Josh Hammer

Yeah, so they lost badly in the Students for Fair Emissions versus Harvard case. They were singled out. By the way, Charlie, one of my best friends in the world, a brilliant lawyer by the name of Adam Martara, he was actually the trial lawyer against Harvard in this case. So I know this case actually quite well. Harvard's emissions policies, when it came to the Students for Fair Emissions case—

were blatantly, overtly discriminatory. They were clearly, clearly violating the 14th Amendment, violating the Civil Rights Act, Title VI. When they were discriminating against white people, Asian people, the plaintiffs in that case happened to be Asians.

were blatantly, overtly discriminatory. They were clearly, clearly violating the 14th Amendment, violating the Civil Rights Act, Title VI. When they were discriminating against white people, Asian people, the plaintiffs in that case happened to be Asians.

And the key part for present purposes, Charlie, is that the Trump executive order, probably the single most important executive order that Trump has signed into law—and he's signed a lot of good ones—

And the key part for present purposes, Charlie, is that the Trump executive order, probably the single most important executive order that Trump has signed into law—and he's signed a lot of good ones—

But the single most important, the executive order that I said essentially achieved a Cold War victory without firing a single shot for our side, the forces of civilizational sanity, was where, among other things, back on January 20th, he interpreted this case, the Students for Fair Emissions v. Harvard case, as also requiring an end to DEI and everything else that smacks of anti-white, anti-Asian, anti-American, anti-Western bigotry on campuses.

But the single most important, the executive order that I said essentially achieved a Cold War victory without firing a single shot for our side, the forces of civilizational sanity, was where, among other things, back on January 20th, he interpreted this case, the Students for Fair Emissions v. Harvard case, as also requiring an end to DEI and everything else that smacks of anti-white, anti-Asian, anti-American, anti-Western bigotry on campuses.

Harvard has flagrantly stuck their middle fingers at this there. So it's far more than just anti-Semitism. It's not just I'm glad you said that.

Harvard has flagrantly stuck their middle fingers at this there. So it's far more than just anti-Semitism. It's not just I'm glad you said that.

Yeah. So there's numerous things, right? So first of all, there's a Trump executive order from 2019. This is one of his executive orders that was produced by the Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights back then when Ken Marcus was leading it there. And back then, they interpreted Title VI of the Civil Rights Act for the very first time to apply to Jews.

Yeah. So there's numerous things, right? So first of all, there's a Trump executive order from 2019. This is one of his executive orders that was produced by the Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights back then when Ken Marcus was leading it there. And back then, they interpreted Title VI of the Civil Rights Act for the very first time to apply to Jews.

And one of the things that they did as part of this executive order that Trump signed six years ago now was he said that anti-Zionism constitutes anti-Semitism for purposes of Title VI. Now, Charlie, it's important to define terms. There's a lot of confusion as to what anti-Zionism is, simply criticizing the policies that

And one of the things that they did as part of this executive order that Trump signed six years ago now was he said that anti-Zionism constitutes anti-Semitism for purposes of Title VI. Now, Charlie, it's important to define terms. There's a lot of confusion as to what anti-Zionism is, simply criticizing the policies that

of a democratically elected government is obviously and transparently not anti-Semitism. Anyone who's ever met two or three Israelis knows they probably disagree because no one loves to disagree on themselves like Israelis or, frankly, just like Jews in general. I mean, literally going back to the Talmud and so forth. But what is anti-Zionism is calling for the destruction of a country.

of a democratically elected government is obviously and transparently not anti-Semitism. Anyone who's ever met two or three Israelis knows they probably disagree because no one loves to disagree on themselves like Israelis or, frankly, just like Jews in general. I mean, literally going back to the Talmud and so forth. But what is anti-Zionism is calling for the destruction of a country.

What is anti-Semitism is to use such genocidal Nazi-esque speech so as to seemingly cause an imminent threat of physical harm. That would fall outside of constitutional free speech limits. It is a fine line. I don't pretend line. This is kind of a bright line rule one way or the other there.

What is anti-Semitism is to use such genocidal Nazi-esque speech so as to seemingly cause an imminent threat of physical harm. That would fall outside of constitutional free speech limits. It is a fine line. I don't pretend line. This is kind of a bright line rule one way or the other there.

But there have been judicial rules given by courts over the years, and the line ends up being somewhere in that gray area right there.

But there have been judicial rules given by courts over the years, and the line ends up being somewhere in that gray area right there.

Well, I'll tell you who I don't think is going to surrender. I don't think that Donald Trump is going to surrender because this is a politically winning fight. I mean, let's hold the policy, the law aside for a second, Charlie, just focusing on the brute politics of this. What an amazing political operation, an amazing political move by Donald Trump and his whole administration.