jews are the most targeted religious group in america, says the fbi. all i say is, never again, but guess what? it is again and again and again. the threat level against the jewish community is historic. hate once limited to extremists, fanatics. jews will not replace us! now main stream. this is a plague. there is no question that anti-semitism is being normalized. on city streets, online. we ve seen people live stream their actual attacks. this is disgusting. on college campuses, in politics. it s become a political prop for people on both the right and the left. how did we get here and how do we stop it? they need to be disrupted today. whenever challenged with darkness and evil we will fight back with light. this is a cnn special report. rising hate: anti-semitism in america. january 15th, 2022, was a bitter cold day in colleyville, texas. it was in the 30s in texas. doesn t usually get that cold. so when a visitor knocked on the do
directed at her on the social media platform yik yak. people were saying if you see the zionist spit on her. he said he saw death threats. and i called my dad and he came and he picked me up at like 3:00 in the morning. reporter: she no longer felt safe going to classes. the president of suny nupalt did send this e-mail to the campus community condemning anti-semitism in its many forms but for blotner it wasn t enough. in june, a formal complaint was filed on behalf of blotner and another student with the u.s. education s office of civil rights. the universities have an obligation to make sure all of their students have equal access to all of those educational opportunities. reporter: suny nupalts declined to speak with us on camera and the students who cassie says kicked her out of the club did not respond to multiple requests for comment. in a text with blotner claimed they are not anti-semitic.
due process, correct? if memory serves, yes and i think there might have been equal protection concerns as well. the supreme court has applied that, somehow fairly mysteriously by saying it s created by the confluence of the fifth amendment and the 14th amendment to the united states constitution. but historically it s been applied in ways that seem to sanction explicit policy making by the courts. for example, the lotner verses new york case, which i know you talked to senator lee about in particular, it was a new deal case which set limitations on how long bakers could work in new york. the supreme court struck that down and said it violated the right of free contract. now, lotner, as you know, was
0 of marriage, correct? i am aware there are various religious faiths that define marriage in a traditional way. do you see that when the supreme court makes a dramatic pronouncement about the invalidity about state marriage laws, it will inevitably set in conflict between those who ascribe to the supreme court s edict and those who have a firmly held religious belief that marriage is between a man and a woman? well, senator, these issues are being litigated, as you know, throughout the courts i as people raise issues and so, i m limited in what i can say about them. i m aware there are cases i m not asking you to decide a case or predict how you would decide in the future. i m asking isn t it apparent that when the supreme court decided something that is not even in the constitution is a fundamental right and no state can pass any law that conflicts with the supreme court s edict, particularly in an area where people have sincerely held religious believes, doesn t that effec