Why top Democrats oppose bipartisan bill targeting antisemitism in universities
The GOP-led Antisemitism Awareness Act mandates the Department of Education to use contested definition of antisemitism
Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) outside Columbia University on April 22, 2024. Photo by David Dee Delgado/Getty Images
By Jacob Kornbluh May 1, 2024
Update 6:45 p.m. 5/1/24: The House passed the GOP-led Antisemitism Awareness Act by a bipartisan 320-91 vote. 70 Democrats voted against.
The House is poised to pass a contentious bill aimed at addressing rising antisemitism in colleges and universities and nationwide pro-Palestinian protests.
The bill is led by Republican lawmakers, and while it has some bipartisan support, top Democrats — including Rep. Jerry Nadler, a prominent member of the Congressional Jewish Caucus — worry it could suppress constitutionally protected free speech on campuses.
Called the Antisemitism Awareness Act, the legislation mandates the Department of Education to use the controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism, which classifies most anti-Zionism as antisemitic. However, some Jewish advocacy groups and progressives have said the IHRA definition stifles legitimate criticism of Israel.
Instead, the Democratic leadership suggested pushing through legislation that would implement the Biden administration’s national strategy to counter antisemitism, released last year. That plan did not endorse a single definition but referenced both IHRA and the Nexus Document, which states that most criticism of Israel and Zionism is not antisemitic, provided that Israel is not treated differently solely because it is a Jewish state. It also has Republican support and the backing of the House Bipartisan Task Force for Combating Antisemitism.
Wednesday’s expected vote — and pending its consideration by the Senate — comes at a critical time amid growing discontent among liberal Democrats and young voters about President Joe Biden’s handling of the war between Israel and Hamas. Opposition to the war has now spread into mass protests on college campuses across the country, some turning violent and others leading to hundreds of arrests, mostly on charges of trespassing.
The White House and senior Democrats this week condemned students at Columbia University forcibly taking over buildings and engaging in what they described as antisemitic rhetoric.
House Republicans have undertaken a series of moves to respond to the escalating protest, including expanding congressional oversight of universities that they allege are rife with antisemitism.
Debate on how to address rising antisemitism
The measure was drafted in October by Rep. Mike Lawler, a freshman from New York’s Hudson Valley whose district includes a significant number of Jews in Rockland County, following a rash of antisemitic incidents and harassment of Jewish students on campus over the war in Gaza. Two Jewish House Democrats, Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey and Jared Moskowitz of Florida, co-authored the legislation. Another 13 Democrats have signed on as co-sponsors.
The adoption of the IHRA definition of antisemitism has been a point of contention in the Jewish community in recent years. A number of prominent American Jewish organizations, including the Anti-Defamation League, the Jewish Federations of North America and the Conference of Presidents, have called on the White House and government agencies to rely on it and are lobbying for support of the GOP-led bill. The Combat Antisemitism Movement, an advocacy group backed by a major Jewish donor to conservative causes, is helping to push the Antisemitism Awareness Act.
Other Jewish advocacy groups, claiming the bill would stifle legitimate criticism of Israel, have lobbied instead for the passage of the Countering Antisemitism Act, which was introduced in the Senate in April. It proposes the appointment of a new presidential adviser dedicated to antisemitism, separate from Ambassador Deborah Lipsdtadt, a cabinet-level position that focuses more on global antisemitism. That new person would also chair a task force to coordinate the implementation of the White House’s national plan across agencies.
In a letter to House Speaker Mike Johnson on Monday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries urged the Republicans to consider the alternative legislation. “The effort to crush antisemitism and hatred in any form is not a Democratic or Republican issue,” Jeffries wrote. “It’s an American issue that must be addressed in a bipartisan manner with the fierce urgency of now.”
The GOP-led bill also faces opposition from groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which has argued that the legislation is unnecessary and could suppress free speech on college campuses. The ACLU contended that “federal law already prohibits antisemitic discrimination and harassment by federally funded entities.”
Kevin Rachlin, the Washington director of the Nexus Leadership Project and previously one of J Street’s top lobbyists, said he’s hoping to see somebody “willing to step up and speak reason” about the need to shelve the divisive bill. “Let’s have a conversation about real tactical things to counter antisemitism that would actually do something, versus a bill that just puts into effect what’s already being done,” Rachlin said.
In December, more than 90 Democrats voted “present” on a similar nonbinding resolution that condemned the dramatic surge in antisemitism since the onset of the Israel-Hamas war because it equated anti-Zionism with antisemitism.
Rep. Kathy Manning, a Jewish Democrat who is co-sponsoring both bills, offered a compromise on Tuesday, calling for the House adoption of the two measures “to make a real difference in the fight against antisemitism.”
Still, Manning called the Republican effort “a political decision,” echoing Democratic assertions that the GOP is using this as an opening to score points against the Democrats in an election year.
A message from our Publisher & CEO Rachel Fishman Feddersen
I hope you appreciated this article. Before you go, I’d like to ask you to please support the Forward’s award-winning, nonprofit journalism during this critical time.
We’ve set a goal to raise $260,000 by December 31. That’s an ambitious goal, but one that will give us the resources we need to invest in the high quality news, opinion, analysis and cultural coverage that isn’t available anywhere else.
If you feel inspired to make an impact, now is the time to give something back. Join us as a member at your most generous level.
— Rachel Fishman Feddersen, Publisher and CEO
