Judge Says ‘Moral Confusion’ by Students Over Israel-Hamas War

A federal appeals court judge said she believes there is “great moral confusion” amid student and other demonstrations in the US that have criticized Israel’s response to the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas.

Judge Edith Jones of the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, speaking Friday at a conference hosted by the conservative Federalist Society, said that “we seem to be at an inflection point with the recent demonstrations across the country.”

“Here you’ve got what looks like hundreds of thousands of young people, many of them in college, who can’t seem to see the distinction between political debate on the one hand and proving murderous barbarity on the other,” Jones said.

She said there appears to be “some great moral confusion going on.”

Jones also said she was “very happy” to see law firms tell law schools they wouldn’t hire students who engaged in antisemitic behavior.

But Jones said that was only a start. She said those students were calling for “terrible violence, and it’s up to the schools who are training these people to give them a moral grounding.”

Jones declined to comment further on her remarks.

The judge, a conservative mainstay on the Fifth Circuit since her appointment by Ronald Reagan in 1985, made the comments as part of a panel on “natural law,” or the idea that all humans are born with some basic moral principles.

Students at colleges and universities whose organizations have issued controversial statements about the Oct. 7 Hamas attack have faced backlash, including from law firms who have revoked offers of employment to some students.

US Judge Matthew Solomson of the US Court of Federal Claims has said he would not hire law clerks who have supported those student group statements. US District Judge Lee Rudofsky has also asked his future clerks and interns to inform him if they have done anything that could been seen as condoning the Hamas attack, or antisemitic or Islamophobic acts.

Hundreds of faculty members at Columbia University and Barnard College have signed their own open letter defending students who have faced such repercussions. The faculty members said those students have also faced threats to their safety.

Free Speech Woes

Jones on Friday also raised concerns about free speech, including about US Supreme Court decisions that have protected those rights under the First Amendment.

After laying out a string of free speech rulings from the high court, Jones said, “when you destroy reasoned speech, you destroy the possibility of civil discourse.”

“So you have to ask, is the Constitution a suicide pact?” Jones said, referencing a 1949 dissent in a First Amendment case by the late Justice Robert Jackson. “Is there a way to limit speech in a reasonable way?”

Jones also took issue with the US Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in New York Times Company v. Sullivan, which creates legal protections for journalists writing about public figures. She said that it “allows the press to utter the most grave falsehoods about anybody with very little recourse.”

“It certainly has created incentives against truth telling in the news,” she added.

The high court has declined to revisit its finding that those suing media outlets must prove “actual malice,” or that a statement was made with knowing or reckless disregard for it being false. Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch have signaled a willingness to reconsider that decision.