‘Who speaks for the Jews?' The ADL, some say. Wrong, say others.
Get The Gavel
A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr.
Enter Email
Sign Up
Phillips argues that disproportionate criticism of Israel reveals latent antisemitism. But this ignores both the extraordinary scale of suffering in Gaza and the billions in US military aid that make this war possible. Holding a US-funded ally to account is not bigotry — it's our moral responsibility.
Advertisement
Today, perhaps more than ever, we need principled, not punitive, leadership from the ADL.
Sandy Light
Cambridge
Caroline Light
Belmont
Miriam Cubstead
Watertown
Caroline Light is a senior lecturer and director of undergraduate studies in women, gender, and sexuality studies at Harvard University. The views expressed here are her own and do not represent the university.
Advertisement
'The Anti-Defamation League really is a bulwark' against hate
My compliments to Colette A.M. Phillips for writing 'In defense of the Anti-Defamation League.' She is spot-on: Whatever the targeted group, violence can materialize from lack of education, prejudicial upbringing, or visceral hate, as shown, in the case of Jews, in Pittsburgh (mass shooting at the Tree of Life synagogue, Oct. 27, 2018); Boulder, Colo. (fire attack June 1 of this year on a group marching in solidarity with the hostages taken from Israel on Oct. 7, 2023); and Marietta, Ga. (the conviction in 1913, and subsequent lynching in 1915, of Leo Frank).
The Anti-Defamation League really is a bulwark against people who have hate issues. It tries to raise awareness that there are better ways to bring respect and understanding for all people when there is division in society.
Edward Sloan
North Andover
'I have never felt represented or protected by the ADL'
As a Jewish person who believes that all lives are sacred, including those of Palestinians, I have never felt represented or protected by the Anti-Defamation League. While in principle the ADL allows that not all criticism of Israel is antisemitic, the organization has not afforded the same benefit of the doubt to pro-Palestinian protesters as it has done, for example, to Elon Musk for giving what appeared to be
Colette A.M. Phillips argues that, since Israel's actions in Gaza have generated more protest than other atrocities around the globe, this protest must be a 'fig leaf' for antisemitism. This argument ignores both the scale of devastation — Gaza has been cited as
Advertisement
But for me, the reason to protest goes deeper. Growing up Jewish, I was told not only that Israel is the sacred ancestral home of our people but also that we have a special responsibility to ensure that what happened to us in the Holocaust does not happen to any people. When I see mass atrocities being committed by the country that is said to be my home, how can I remain silent?
Ben Allen
Boston
'The ADL is now a partisan organization'
I am a Jewish American and found Colette A.M. Phillips's op-ed very disturbing. Despite claiming that 'criticizing a government is fair game,' she then says much political criticism of Israel is not fair game. Instead, she establishes an impossible test for permissible criticism: that the speaker must prove their criticism is not 'selective.'
People have countless reasons for caring about some issues more than others. It has never been right to censor speech for its selectivity nor the imputed motives behind selectivity. Yet Phillips wants us to believe that in the case of Israel, we should reduce all special concern to hidden antisemitism. This is trying to win an argument without making it.
Phillips falls back on the exhausted argument that 'we have learned to listen' to the oppressed. They decide what counts as bigoted. Even if true in principle,
Advertisement
Alex Gourevitch
Cambridge
The writer is an associate professor of political science at Brown University. The views expressed here are his own and do not represent the university.
'All of us are capable of monstrous acts'
I was raised with awareness of antisemitism — my grandparents fled the anti-Jewish pogroms in Ukraine, and many family friends were German, Polish, or Austrian survivors of the Holocaust.
In 1980, my junior high school in Arlington was one of the first cohorts to use the Facing History and Ourselves curriculum. We studied the Armenian genocide, the Holocaust, and the war in Cambodia. It was painful to hear specifics of the slaughter of Jews and of the passivity of bystanders who knew but did not act in opposition.
However, in studying the Holocaust in the context of these other atrocities, it was always clear that this particular history was part of a much larger pattern of cruelty and resistance. As Jews, our suffering was not something that made us 'special'; rather, it was a dramatic example of recurring human barbarism.
The ADL's defense of fascist acts is a bitter irony. Those who claim Israel is not committing genocide in Gaza are willfully ignoring mass starvation and heartless slaughter. It feels excruciating, but we must be honest that Americans, Israelis, Jews, indeed all of us are capable of monstrous acts, and we must put aside our pride and act with determination to stop the horror.
