Nadene Goldfoot
The Antisemitism Awareness Act, a bipartisan piece of legislation, aims to provide a clear definition of antisemitism for the U.S. Department of Education to use when investigating discrimination cases in federally funded programs. The act seeks to incorporate the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism, which includes contemporary examples of antisemitism like Holocaust denial.
Passed House (05/01/2024) One year ago on May 1st
Antisemitism Awareness Act of 2023
This bill provides statutory authority for the requirement that the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights take into consideration the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's (IHRA's) working definition of antisemitism when reviewing or investigating complaints of discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance. According to the IHRA's working definition, antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews.
Anti-Semitism by 2025 has reached new heights since the 1930's which brought on the Holocaust. Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, and college campuses. These are the battlefields where young American Jews continue to encounter antisemitism at an alarming rate.
According to the latest annual State of Antisemitism in America Report released by American Jewish Committee (AJC) on February 12, 2025, online and on social media continue to be the place where American Jews encounter the worsening trend of antisemitism from a variety of sources including white supremacists on the far right and anti-Israel extremists on the far left.
Roughly seven in 10 (69%) Jewish adults report experiencing antisemitism online or on social media – including those who say they have been personally targeted and those who say they have seen or heard antisemitic incidents. This increases to eight in 10 (83%) among young Jewish adults.
Of the U.S. adults who witnessed antisemitism in the past 12 months, the majority (70%) say they saw it online or on social media.
- To clarify the definition of antisemitism for the Department of Education to enforce anti-discrimination laws under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
- The bill mandates the use of the IHRA's working definition, which includes a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred towards Jews, and includes examples like Holocaust denial and conspiracy theories.
- The act aims to help the Department of Education better identify and address antisemitic incidents on college campuses and in other federally funded programs. Is Dept. of Education still intact in 2025?No, the U.S. Department of Education is not fully intact. President Trump signed an executive order on March 20, 2025, to begin dismantling the department and returning authority to states and local communities. This order has reduced the department's role and responsibilities, though it didn't fully eliminate the agency. The department is still operating, but with a reduced scope. What happens now to this act? ?????
- The bill has bipartisan support and has passed the House, but has faced challenges in the Senate.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene opposed an earlier version of a bill to combat antisemitism because she said it rejected “Gospel” that “the Jews” handed Jesus to executioners. (Getty)
A Representative Republican, Greene has promoted antisemitic and white supremacist views including the white genocide conspiracy theory, QAnon, and Pizzagate. She has amplified conspiracy theories that allege government involvement in mass shootings in the United States, implicate the Clinton family in murder, and suggest the attacks of 9/11 were a hoax. Before running for Congress, Greene supported calls to execute prominent Democratic Party politicians, including Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. As a congresswoman, she equated the Democratic Party with Nazis, and compared COVID-19 safety measures to the persecution of Jews during the Holocaust.
- The act is intended to combat antisemitism, which includes contemporary manifestations like Holocaust denial and conspiracy theories.
- The IHRA definition is widely adopted by governments and institutions and provides a clear framework for identifying antisemitism.
- The bill is seen as a way to protect Jewish students and ensure that antisemitism is taken seriously on college campuses.
- Some groups, like the American Civil Liberties Union, have raised concerns that the act could lead to the suppression of legitimate criticism of Israel and chill free speech.
- Others worry that the broad definition of antisemitism could be used to stifle political debate. What Is Anti-Semitism?
To start, it is necessary to understand that anti-Semitism, historically, takes many forms. There is the openly racist anti-Semitism that often originates on the extreme right among those who perceive Jews as inherently evil and subhuman. There is religious anti-Semitism that focuses on claims that Jews are responsible for forsaking prophets or for “killing Christ.” And then there is conspiratorial anti-Semitism that singles out Jews for perceived offenses such as controlling global financial markets or otherwise bearing a unique responsibility for all evil in the world.
There are groups who attempt to deny there is any anti-Semitism connected to critiques of Israel. They do so by describing anti-Semitism only in racial terms. And so the argument goes, “We are not racists – we don’t hate Jews – therefore we can’t be anti-Semitic.” Yes, they are.
A Senate committee is expected to vote today on whether or not to advance a new version of the Antisemitism Awareness Act.
Republicans added an amendment to the bill, posted online Tuesday, which caught the eye of our senior political reporter, Jacob Kornbluh. The loophole reinforces the First Amendment right to preach that the Jews killed Jesus and it protects the statement from being considered antisemitic.
The amendment is a concession to Christian conservatives like Rep. Majorie Taylor Greene, Republican of Georgia, who worried that the bill infringed on their religious liberty.
