To the editor: Has history ever looked kindly on the governments or nation states that instituted laws, obligations, regulations or policies specific to identifying those of its own citizens as “Jewish” (“Judge says Penn must turn over information about Jewish employees in U.S. discrimination probe,” March 31)?
Additionally, by what measure would such a requirement today discern, with all consideration to the absurdity deserved, how Jewish? Religious or secular? Orthodox or not? Assimilated, but not too much? Of course, that’s just for starters.
From a purely practical perspective, what is the University of Pennsylvania to do in adhering to the court’s order? Are we supposed to assume the university, as a matter of regular practice, maintains employment records that have a “certain” designation listed next to each worker? Penn has already said it does not “maintain employee lists by religion.”
Missing from this article is any consideration as to why the hundreds or thousands of the faculty who identify as Jewish should have their names provided to this or any other government.
Hopefully, even some of those readers who support this administration might think that sounds at least a “bisl” dangerous.
Ted Rosenblatt, Hancock Park
..
To the editor: I am appalled by U.S. District Judge Gerald Pappert’s ruling that the University of Pennsylvania must give out the names and personal contact information of Jewish employees to the Justice Department.
My dismay is not based on the parallel to Nazi/fascist investigations of Jews in the 1930s and ‘40s, nor the privacy rights of the university. It is based on basic privacy rights of any employee to prevent having his or her name and address given out to anyone when the only reason for the request is based on the religion of the employee.
Andrew E. Rubin, Los Angeles