Bearing Witness and Building Solidarity: Screening of No Other Land at BU Law

Creating space for Palestinian narratives is urgent but increasingly rare. As pro-Palestinian advocacy faces intensifying repression in the United States and abroad, events that foster critical dialogue and reflection about the occupation and systematic oppression of Palestinians become even more vital. Yet, such efforts come with risks. Public forums often fail to grapple with the human cost of occupation, and those who attempt to amplify Palestinian voices are frequently silenced.

Palestinian Prisoners’ Day, April 17, 2025

Against this backdrop, on April 17, Palestinian Prisoners’ Day, IHRC hosted a screening and discussion of No Other Land. After the screening, students and faculty from different disciplines stayed to engage in necessary, if difficult, conversations about international law, human rights, and the suppression of Palestinian perspectives.

Planning the Screening: Solidarity Across Campus

Organizing this screening reminded us of the importance of collective action. From the very beginning, BU Law’s administration supported the event. Student organizations stepped up to offer financial and logistical help, ensuring the event could happen despite the risks that come with hosting pro-Palestinian programming. Faculty from other elsewhere at BU, such as Political Science and the Elie Wiesel Center for Jewish Studies, joined the discussion and recognized the value in hosting this event as a critical legal and political dialogue. The screening intentionally coincided with Palestinian Prisoners’ Day to honor and advocate for the thousands of Palestinians detained in Israeli prisons, many without formal charges or fair trials. This day, much like the film itself, symbolizes resilience and the unbroken demand for justice in the face of systemic oppression.

No Other Land is a collaborative documentary created by Basel Adra, a Palestinian activist, Yuval Abraham, a Jewish-Israeli journalist, alongside filmmakers Rachel Szor and Hamdan Ballal. Filmed between 2019 and 2023, the documentary follows Adra as he documents the Israeli military’s demolition of Masafer Yatta, his village in the southern West Bank. The land, designated by Israel as a military training zone, has become a frontline in the broader struggle over Palestinian self-determination, as my colleague discussed in a related blog. The film’s collaboration between Palestinian and Israeli voices brings a raw, human element to the legal and political debates surrounding occupation and annexation.

Post-Screening Reflections: What It Means to Stay

The post-screening discussion reflected the complex emotions stirred by the film. One faculty member of Palestinian heritage offered personal insight into what is in store for Palestinians who choose to remain on their land despite immense pressures — military violence, settler harassment, home demolitions — that seek to push them out. The professor reminded us that what is at stake is not just land, but culture, dignity, and freedom. For Palestinians, staying in villages like Masafer Yatta is an act of resistance, a refusal to relinquish their history and identity. The occupation does not even if an individual gives up their land and moves to the nearby city of Hebron, leaving resistance as the only real option for many residents of the West Bank. Even moving into cities does not offer freedom from surveillance, harassment, or violence.

Another professor expressed deep disappointment in global leadership, particularly U.S. and Canadian support for Israel’s military operations and the inaction of Arab states. Despite international legal rulings, such as the impactful 2024 ICJ Advisory Opinion affirming the illegality of Israel’s occupation and settlement policies explained in the previous blog, Western governments continue to fund what much of the international community has found to be blatantly unlawful. For instance, the United States provides $3.8 billion annually in military aid to Israel under a ten-year agreement, with much of that funding reinforcing the occupation infrastructure.

Some of our post-screening discussion returned to the disconnect between international law and reality. Our last blog detailed Palestinians’ well-established right to self-determination, the prohibition of annexation, and protections for occupied peoples under international humanitarian and human rights law. Yet no mechanisms compel Israel to change course. This is why No Other Land feels so necessary. While international law remains slow but steady, the film asserts a different kind of call to action — not legal, but human. It forces viewers to confront the human cost of legal violations, personalizing what is too often discussed in sterile, diplomatic language. The film amplifies Palestinian voices, transcending borders and legal frameworks to demand attention and solidarity.

Suppression Beyond Borders: Academic Freedom Under Threat

This disconnect between law and lived experience felt even starker when we turned to the suppression of academic freedom here in the United States. During the discussion, one student shared personal stories about his family’s experience, but he chose not to reveal his name out of fear of potential detention or surveillance. This fear is not unfounded. In recent months, pro-Palestinian students and activists across U.S. campuses have faced disciplinary actions, visa revocations, and even threats of deportation. ICE and law enforcement scrutiny have intensified in some cases, creating a chilling effect on political expression. Even as we organized this screening, we felt those pressures — hesitating to post room directions, wary of attracting unwanted attention.

Just weeks before our event, O Cinema in Miami Beach faced eviction threats after screening No Other Land. Miami’s mayor threatened to block the theater’s lease renewal, in attempt to punish O Cinema for showing the documentary. This incident served as a chilling reminder that amplifying Palestinian voices can invite retaliation. Whether in universities or community theaters, the act of bearing witness is radically challenged.

This repression is not new. Censorship and discriminatory chilling of speech and assembly rights have long been in the government’s playbook for controlling disfavored narratives, from McCarthy-era blacklists to post-9/11 crackdowns on Muslim communities. Yet the current wave of suppression around Palestinian advocacy feels particularly acute, both in scale and coordination. Faculty have been reprimanded, denied tenure, or terminated for expressing support for Palestinian rights — echoing purges on account of political speech but now weaponized against those defending human rights. Organizations like Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) have been defunded, deregistered, or banned outright on campuses across the country. What makes this moment more dangerous is the alignment of university administrations, law enforcement, and governments in stifling debate, creating a layered system of repression that chills not only those speaking out but anyone who might. Unlike previous eras where repression was localized, today it operates across institutions, leveraging immigration status, employment security, and academic standing to enforce silence. This erodes the very foundation of what universities are meant to be: spaces for inquiry, dissent, and truth-seeking. When fear shapes what can be said, the integrity of education itself is at risk.

Defending Academic Freedom

Academic freedom includes the freedom of individuals to teach, research, and publish without interference or fear of repression. Academic freedom in the U.S. is grounded in the First Amendment, which protects freedom of speech and expression from government interference. Courts have long recognized that universities occupy a special space in the constitutional landscape where robust debate must be protected. In *Keyishian v. Board of Regents (1967)*, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that academic freedom is “a special concern of the First Amendment.”

These ideas align with international human rights law. Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) guarantees freedom of opinion and expression, including the right “to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), ratified by the U.S., similarly codifies these rights. Additionally, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), in its General Comment №13, recognizes academic freedom as essential to the right to education.

Organizations like Palestine Legal, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and the National Lawyers Guild (NLG) provide legal resources and defense for students, faculty, and activists facing retaliation. Defending academic freedom also requires active engagement with law students, scholars, and lawyers. Whether through litigation, advocacy, public education, or organizing, legal professionals have a vital role to play in pushing back against suppression and guarding spaces for dissent.

This screening of No Other Land was not only about sharing the voices in the film — it was about building solidarity and creating space for reflection at a time when such spaces are under threat. As we navigate the legal, political, and moral dimensions of the Israeli occupation, we must remain committed to uplifting suppressed voices and resisting the normalization of injustice. Law students, professors, and legal advocates must carry forward the message of the film — not just in courts, classrooms, or publications, but in the everyday decisions to speak out, show up, and bear witness. When we defend academic freedom and amplify those silenced, we help preserve the very foundation of justice.