The Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU)’s Legislative Council (LC) aimed to resolve unfinished business at its last meeting of the 2024-2025 academic year on April 3. The session saw the LC’s re-approval of the Policy Against Antisemitism, which faced legal opposition after it first passed in December 2024.
The meeting commenced with Director of Clubs and Services Hamza Abu-Alkhair reading the Services Committee Report. Science Councillor Ishita Kumar asked for clarification on exactly how SSMU services are meant to operate. Abu-Alkhair responded that in Fall 2024, SSMU President Dymetri Taylor asked each service to submit a three-year roadmap of their operating plan to keep them on track.
“Because they have such a large budget, there has to be accountability when it comes to services,” Abu-Alkhair said.
The discussion of services was tabled for later in the meeting.
Next, VP External Affairs Hugo-Victor Solomon brought forward a Motion asking SSMU to promote a letter requesting that Quebec’s government base tuition discounts on Francophone language status, rather than nationality. Solomon also introduced a Motion to formalize SSMU’s successful food pantry pilot project. The LC unanimously approved both motions.
Discussion of the Policy Against Antisemitism occupied most of the remaining meeting time. Solomon described this policy as the result of the “most extensive, sophisticated, and broad consultation [of] any [motion] this year,” with input from students dating back to September and oversight from SSMU’s legal counsel. He called on the LC to “embody the Jewish tradition of thoughtful and respectful disagreement” as they debated.
A member of the gallery proposed a motion to form a working group of 12 student organizations to reform the Policy. The motion failed to meet the two-thirds-in-favour requirement needed to add a motion from the floor. When dissenters requested the Dais read aloud an email describing their issues with the Policy, speaker Jonathan Dong declined, citing section 3.8.10 of the LC’s Standing Rules, which prevents the use of disrespectful language.
The gallery continued to debate whether SSMU had upheld its regulatory obligations during consultations. Solomon asserted the union had, listing examples of feedback from groups such as Hillel McGill that he had incorporated into the Policy.
“The consultation process does not inherently guarantee that every recommendation or amendment proposed by stakeholders will be incorporated into the final decisions of the Legislative Council,” Solomon said.
Chavurah and floor member Lola Milder expressed frustration at the gallery’s back-and-forth over constitutional requirements, without amendments actively being made. Milder affirmed she had been consulted for the policy and supported it.
“I am exasperated to be here once again,” Milder stated. “I also want to highlight that many of the groups who were signatories on the letters that were put forward in the fall […] are not Jewish groups, but Israeli culture groups [….] Let’s not conflate [the two].”
Members from the floor then asked the LC to review amendments to the Policy they had sent to the Dais in advance. The Steering Committee recessed to review the amendments, ultimately finding that three were not in compliance with SSMU regulations. The LC moved to add one eligible proposed amendment to the policy, excluding two of its sections.
“We will be physically kicked out of this room very shortly,” Solomon then stated. “I’m not saying that all of these amendments are universally rejected, but the Legislative Council does not have the resources to fully consider them.”
Taylor moved to adjust the agenda to accommodate time constraints, allowing the LC to conclude by approving motions relating to internal regulations and amendments to the SSMU Policy on Harmful Military Technology, and hearing various executive and committee reports.
Moment of the Meeting: Via anonymous online voting, the LC passed the Policy Against Antisemitism, with 14 in favour, five opposed, and one abstaining.
Soundbite: “We are stronger as a community when we reject dehumanization and fascism in all its forms, and accept a plurality of legitimate expression, especially when we might not agree with it [….] There are multiple ways of being Jewish, of practicing tikkun olam, and upholding tzedek.”—Solomon on the debate over the Policy Against Antisemitism.
