Lawmakers in more than half a dozen U.S. states are pushing for laws to define anti-Semitism, sparking debates over free speech and bringing complicated global politics into statehouses.
Advocates say it is increasingly important to add a definition that explains how to determine whether certain criticism of Israel also amounts to hatred of the Jewish people. Lawmakers cited the October 7 attacks in which Hamas killed about 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and took about 250 hostages back to Gaza, sparking a war that has killed more than 26,000 Palestinians.
“For anyone who didn’t think anti-Zionism could cross over into anti-Semitism, the rest of the world could see that it did,” said Democratic Rep. Esther Panitch, the only Jewish member of Georgia’s legislature and one of the sponsors of a bill the state Legislature passed last week. Republican Gov. Brian Kemp is expected to sign.
Antisemitism, defined in 2016 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, is “a particular perception of Jews, which can be expressed as hatred of Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed against Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, against Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”
But Kenneth Stern, the author of the IHRA definition, said the use of such language in the law is problematic.
“There is an increasing number of young Jews for whom their Judaism leads to an anti-Zionist position,” said Stern, director of the Bard Center for the Study of Hate. “I don’t want the state to decide this issue.”
Over the past three months, there has been an increase in protests across the country calling for a ceasefire in Gaza and the release of Israeli hostages. A coalition of organizations, including Jewish Voice for Peace and CAIR, issued a joint statement saying the Georgia bill “wrongly equates criticism of Israel and Zionism with discrimination against Jewish people.”
Measures that use the same definition of anti-Semitism — but in anti-discrimination laws — have made progress in legislative chambers in Indiana and South Dakota. An Anti-Defamation League report last year found that anti-Semitic incidents have increased significantly in Georgia and Indiana, but not in Georgia, where fewer than 10 incidents per year have recently been reported.
Other legislation with the definition is pending in at least five other states this year.
Supporters of the bill say more than 30 states have adopted the definition in some way over the years. Previously, legal definitions – including in New York, the state with the largest Jewish population – were primarily established through resolutions or executive orders, rather than through mandatory laws.
In other parts of the country, Iowa passed the definition into law in 2022 and Virginia, among others, did the same last year.
Lawmakers say their bills are a response to the Oct. 7 attacks, but before that the problem of anti-Semitism was on the rise in the U.S. and globally. Since the outbreak of the war between Israel and Hamas, several states have passed resolutions condemning Hamas and expressing support for Israel.
Thousands of entities around the world, including the U.S. State Department, major corporations and colleges, have officially recognized the definition, while groups including the American Jewish Committee support it.
However, the US Congress and the American Bar Association have refused to do so. Among those urging lawmakers to vote no are chapters of the ACLU.
“There is fundamental First Amendment harm when the state attempts to silence pure speech based on its position,” said Brian Hauss, an ACLU attorney.
Supporters of the laws emphasize that they are not trying to ban speech, but rather try to decipher actions that amount to discrimination or hate crimes, which have varying degrees of severity.
“This bill is entirely about conduct — unfavorable or disparate treatment prohibited by state law,” said South Dakota State Rep. Fred Deutsch, a Republican whose father was a Holocaust survivor. “This bill does not restrict the freedom of expression of any person or organization.” This week, the House passed a measure by a vote of 53 to 14.
Lara Freidman, president of the Foundation for Middle East Peace, said the laws could elevate charges, such as those against a protester for property destruction, to the level of a hate crime if the perpetrator is seen carrying a Palestinian flag.
Georgian state Rep. Ruwa Romman, a Democrat of Palestinian descent, said the definition, if adopted by colleges, has suppressed students’ right to freedom of expression.
“When they tried to organize a Palestinian poet or a Palestinian culture evening, the government preemptively canceled the events for fear of being anti-Semitic,” she said.
Some protesters gathered in Indiana’s capital this month before the House unanimously introduced a bill that included the definition there.
“I don’t have to feel like I’m going to be censored, attacked or harassed as a student,” said Yaqoub Saadeh, president of the Middle Eastern Student Association at Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis.
How colleges act to prevent or stop anti-Semitism on campus has become a hot-button issue across the country. Last year, the fallout from campus presidents’ testimony before Congress led to the resignations of presidents of Harvard and the University of Pennsylvania.