Democratic presidential nominee George McGovern — tossed the suit in a ruling which accused the Jewish plaintiffs of expecting MIT officials to be “clairvoyant” in anticipating a surge of antisemitism. He also rejected their argument that pro-Hamas demonstrators at MIT intentionally violated the civil rights of Jewish students by, as is alleged, calling for a genocide of Jews in Israel and perpetrating numerous other acts of harassment and intimidation.

Jewish students have consistently maintained that MIT’s response to antisemitism was delayed and paled in comparison to any action that it would have taken had the group subject to the discriminatory behavior been anything but Jewish.

In August, MIT student Talia Khan told The Algemeiner that the school’s Jewish community is not discouraged by Stearns’ ruling.

“We, as a community, are not giving up after this dismissal,” she said. “We are pursuing all options to ensure MIT is held accountable for its failure to ensure the safety, security, and civil rights of all students.”

Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.

The post Jewish MIT Students Prevail in Right to Work Settlement, No Longer Required to Pay Dues to Anti-Israel Union first appeared on Algemeiner.com.