The University of California (UC) has decided to prohibit student governments and other university groups from boycotting Israel. This move comes after a directive from the Trump administration, which stated that institutions involved in such boycotts would risk losing federal medical and science research funding.
UC President Michael Drake informed campus leaders in a letter that boycotting companies based on their ties to specific countries violates university policy. While there isn’t a formal anti-boycott rule, existing policies require fair competition for university contracts. Student governments are also expected to follow sound business practices that comply with legal requirements, which include not engaging in boycotts against any nation.
This policy affects all UC campuses, medical centers, and affiliated divisions. However, it does not extend to student clubs, which have more freedom to express political views and make financial decisions. Some professional school governments, like those at law schools, might be impacted since they are recognized as official student governments.
Drake’s announcement builds on UC’s longstanding opposition to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which gained traction among students last year. Supporters of BDS argue that their efforts are not antisemitic and focus on ending academic and financial ties to Israel. However, California has placed legal restrictions on state funding for universities that endorse such boycotts since 2016.
The timing of this letter is significant as UC is currently under investigation by the Trump administration for alleged antisemitic discrimination. The Department of Health and Human Services and the National Science Foundation have warned that federal funds could be jeopardized if universities promote anti-Israel actions.
Drake’s message emphasizes that while individuals and groups can express their opinions, university entities must manage their finances in accordance with university policies and applicable laws. He reiterated the importance of inclusivity and the need for university bodies to represent all students fairly.
The decision may face opposition from student governments, which often take stances that differ from university administration. Aditi Hariharan, president of the UC Student Association, expressed her disagreement with the ban, stating that student government is one of the few avenues for students to influence university decisions.
In contrast, Kira Stein, chair of UCLA’s pro-Israel Jewish Faculty Resilience Group, praised the decision, arguing that official boycotts are divisive and do not contribute to peace. She called for respectful dialogue on campus.
While UC leaders have firmly rejected calls for divestment from Israel, some student governments have previously endorsed BDS, pledging not to fund pro-Israel events. This has led to conflicts, such as the recent suspension of the UC Davis Law Student Association after it passed a boycott resolution against Israel.
Overall, the ban on boycotts reflects UC’s commitment to maintaining its funding and ensuring that its financial practices align with federal guidelines while navigating the complex landscape of campus activism and political expression.