July, 27 2020, 12:00am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Jen Nessel, Center for Constitutional Rights, 212-614-6449, jnessel@ccrjustice.org
Kristian Bailey, Palestine Legal, (312) 547-0766, kbailey@palestinelegal.org
Civil Rights Groups Ask Appellate Court to Reject Renewed Palestine Censorship Efforts by Fordham University
Students asked New York's Appellate Court on Friday to reject an effort by Fordham University to overturn a decision ordering the school to recognize the Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) club. The students are represented by the Center for Constitutional Rights, Palestine Legal, and cooperating counsel Alan Levine.
"It's ridiculous to us that our university is still trying to censor us now," said Veer Shetty, vice president of SJP at Fordham. "We've already been active for a year, and appealing the court's ruling feels especially cruel."
WASHINGTON
Students asked New York's Appellate Court on Friday to reject an effort by Fordham University to overturn a decision ordering the school to recognize the Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) club. The students are represented by the Center for Constitutional Rights, Palestine Legal, and cooperating counsel Alan Levine.
"It's ridiculous to us that our university is still trying to censor us now," said Veer Shetty, vice president of SJP at Fordham. "We've already been active for a year, and appealing the court's ruling feels especially cruel."
The original case stems from a fall 2015 effort by Fordham University students to start a Students for Justice in Palestine club on campus. Administrators dragged out the application process for a year - including multiple meetings, questioning students on their political views, and amendments to SJP's constitution.
In November 2016, Fordham's undergraduate student government approved SJP as a student club. One month later, Fordham University Dean of Students Keith Eldredge took the unprecedented step of vetoing the student government's approval based on SJP's "political goals" and the possibility it would lead to "polarization."
The Center for Constitutional Rights, Palestine Legal, and Alan Levine sued Fordham on behalf of four students in April 2017, winning the case in August 2019 when a New York court annulled Fordham's decision, mandating that the university recognize SJP as an official club.
Fordham appealed the ruling in January 2020. Oral argument is expected in the Court's September term.
While all of the original students who wanted to form SJP have since graduated, petitioner Veer Shetty was successfully added to the suit in 2019 as a sophomore who wanted to join SJP. Shetty has served as SJP's vice president during the 2019-2020 school year following the legal victory. Fordham is also challenging the ruling accepting Shetty as a petitioner.
"Last August, the court found that Fordham acted irrationally in banning SJP and ordered Fordham to recognize the club," said Maria LaHood, deputy legal director at the Center for Constitutional Rights. "Now, even after SJP has been active on campus for a year, Fordham is still shamelessly trying to stop them - for what?"
The brief filed by the Center for Constitutional Rights, Palestine Legal, and Alan Levine argues that the lower court properly found that Fordham violated its own rules in denying SJP club status and that Fordham's focus on the reported conduct of SJPs at other schools in denying club status to SJP at Fordham was irrational.
"Fordham should never have vetoed SJP in the first place," said Palestine Legal senior staff attorney Radhika Sainath. "The fact that the school is still trying to stop students from speaking out for Palestinian freedom, now, with annexation and in the middle of a pandemic, is beyond belief."
"We are confident that the appeals court, like Supreme Court Justice Bannon, will find that Fordham's denial of club recognition for SJP was no more than an act of naked political censorship," said attorney Alan Levine.
Read more about the case at the Center for Constitutional Rights' case page and Palestine Legal's case page.
The Center for Constitutional Rights is dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. CCR is committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change.
(212) 614-6464LATEST NEWS
Illinois Man Gets 53 Years in Prison for Vicious Hate-Crime Killing of 6-Year-Old Wadee Alfayoumi
"No sentence can restore what was taken, but today's outcome delivers a necessary measure of justice. Wadee was an innocent child. He was targeted because of who he was—Muslim, Palestinian, and loved."
May 02, 2025
A judge told an Illinois man Friday that his hate-fueled murder of six-year-old Wadee Alfayoumi in October 2023 was "brutal and heinous" as she sentenced him to 53 years in prison.
The sentence was handed down three months after Joseph Czuba, 73, was found guilty of murdering the Palestinian-American kindergartner, who lived with his family in two bedrooms they rented from Czuba in Plainfield Township, Illinois.
Prosecutors found that Czuba became "paranoid and violent" after Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, 2023 and as Israel's bombardment of Gaza's population of 2.3 million Palestinians began in retaliation.
