CAIR shows it's not interested in free speech or government transparency

(JNS) — The Council on American-Islamic Relations, which has a 30-year history of ties to Hamas, has used open-meeting laws across the United States to influence city councils, school boards and other public forums.

But when it comes to the ethnic-studies curriculum adopted in secret in Santa Ana, Calif., CAIR has made it clear that it is not interested in governmental transparency or community participation. CAIR and its affiliate organizations selectively champion free speech and transparency only when it serves their agenda.

On Dec. 6, the Orange County Superior Court heard a case against the Santa Ana Unified School District. The suit alleges that the school district intentionally violated the Brown Act, California’s open meetings law, to avoid public scrutiny in the development of its ethnic studies curriculum. CAIR put out a press release immediately after the hearing urging the court to “reject an anti-Palestinian lawsuit.”

Discovery in the case revealed that the Santa Ana ethnic-studies committee felt that “Jews are not a disadvantaged ethnic group in the U.S. because they were never slaves.” Communications between committee members included statements such as, “Jews greatly benefit from white privilege, so they have it better,” and “we don’t need to give both sides. We only support the oppressed, and Jews are the oppressors.”

There is much to reject factually about these assertions, but putting that aside, the Brown Act applies equally. A particular California school board does not have the discretion as to which groups should have a say. Open meeting laws are designed to ensure that the public is aware of government action so that the community can provide input and hold elected officials accountable.

The Santa Ana school district intentionally operated clandestinely. For example, the committee scheduled votes on the ethnic-studies curricula during Jewish holidays so that it would not have to address what it referred to as the “Jewish question.” One member of the committee suggested to another via text: “We may need to use Passover to get all new courses approved.” Another official responded, “That’s actually a good strategy.”

In formal depositions, committee members called the Jewish Federation of Orange County “racist Zionists.”

If it was consistent, CAIR would have championed public comment and community feedback in the ethnic-studies case. Earlier this year, CAIR launched an attack campaign against Santa Ana Mayor Valerie Amezcua after she temporarily cleared chambers during a municipal ceasefire debate to calm anti-Jewish hate speech and restore order. CAIR said the mayor “not only tried to silence and dismiss pro-Palestinian voices, but she also displayed an appalling lack of empathy and obvious disdain towards members of her own community.” According to CAIR’s Los Angeles policy manager, the Santa Ana City Council was required to “create a welcoming environment for all residents of Santa Ana, without displaying bias towards one side.”

CAIR’s use of open meetings laws to push for ceasefire resolutions and anti-Israel divestment policies is extensive. For example, the CAIR LA’s executive director, Hussam Ayloush, called on the Los Angeles City Council to enact a ceasefire resolution stating that leaders needed to “align themselves with the voices of their constituents.” San Francisco Bay Area director Zahra Billoo is promoting a local resident’s  petition to demand that the San Jose City Council “divest from corporations with ties to Israel.” CAIR has similarly commended the use of public comments to push locally elected officials to enact divestment actions in other California municipalities as well.

 CAIR’s press release in response to the Santa Ana Unified court case reveals its lack of interest in teaching multiple perspectives of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Instead, it pronounced that the Santa Ana ethnic-studies curriculum should be left untouched since it “provides critical insight into the history of the forced displacement of Palestinians and the illegal occupation of their land by Israeli forces.” Historical facts of Jewish indigeneity to the Land of Israel, the exile of Jews from Arab lands and the present realities of an integrated and multicultural Israel are inconvenient truths that CAIR wants to ensure do not come to light. 

The anti-Israel movement’s manipulation of open meetings laws reveals a deep unwillingness to embrace the principles of dialogue and equal representation which are what the laws themselves, like the Brown Act in California, are designed to protect.