Letter to the UC Board of Regents on Fighting Antisemitism

Dear Chair and Members of the University of California Board of Regents,

We write as current and former UC faculty, many of us in STEM fields and professional schools, in response to the release of When Faculty Take Sides: How Academic Infrastructure Drives Antisemitism at the University of California. UC is admired worldwide for rigorous teaching, original research, and open inquiry anchored in scholarly standards rather than political advocacy. That reputation depends on a simple but essential boundary: individual faculty are free to speak as citizens, but UC’s academic authority, resources, and UC-branded platforms must not be used to advance organized political advocacy as institutional practice.

The report finds that UC has not consistently enforced this boundary. In practice, political advocacy has been carried into UC’s academic life through courses, academic-unit communications, and UC-branded programming — and the result has been hostile or exclusionary conditions for some students. In the cases documented in the report, those harms fall disproportionately on Jewish students and others labeled “Zionist” or “pro-Israel,” but the underlying problem is institutional: UC academic authority is being used in ways that make political agendas appear to carry the University’s official endorsement.

Looking across UCLA, UC Berkeley, and UC Santa Cruz, the report shows the same pattern repeating: faculty influence concentrated in key unit roles; academic units using their websites, listservs, social media, and events to push one-sided messaging; new campus-branded academic initiatives that amplify that programming; and classrooms being used to steer students toward political activity.

For the Regents, the implications are not abstract. UC’s crisis cannot be resolved by treating it solely as a matter of episodic student conduct or generalized “climate.” The report describes a governance-related breakdown: UC lacks clear systemwide operational rules and consistent enforcement that distinguish protected individual faculty speech from institutional academic-unit action, and that prevent misuse of UC authority and resources inside core academic functions.

This breakdown also harms the University itself. It undermines UC’s academic mission, damages UC’s reputation as a leading research institution, and increases exposure to federal scrutiny and potential funding consequences — risks that fall disproportionately on research-intensive STEM departments and the broader UC research enterprise. When the public sees UC-branded academic units operating as political actors, confidence in UC’s scholarly standards and institutional integrity erodes. When regulators see inconsistent enforcement of rules that govern instruction, resource use, and institutional neutrality, the stakes become not just reputational but financial.

We therefore urge the Regents to act now. Enforce UC’s existing rules — and strengthen them where needed — to stop faculty and academic units from using UC authority, resources, and UC-branded platforms to advance political advocacy as institutional practice. The point is not to restrict anyone’s private speech. It is to restore a clear, enforceable boundary: UC academic units should educate and conduct research, not operate as political actors. The report lays out specific Regents-level actions to make that boundary real across all campuses, with consistent oversight and consequences when it is violated. We also respectfully request that the Regents take up the report and its recommendations for discussion at the Regents’ March meeting.

The Regents’ leadership is essential to protect UC’s academic mission and instructional integrity, safeguard equal access to UC’s educational programs for all students, and restore public confidence that UC’s academic units operate as scholarly institutions rather than political actors.

Respectfully,

Professors Judea Pearl (UCLA) and Ilan Benjamin (UCSC) along with 366 Current & Emeritus UC Faculty and Staff