Alfayoumi's mother, Hanan Shaheen, testified during Czuba's trial that he had attacked her first before moving on to stab her son 26 times. Czuba told Shaheen before the attack that the family had to leave their home because they were Muslim.
Mahmoud Yousef, an uncle of Alfayoumi's father, told the court at the sentencing that no prison sentence for Czuba would lessen the family's pain.
"Together, we must build a society where no one lives in fear because of who they are, and no family mourns a loved one lost to hate."
"That's more than just hate, that went way beyond that," Yousef said of the murder. "We're talking about a 6-year-old kid whose father had plans for him."
Yousef also looked directly at Czuba and demanded that he say something to the family "for peace of mind," but Czuba did not speak during the hearing.
"Wadee Alfayoumi should still be alive today," said Rep. Bill Foster (D-Ill.). "While justice has been served, nothing can bring Wadee back. Together, we must build a society where no one lives in fear because of who they are, and no family mourns a loved one lost to hate."
During the trial, the jury heard Shaheen's frantic 911 call and saw crime scene photos that were so harrowing the judge agreed not to show them to the audience, where Alfayoumi's family was sitting.
"No sentence can restore what was taken, but today's outcome delivers a necessary measure of justice," said Ahmed Rehab, executive director of Chicago's chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. "Wadee was an innocent child. He was targeted because of who he was—Muslim, Palestinian, and loved."
Keep ReadingShow Less
In 'Dead of Night,' House GOP Unveils 'Corporate Polluter's Wish List'
"The sprawling proposal," warned the Sierra Club, "includes dozens of provisions that would benefit the oil and gas industry and other corporations, at the expense of American families."
May 02, 2025
Green groups on Friday decried U.S. House Republicans' proposed text for the upcoming reconciliation bill, which the Natural Resources Defense Council said "contains an unprecedented slate of direct attacks on the environment and public lands and waters."
Republicans on the House Natural Resources Committee submitted their proposed section of the massive GOP energy, tax, and national security bill, which is scheduled for a markup on Tuesday.
"The sprawling proposal, released in the dead of night, includes dozens of provisions that would benefit the oil and gas industry and other corporations, at the expense of American families," said the Sierra Club.
"The only way it could be friendlier to Big Oil CEOs would be if they wrote it themselves."
The draft's proposals include fast-tracked and expanded fossil fuel extraction on public lands, mandated oil and gas drilling leases in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, ending protections for Minnesota's pristine Boundary Waters watershed, reinstating canceled leases for the proposed Twin Metals mine in Minnesota, rolling back fossil fuel royalties, and more.
"This proposal is a corporate polluter's wish list," warned Athan Manuel, director of Sierra Club's Lands Protection Program. "The only way it could be friendlier to Big Oil CEOs would be if they wrote it themselves."
"Let's be clear, this proposal is a means to an end," Manuel added. "The end is tax cuts for billionaires, and the means are selling off the public lands that belong to the American people. These provisions enable drilling and mining as quickly, lucratively, and free from public scrutiny as possible, even allowing the fossil fuel industry to buy their way out of judicial oversight. It's a giveaway to industry, and Americans should not stand for it."
Defenders of Wildlife warned that "this egregious legislation would undermine critical wildlife protections and destroy or degrade large swaths of wildlife habitats through destructive mandates for increased logging and massive oil and gas lease sales on American public land, including portions of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge."
Robert Dewey, the group's vice president of government relations, said that "this bill would be devastating for American wildlife and the habitats they depend on."
"It puts a bullseye on already imperiled polar bears, whales, and hundreds of other species that depend on the integrity of federal lands and waters for their survival," Dewey added. "Congress shouldn't be handing over these vital and cherished wildlife habitats on public lands to oil and other extractive companies for bigger profits."
"This measure would give the oil industry free rein to pillage our public lands and oceans."
Kyle Jones, NRDC's federal affairs director, also issued a dire warning:
This measure would give the oil industry free rein to pillage our public lands and oceans. Instead of helping the American people and our shared public resources, it would allow the oil, coal, and timber industries to pick and choose the areas they want to exploit. And it exposes irreplaceable Alaskan wilderness to destructive oil drilling, industrial roadways and mining.
Worst of all, it allows fossil fuel companies and other big polluters to buy their way out of meaningful review or public input into their projects. So, that would mean one set of rules for the fossil fuel and logging barons, and another for the rest of us.
