Jewish advocacy group questions DHS on plans to use antisemitism to deny immigration benefits
The department said Wednesday that it would 'begin considering aliens' antisemitic activity on social media' as it weighs whether to approve applications for green cards or student visas.
But the Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA), an 80-year-old, nonpartisan Jewish advocacy group, asked DHS how it plans to make that evaluation.
'Make no mistake: the threat of antisemitism is real and rising in the United States and around the globe,' the group's CEO Amy Spitalnick wrote in a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.
'At the same time, this new policy raises significant questions as to how it will be applied — particularly as many in the Jewish community have already expressed deep concerns about how our legitimate fears of antisemitism are being used as the pretext to advance policies that undermine rights such as due process and our core democratic norms and values, which ultimately threatens the safety of Jews and all communities.'
The notice from the department said the new policy would be used to target those 'who support antisemitic terrorism, violent antisemitic ideologies and antisemitic terrorist organizations such as Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, or Ansar Allah aka: 'the Houthis.''
But it comes as the Trump administration has stripped more than 300 student visas and also arrested some who have participated in protests about the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza. While the Trump administration has asserted those arrested have supported Hamas, critics say lawful first amendment protests have been mischaracterized as part of a broader crackdown on free speech.
JCPA noted that DHS said the new policy would be applied to those 'affiliated with educational institutions linked to antisemitic activity.'
'How is that affiliation being defined? Does there have to be antisemitic activity on the applicant's part, or is merely attending a university where someone else espoused antisemitism enough to be denied entry?' Spitalnick asked.
The group also asked about other forms of extremism and whether DHS has plans to evaluate any applicant's support for any neo-Nazi or white supremacist groups.
'Will engaging in other forms of hate — such as racism, anti-Muslim prejudice, antiLGBTQ hatred, or misogyny — also preclude entry?' the letter asks.
The group also sought more details about how the review would be carried out, asking what search tools would be used, who would be making the decision and if applicants from all countries would be screened.
JCPA argues that Jewish safety 'is inextricably linked with inclusive democracy in which everyone's fundamental rights are protected.'
DHS did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
In its Wednesday release, it said it would consider any content 'that indicates an alien endorsing, espousing, promoting, or supporting antisemitic terrorism, [or] antisemitic terrorist organizations.'
'There is no room in the United States for the rest of the world's terrorist sympathizers, and we are under no obligation to admit them or let them stay here,' DHS spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin said in a release.
'Sec. Noem has made it clear that anyone who thinks they can come to America and hide behind the First Amendment to advocate for anti-Semitic violence and terrorism – think again. You are not welcome here.'
And in a Thursday social media post, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) also drew attention for listing 'ideas' as among the items the agency is required to stop 'if it crosses the U.S. border illegally.'
A number of Jewish groups have spoken out against the plans to review social media for antisemitic content.
'We already know that President Trump doesn't shy away from breaking bread with and hiring antisemites. And he has already weaponized antisemitism to silence those he disagrees with and to strip funding from universities,' New Jewish Narrative, a progressive group, said in a statement when the policy was announced.
'Antisemitism is a real and very serious problem, but this is not the answer. Given Trump's track record, we already know that this move is not genuinely about protecting American Jews.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UPI
22 minutes ago
- UPI
The Jeffrey Epstein saga: a new national security threat?
U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Geoffrey Berman speaks during a news conference about the arrest of American financier Jeffrey Epstein in New York on July 8, 2019, on sex trafficking charges, File photo by Jason Szenes July 30 (UPI) -- The sordid saga of the long dead and convicted predator Jeffrey Epstein not only poses a threat to Donald Trump's presidency, but it also conceivably threatens the credibility of the U.S. political system. Yet, an even more sinister and potentially dangerous threat lurks for the United States and its friends. The two threats are linked, ironically, by Epstein's ghost. Trump's MAGA base is furious that the promised Epstein files have not been released. What's worse is that that Attorney General Pam Bondi apparently informed Trump his name was in the file -- high-test fuel for that blaze. And, now, possibly to deflect attention, Trump and his director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, have accused former President Barack Obama of treason by interfering in the 2016 election with Russian help. In a nation as politically divided as America, any spark could ignite a political firestorm. Beijing, Moscow and others with malicious intent are intensely watching this saga. One conclusion must be that even greater opportunities exist today to interfere in United States and Western politics, not just exploiting this debacle. More importantly, creating new crises that manipulate and fracture political and social cohesion is a formidable danger. The U.K.'s Brexit is an example of manipulation. In the effort to withdraw from the European Union -- the Leave campaign -- former Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his key adviser, Dominic Cummings determined that 1 million or so Britons lacked party affiliation. Then, using social media, this group was targeted with Leave propaganda generated by Cummings. That swung the vote to leave. Cummings was not alone. Substantial evidence exists that Moscow helped influence Brexit and the Leave campaign to weaken the Atlantic Alliance. And Moscow also interfered in the 2016 U.S. elections. Consider the infamous Steele Dossier. Among the allegations, the dossier accused Trump of lewd sexual behavior in Moscow. Suspend reality and imagine Vladimir Putin intervened to help elect Hillary Clinton as president in 2016. Following Cummings' lead, Russian trolls would have filled the Internet with deep-fake photos and invented stories exaggerating or inventing Trump's misconduct. One wonders who might have been elected 45th president. China and Moscow have significant interests in manipulating and fracturing American and Western cohesion. Putin is focused on winning in Ukraine, minimizing sanctions, and in the process, weakening Western solidarity. China is keen on reducing American economic and political influence, as well as annexing Taiwan. It would be negligent to not assume China and Russia are identifying critical weaknesses and potential future fracture