Julia Halperin
Jamaica Plain
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
12 minutes ago
- Washington Post
The Justice Department seeks voter and election information from at least 19 states, AP finds
NEW YORK — The requests have come in letters, emails and phone calls. The specifics vary, but the target is consistent: The U.S. Department of Justice is ramping up an effort to get voter data and other election information from the states. Over the past three months, the department's voting section has requested copies of voter registration lists from state election administrators in at least 15 states, according to an Associated Press tally. Of those, nine are Democrats, five are Republicans and one is a bipartisan commission. In Colorado, the department demanded 'all records' relating to the 2024 election and any records the state retained from the 2020 election. Department lawyers have contacted officials in at least seven states to propose a meeting about forging an information-sharing agreement related to instances of voting or election fraud. The idea, they say in the emails, is for states to help the department enforce the law. The unusually expansive outreach has raised alarm among some election officials because states have the constitutional authority to run elections and federal law protects the sharing of individual data with the government. It also signals the transformation of the Justice Department's involvement in elections under President Donald Trump. The department historically has focused on protecting access to the ballot box. Today, it is taking steps to crack down on voter fraud and noncitizen voting, both of which are rare but have been the subject of years of false claims from Trump and his allies . The department's actions come alongside a broader effort by the administration to investigate past elections and influence the 2026 midterms. The Republican president has called for a special prosecutor to investigate the 2020 election that he lost to Democrat Joe Biden and continues to falsely claim he won. Trump also has pushed Texas Republicans to redraw their congressional maps to create more House seats favorable to the GOP. The Justice Department does not typically 'engage in fishing expeditions' to find laws that may potentially have been broken and has traditionally been independent from the president, said David Becker, a former department lawyer who leads the nonprofit Center for Election Innovation and Research. 'Now it seems to be operating differently,' he said. The department responded with an emailed 'no comment' to a list of questions submitted by the AP seeking details about the communications with state officials. Election offices in Alaska, Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New York, Utah, and Wisconsin confirmed to the AP that they received letters from the voting section requesting their statewide voter registration lists. At least one other, Oklahoma, received the request by phone. Many requests included basic questions about the procedures states use to comply with federal voting laws, such as how states identify and remove duplicate voter registrations or deceased or otherwise ineligible voters. Certain questions were more state-specific and referenced data points or perceived inconsistencies from a recent survey from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, an AP review of several of the letters showed. The Justice Department already has filed suit against the state election board in North Carolina alleging it failed to comply with a part of the federal Help America Vote Act that relates to voter registration records. There are signs the department's outreach isn't done. It told the National Association of Secretaries of State that 'all states would be contacted eventually,' said Maria Benson, a NASS spokeswoman. The organization has asked the department to join a virtual meeting of its elections committee to answer questions about the letters, Benson said. Some officials have raised concerns about how the voter data will be used and protected. Election officials in at least four California counties — Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego and San Francisco —said the Justice Department sent them letters asking for voter roll records. The letters asked for the number of people removed from the rolls for being noncitizens and for their voting records, dates of birth and ID numbers. Officials in Arizona, Connecticut, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Rhode Island and Wisconsin confirmed to the AP that they received an email from two department lawyers requesting a call about a potential 'information-sharing agreement.' The goal, according to several copies of the emails reviewed by the AP, was for states to provide the government with information about instances of election fraud to help the Justice Department 'enforce Federal election laws and protect the integrity of Federal elections.' One of those sending the emails was a senior counsel in the criminal division. The emails referred to Trump's March executive order on elections , part of which directs the attorney general to enter information-sharing agreements with state election officials to the 'maximum extent possible.' Election officials in several states that received requests for their voter registration information have not responded. Some said they were reviewing the inquiries. Officials in some other states provided public versions of voter registration lists to the department, with certain personal information such as Social Security numbers blacked out. Elsewhere, state officials answered procedural questions from the Justice Department but refused to provide the voter lists. In Minnesota, the office of Secretary of State Steve Simon, a Democrat, said the federal agency is not legally entitled to the information. In a July 25 letter to the Justice Department's voting section, Simon's general counsel, Justin Erickson, said the list 'contains sensitive personal identifying information on several million individuals.' He said the office had obligations under federal and state law to not disclose any information from the statewide list unless expressly required by law. In a recent letter, Republican lawmakers in the state called on Simon to comply with the federal request as a way 'to protect the voting rights of the citizens of Minnesota.' Maine's secretary of state, Democrat Shenna Bellows, said the administration's request overstepped the federal government's bounds and that the state will not fulfill it. She said doing so would violate voter privacy. The department 'doesn't get to know everything about you just because they want to,' Bellows said. There is nothing inherently wrong with the Justice Department requesting information on state procedures or the states providing it, said Justin Levitt, a former deputy assistant attorney general who teaches at Loyola Law School. But the department's requests for voter registration data are more problematic, he said. That is because of the Privacy Act of 1974, which put strict guidelines on data collection by the federal government. The government is required to issue a notice in the Federal Register and notify appropriate congressional committees when it seeks personally identifiable information about individuals. Becker said there is nothing in federal law that compels states to comply with requests for sensitive personal data about their residents. He added that while the outreach about information-sharing agreements was largely innocuous, the involvement of a criminal attorney could be seen as intimidating. 'You can understand how people would be concerned,' he said. ___ Fields reported from Washington. Associated Press state government reporters from around the country contributed to this report.
Washington Post
2 hours ago
- Washington Post
Latino GOP lawmakers voice worry about Trump's mass deportation campaign
Hispanic Republicans in the U.S. House say they are increasingly concerned that President Donald Trump's mass deportation campaign could backfire with Latino voters, as they look for ways to protect some undocumented immigrants from deportation. These Republicans expressed fear that the inroads Trump and the GOP made with Latino voters in 2024 could erode because of what they see as a haphazard approach to mass deportations, which are starting to disrupt their communities and threaten local businesses. They are growing especially anxious about the push to arrest and deport migrants whose only crime is crossing the border illegally.
USA Today
3 hours ago
- USA Today
Western nations want a Palestinian state. But Arab nations keep their distance.
Middle Eastern leaders who live closest to Gaza − and who arguably understand the players, history and regional dynamics best − are not escalating the political pressure on Israel. Britain's announcement that it may recognize a Palestinian state, along with France and Canada, is another signal of Western frustration with Israel, nearly two years into the war sparked by Hamas' attacks. But while outrage over Gaza dominates headlines in Western capitals, a quieter and far more revealing story is unfolding in the Arab world. The leaders who live closest to Gaza − and who arguably understand the players, history and regional dynamics best − are not escalating the political pressure on Israel. Instead, they're recalibrating, reassessing and, in some cases, even deepening their ties with the Jewish state. Like some Western nations, Arab states have strongly condemned civilian casualties and the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and called for a future Palestinian state. However, unlike their Western counterparts, they have not allowed Hamas, the group that ignited this war with an unprovoked massacre on Oct. 7, 2023, to shape the moral narrative. They haven't withdrawn from the Abraham Accords, recalled their ambassadors or severed diplomatic ties with Jerusalem. Even in moments of high emotion, they're choosing long-term strategy over symbolic gestures. That choice speaks volumes. With Gaza conflict, it's important to know the participants In Saudi Arabia over the past year, senior figures have publicly criticized Hamas. In Egypt and Jordan, leaders are focused on regional stability and working to contain, not inflame, the conflict. In Iraq, Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani revealed that his government thwarted nearly 30 attempted attacks on Israel and U.S. troops during Iran's spring offensive. That included foiling drone launches from Iraqi soil, which underscores how far some Arab states are going to stop the conflict from spreading. So why are Western cities ablaze with protests while Arab capitals work the phones in quiet diplomacy? Unlike Western activists who chant 'from the river to the sea' without knowing what river or which sea, Arab governments know precisely what Hamas is. They've dealt with its destabilizing ideology, its ties to Iran and its contempt for compromise. They understand that Hamas does not seek peace, statehood or coexistence. It seeks perpetual war and Islamic revolution. In contrast, too many in the West are waging an ideological campaign detached from regional reality. In their fervor to stand with 'Palestine,' they overlook that Hamas is not a liberation movement. It is a jihadist militia that exploits civilian suffering to manipulate global opinion. They also forget that, for all its flaws, Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East where Arabs and Jews alike vote, protest and serve in parliament. Hamas has noticed, it has openly praised European governments for their positions on Israel. In Ireland, lawmakers are pushing to criminalize trade with Israelis. Now, as Britain considers recognition of a Palestinian state along with France and Canada, Hamas' strategy of provocation and propaganda is paying diplomatic dividends. The result is a surreal inversion: While the Arab nations inch toward coexistence, the West drifts into moral chaos. What was once a principled defense of human rights has morphed into selective outrage, often blind to the region's realities and exploited by its most destructive actors. Empowering Hamas will worsen, not improve, life in Gaza This isn't just dangerous for Jews and Israelis; it's corrosive to liberal democracy itself. When human rights are applied selectively, when terrorism is downplayed or excused and when Hamas' calls to destroy Israel and slaughter its citizens are rationalized as 'resistance,' something fundamental is breaking. It may be time for the West to look east − not for answers, but for clarity. The Arab world is not embracing Hamas. It's moving on. It's negotiating, normalizing and, in some cases, partnering with Israel to contain shared threats. If the goal is a better future for Israelis and Palestinians, outrage isn't a strategy. It's a spectacle. And the people closest to the conflict seem to understand that best. Aviva Klompas is the former director of speechwriting at the Israeli Mission to the United Nations and cofounder of Boundless Israel, a nonprofit organization that partners with community leaders in the U.S. to support Israel education and combat hatred of Jews. She is cohost of the "Boundless Insights" podcast.