"The best thing that can be said about this measure is that it may be too radical for even this Congress," Jones added. "For the good of Americans and our shared resources, it should be quickly cast aside and forgotten."
The GOP draft follows the Trump administration's publication last month of a proposal that the Center for Biological Diversity warned "would rescind nearly all habitat protections for endangered species nationwide" by changing the regulatory definition of a single word—"harm"—in the Endangered Species Act, the nation's cornerstone wildlife conservation law.
It also comes as the administration, spearheaded by the Department of Government Efficiency—which has been led by billionaire Elon Musk—eviscerates federal agencies including the Fish and Wildlife Service and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
As he did during his first term, President Donald Trump—who campaigned on a "drill, baby, drill" platform—is pursuing a massive rollback of climate and environmental regulations and has appointed Cabinet secretaries whose backgrounds and beliefs are often inimical to their agencies' purposes.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Medicare Advantage Bribery Scheme Highlights 'Bad Behavior' Trump Wants to Reward
"The Trump administration recently announced it would substantially increase payments to private Medicare Advantage plans in 2026, rewarding their bad behavior."
May 02, 2025
Healthcare advocates have long condemned the for-profit insurance companies that manage Medicare Advantage plans for overbilling the federal government by hundreds of billions of dollars per year, using artificial intelligence and algorithms to deny patients' claims, and tricking patients with disabilities via deceptive marketing practices—and a lawsuit originally initiated by a whistleblower is accusing three such private insurance giants of taking part in overt bribery.
The U.S. Department of Justice filed a complaint Thursday under the False Claims Act, accusing three of the largest Medicare Advantage insurers—Aetna, Humana, and Elevance Health—of paying brokers hundreds of millions of dollars to steer beneficiaries toward their plans, and to steer disabled seniors away in an effort to keep them more profitable.
The American Economic Liberties Project (AELP) noted that the lawsuit comes from an unlikely place—the Trump administration, which last month announced it would substantially increase payments to the privately run plans, increasing rates to the tune of $25 billion in additional funds next year despite their history of defrauding the government and patients.
While applauding the DOJ for cracking down on the bribery scheme, the group noted that "despite its promises to crack down on such wasteful spending, the Trump administration recently announced it would substantially increase payments to private Medicare Advantage plans in 2026, rewarding their bad behavior."
Dr. Mehmet Oz, who President Donald Trump appointed to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, has also advocated for a proposal called Medicare Advantage for All—further expanding the for-profit plans that now cover more than half of Americans who are eligible for Medicare.
"For years, these firms have driven seniors into worse care with deceptive marketing and discrimination, but now it's clear they're crooks too."
The lawsuit filed Thursday also named three brokers—eHealth, Inc., GoHealth, Inc., and SelectQuote Inc.—and said that between 2016-21, the companies "paid hundreds of millions of dollars in illegal kickbacks to the defendant brokers in exchange for enrollments into the insurers' Medicare Advantage plans."
The brokers are accused of directing beneficiaries to the plans that paid them the most in kickbacks, regardless of the suitability of the plans. They also allegedly provided their employees with incentives to sell plans based on the payments from the three insurers and refused to sell Medicare Advantage plans for the three companies if they didn't pay the brokers sufficiently.
Aetna and Humana are also accused of conspiring with the brokers to "discriminate against Medicare beneficiaries with disabilities whom they perceived to be less profitable," threatening to withhold payments unless brokers enrolled fewer disabled senior citizens.
"Private Medicare Advantage plans routinely fail to deliver quality care—especially for seniors and the most vulnerable—and are among the most wasteful, fraudulent, and abusive actors in our healthcare system," said Emma Freer, senior policy analyst for healthcare at AELP. "For years, these firms have driven seniors into worse care with deceptive marketing and discrimination, but now it's clear they're crooks too—bribing brokers behind closed doors because they know no one would choose these plans on a level playing field."
In addition to cracking down on the bribery scheme, Freer called on Trump's DOJ to "move swiftly on its ongoing monopolization and fraud investigations in the largest Medicare Advantage plan provider, UnitedHealth Group."
The DOJ opened an investigation in February into UnitedHealth's effect on competition in insurance, pharmacy benefit management, physician networks, and other sectors of the for-profit healthcare industry.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular