We call on the New York Times to remove Professor Ussama Makdisi from any editorial or advisory role associated with its opinion section.

This is not about restricting political speech or criticism of Israel. Debate is essential in a free society, and disagreement must remain protected.

This is about editorial responsibility.

Following the October 7 attacks, in which approximately 1,200 Israeli civilians were murdered, Professor Makdisi circulated a public statement that included the line: “I could have been one of those who broke through.”

Whatever interpretation is intended, this statement has been widely understood as expressing identification with participants in a mass attack on civilians. That crosses a basic ethical line for anyone serving in an editorial capacity at a leading newspaper.

Professor Makdisi also has a long public record of sharply charged political commentary on Israel, including describing it as a “settler-colonial enterprise,” alleging “ethnic cleansing,” and characterizing Israeli policy as “complete domination” of Palestinians. He has also participated in events organized by Students for Justice in Palestine, a movement closely associated with campus-based anti-Israel activism and the broader BDS campaign.

Whatever one’s views on these positions, they reflect a sustained and deeply engaged political advocacy profile—one that raises legitimate questions about suitability for editorial influence at a major news institution.

Editorial roles at The New York Times are not neutral academic platforms. They shape public discourse and carry institutional authority. At a time of rising antisemitism and heightened global tensions, standards for those entrusted with editorial judgment must be especially clear.

This concern is not abstract. Major institutions, including the New York Times, have faced historical criticism for inadequate attention to the persecution of Jews during World War II. That history underscores the importance of vigilance today.

We therefore demand:

 1) Immediate removal of Ussama Makdisi from any editorial or advisory role
 2) Transparency regarding the standards used for selecting editorial contributors
 3) A clear reaffirmation that rhetoric perceived as legitimizing or identifying with violence against civilians is incompatible with editorial responsibility

The credibility of the New York Times depends not only on what it publishes—but on who it empowers to help shape its voice.