Good afternoon, councilmembers. My name is Christie Love Hill, chief program & strategy officer at the ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties (ACLU-SDIC). Last Friday, we sent a letter urging you to vote NO on the city’s proposed resolution.
The First Amendment protects everyone, including those who criticize domestic or foreign governments, and the ACLU strongly defends this right. The IHRA definition, however, undermines that right by wrongly treating protected political speech as discrimination.
Antisemitism must be addressed. But this resolution is unnecessary and dangerous. It will not combat discrimination, and it will chill protected speech.
The city says this resolution is “nonbinding,” but that does not fix the issue. Discrimination, including antisemitism, is already prohibited under federal, state and local law. The resolution risks replacing a constitutional understanding of antisemitism for an unconstitutional framework when interpreting and enforcing those laws.
Courts are already recognizing the constitutional problem, with one court recognizing that a campus policy that incorporates the IHRA definition likely violates the First Amendment because it constitutes viewpoint discrimination.
Adopting the resolution will chill speech. People will reasonably hesitate to speak at council meetings, apply for permits or participate in protests, particularly as residents engage in debate over Israel, Palestine, Iran and U.S. involvement abroad.
These concerns are not hypothetical. The federal government has targeted individuals for their viewpoints. The Trump administration has detained and, in some cases, deported students and legal permanent residents for speech in support of Palestinians. At the same time, our communities are experiencing ongoing immigration enforcement and raids. A policy that singles out certain viewpoints only increases the risk that immigrants and refugees will be targeted or silenced.
We urge you to vote no.