The Boca Raton House of Representatives censored Speaker Pro Tempore Alex Mojica at its April 18 meeting, a formal statement of disapproval following a controversial comment he made during an April 4 meeting. 

The remark, “Now if I had attacked Gaza like Benjamin Netanyahu, that would be different,” sparked backlash from student leaders and members of the Jewish community, who deemed it inappropriate. 

Mojica’s comment followed a failed impeachment attempt against him. On March 29, Mojica tried to remove House Secretary Deenah Ilario for not submitting meeting minutes, but he later realized he did not have the authority to do so. 

In response to his actions, a motion to impeach him was introduced at the April 4 meeting, arguing that his behavior and misuse of authority warranted his removal. The impeachment attempt ultimately failed, but the controversy surrounding his actions and the subsequent comment led to the House of Representatives introducing a censure resolution to condemn the remarks. 

In his defense, Mojica made what he described as “an inappropriate analogy about Israel,” which he said in the April 18 meeting was not intended to be offensive but was “a stupid analogy” made under pressure.

“It was an inappropriate comment,” Mojica told the University Press during a phone call interview. “I wasn’t slurring Judaism. It was just a bad analogy, and I voted in favor of the resolution to demonstrate my accountability.”

Although Mojica issued an immediate apology at the April 4 meeting after being called out, several student leaders and members of the Jewish community continued to express concern. In response, members of the House introduced a “Stop Antisemitism” resolution at the April 18 meeting – a formal action by the House to publicly denounce hate speech and show support for Jewish students.

During the open forum, Giulia Fuentes, the Student Government global programming director, spoke about her frustration over the comment. “Words have consequences, rhetoric has consequences, and those consequences are not hypothetical. They are real,” Fuentes said. “In a climate already heavy with hatred, comments like the one made two meetings ago pour gasoline on an already burning fire.”

Representatives said the resolution serves as an official statement that the House does not condone the remarks made. Rules and Policies Chair Jack Nixon explained in an email to the UP that it was not designed to punish Mojica, but to send a message of unity and accountability.

“The resolution is a statement from the House to our student body and Jewish community, clarifying that anti-Semitic rhetoric has no place in our student government and that we remain committed to making this campus a safe and inclusive space,” he wrote to the UP in an April 19 email. 

Nixon emphasized that censure resolutions are symbolic rather than punitive. “Censure resolutions are simply a formal letter that the body denounces the comments made by the applicable person,” he wrote. “There are no further or ongoing consequences with these types of resolutions within SG. We should always give people the opportunity to learn and grow, as SG is a learning environment.”

While the resolution passed, the individual vote count was not publicly shared. Nixon said the resolution did not include any specific consequences but served as a symbolic gesture of disapproval. 

Mojica also asked for guidance from his fellow representatives on how to move forward and begin rebuilding trust, especially with Jewish organizations on campus like Hillel of Broward and Palm Beach.

“Is there a way, or what way would you recommend, how we can move past this with the Jewish community, particularly with Hillel?” he asked. “Are there events we can do or projects we can partner on in order to build back better again?”

Chief Justice Nicholas Silano echoed Fuentes’ concern, stating the importance of holding student leaders to a higher standard.

“These comments are not what student leaders, especially someone in one of the highest elected offices in student government, should be making,” Silano said. “These comments and behaviors are unbecoming and out of line.”

Assistant Vice President of Student Engagement Donald Van Pelt submitted a written statement to the House, acknowledging the concerns while encouraging a path toward reconciliation. He emphasized the importance of creating a safe and inclusive environment for all students, while also suggesting that accountability doesn’t always need censure.  

“While accountability remains critical, I believe that censure may not be the most constructive or restorative approach at this time,” Van Pelt wrote. “Leadership should always include the opportunity for reflection, education and reconciliation.”

Jada Strayer is a Staff Writer for the University Press. For more information on this or other stories, you can contact Strayer at jstrayer2023@fau.edu or DM jadastrayer on Instagram.