West Virginia University punished a Jewish student for distributing free pro-Israel books, sparking outrage among free speech advocates who argue the university’s actions threaten First Amendment rights on campus.
Key Takeaways
- West Virginia University issued a no-contact order against Jewish student Eliyahu Itkowitz after he distributed Alan Dershowitz’s book “The Ten Big Anti-Israel Lies” on campus.
- A Muslim dining hall employee falsely reported the book as “anti-Muslim” and attempted to have Itkowitz banned from the dining facility.
- The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) has demanded WVU lift the no-contact order, arguing it threatens protected speech.
- Despite a five-month investigation finding no evidence of misconduct, the university maintained restrictions against Itkowitz.
- Free speech advocates warn this case demonstrates how university complaint processes are being weaponized to silence political viewpoints.
Free Speech Under Fire at WVU
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) has called on West Virginia University to immediately lift a no-contact order against Jewish student Eliyahu Itkowitz after he was targeted for distributing pro-Israel literature on campus. The controversy began when Itkowitz offered a copy of Alan Dershowitz’s book, “The Ten Big Anti-Israel Lies: And How to Refute Them with Truth,” to dining hall employee Hannah Harper, who had recently converted to Islam. After initially accepting the book, Harper later filed a complaint with university officials claiming it was an “anti-Muslim book” and attempted to have Itkowitz banned from the dining facility.
“The university launched an investigation, despite the fact that even if all of her allegations against Eli were true, and there is evidence to suggest that they aren’t, all of the described actions constitute protected speech under the First Amendment,” said Jessie Appleby, attorney at The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.
False Claims Lead to Campus Police Involvement
The situation escalated when Harper falsely told her manager that Itkowitz had been banned from the dining hall, leading to an incident where campus police were called. University officials conducted a lengthy investigation into Harper’s claims that Itkowitz had made anti-Muslim comments, which he denied. Video footage and witness statements failed to support Harper’s allegations. Despite the lack of evidence of any policy violations, the university still issued a no-contact order against Itkowitz, effectively punishing him for engaging in constitutionally protected speech.
“Because the investigation itself threatened discipline, it chilled free speech. It lasted five months, exhaustive interviews, and the no-contact order even though it never found him guilty of misconduct. Eli should not feel threatened that exercising free speech will incur disciplinary sanctions,” said Jessie Appleby, attorney at The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.
Pattern of Silencing Pro-Israel Voices
This incident is not isolated, as similar situations have been reported at other universities across the country. At Princeton University, pro-Israel students also faced no-contact orders after expressing their views. Free speech advocates argue that these university actions reveal a troubling pattern of using administrative procedures to silence certain political viewpoints, particularly those supporting Israel. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has joined FIRE in highlighting these issues, emphasizing the need for universities to protect free expression while still preventing genuine discriminatory harassment.
“WVU has a responsibility to prevent discriminatory harassment, but in doing so it must not sacrifice its constitutional obligation to protect free speech,” stated The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) in their letter to West Virginia University.
Weaponizing University Complaint Processes
Critics argue that WVU’s handling of the situation demonstrates how university disciplinary processes can be misused to target ideological opponents. Despite finding no evidence of misconduct after months of investigation, the university still imposed a no-contact order on Itkowitz, effectively punishing him for sharing pro-Israel literature. FIRE has called on WVU to revise its complaint handling procedures to prevent similar misuse in the future, emphasizing that universities should conduct preliminary reviews to determine if complaints involve protected expression before launching formal investigations.
“This case aptly demonstrates that WVU’s policy of investigating wholly protected expression has allowed students and staff to weaponize the complaint process to silence their ideological opponents,” said Jessie Appleby, attorney at The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.
Protecting Campus Dialogue
This case highlights growing concerns about the state of free speech on American college campuses, especially regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. FIRE and other advocacy groups emphasize that universities must maintain environments that support the free exchange of ideas, even when those ideas might be controversial or offensive to some. By allowing complaints based solely on protected expression to trigger investigations and disciplinary measures, universities risk creating a chilling effect that discourages students from engaging in open dialogue on important global issues.
“By launching investigations and issuing no-contact orders based on complaints solely alleging protected expression, WVU is allowing students and staff with ideological disagreements to use its complaint process as a cudgel to silence opponents,” said Jessie Appleby, attorney at The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.