points in the United States and elsewhere. In that event where might they focus? National political systems, given the Epstein debacle and national infrastructures, are the two most obvious candidates. Regarding the United States, the Constitution and its system of government based on checks and balances and a division of power among three co-equal branches are the best targets. A super-majority of Americans is highly distrustful and disdainful of government. Exploiting this distrust would not be difficult using the ubiquity of social media and the propensity of Americans to embrace conspiracy theories. Epstein and the Steele Dossier are two examples of how possible future fractures can be invented to sow political, social and economic disruption. The difference is that these effects could be even more destructive. Regarding infrastructure, Israeli and Ukrainian infiltration of two societies with seeming control of their borders and people to launch surprise attacks deep into Iran and Russia underscores how potentially vulnerable military bases and installations are to drones. And even more susceptible to drone attacks are electric generation and power grids, which could cause nationwide disruption. Kinetic attacks on military and civilian infrastructure are fraught with risk. But perceived threats are not. The strategy would be to use a variant of Orson Welles' provocation of massive public and psychological panic in his radio broadcast of War of the Worlds in 1938. Consider future Wellesian scenarios on steroids that threaten catastrophic events or apply fake news reports of spreading epidemics or environmental, financial and other disasters to induce fear and disruption. Concocting new and credible conspiracy theories would be part of this disruptive strategy. None of this is new. The USSR used the Comintern, Cominform and KGB to misinform, disinform, disrupt and provoke. The United States and the U.K. employed similar techniques principally against the Nazis in World War II. However, today is different because social and other media can turn these activities into political weapons of mass disruption. The United States will survive Epstein. Against determined adversaries who intend to create and exploit new political fractures, are the United States and the West ready? That answer is sadly no. Harlan Ullman is UPI's Arnaud de Borchgrave Distinguished Columnist, senior adviser at Washington's Atlantic Council, chairman of a private company and principal author of the doctrine of shock and awe. His next book, co-written with Field Marshal The Lord David Richards, former U.K. chief of defense and due out next year, is Who Thinks Best Wins: Preventing Strategic Catastrophe. The writer can be reached on X @harlankullman.
USA Today
22 minutes ago
- USA Today
Texas redistricting: Republicans propose new map, Democrats try to counter
WASHINGTON − An ongoing effort by Republicans to redraw Texas' congressional map ahead of the 2026 midterm elections continues to agitate Democrats across the country, as they search for ways to block or counter an initiative sought by President Donald Trump. The White House has urged Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and state Republicans to advance on a rare mid-decade redistricting, with the hope that shifting boundaries could help the party pick up as many as five seats in next year's race for control of the U.S. House. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-Louisiana, and the GOP are hoping the boost can help them hang onto their razor-thin lower chamber majority during the final two years of Trump's second term and amid the 2028 race for the White House. Texas Democrats balked when Abbott agreed to add redistricting to their to-do list for a 30-day special session that began July 21 in Austin. Now, liberal lawmakers are crying foul with blue state governors threatening tit-for-tat responses and Texas Democrats weighing their own limited protest options as the GOP seeks to make major changes to the critical voter boundary lines that make up the nation's second largest congressional delegation. Here's the latest to know on the controversial redistricting effort happening in the Lone Star State. What could a new map look like? Texas Republicans released their proposed new map on July 30. Ahead of the official release, Punchbowl News first reported that the anticipated redraw would shift district boundaries around Dallas, Houston, Austin and the Rio Grande Valley. There would still be 38 total seats in the Texas delegation under the new maps - leaving it second only to California's 52 seats. But five Texas seats would be redrawn in a bid that Republican envision giving their candidates a leg up with more GOP voters. Democrats who at risk of losing their spot in Congress include Reps. Henry Cuellar, Vicente Gonzalez and Marc Veasey, according to Punchbowl. Democrats charge partisan law violation The rare push to redraw the boundary lines has led Democratic senators to accuse Trump administration officials of breaking a decades-old law limiting executive branch employees from engaging in partisan activities − such as advocating for a state's redistricting in order to benefit their political party. In a letter to the Office of Special Counsel, California Sens. Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff, along with Rhode Island's Sheldon Whitehouse and Illinois' Dick Durbin, called for an investigation into members of Trump's White House and Justice Department, accusing them of breaking the Hatch Act. "The purpose of this redistricting push is to defeat Democratic Members of Congress and elect Republicans to affect the balance of political party power in the 120th Congress," the senators wrote. "While such goals are appropriate for a political party organization, they are not appropriate for executive branch officials," they added, "especially at the Department of Justice which must take greater steps to ensure it acts with impartiality." The Hatch Act does not apply to the president or vice president. Hakeem Jeffries took a trip to Texas House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-New York, made a trip to Texas July 30, the same day Republicans released their proposed map. While there, Politico reported that Jeffries planned to meet with Rep. Al Green, a Houston lawmaker whose district could be caught in the crosshairs of a major map shake up. "We understand that this is all hands on deck for us in the Democratic Party," Green told Politico. Jeffries has been vocal in his opposition to the redistricting plans, saying in a July 15 press conference, "Texas Republicans are likely going to continue to act like political punks and bend the knee to Donald Trump's extreme agenda." Later, he told CNN, regarding Democrats' response: "Let me just simply say the maps in New York are not as fair as they could be." Redistricting arms race could ensue Jeffries is not the only blue state lawmaker proposing an equal and opposite reaction to Texas. Democrats coast-to-coast have promised a full-scale counterattack, should the Lone Star State move forward with redistricting. "We're not going to be sitting back with one hand tied behind our back while Republicans try to undermine the voices of the American people," Rep. Suzan DelBene, a Democrat from Washington and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, told reporters at a meeting July 23. California Gov. Gavin Newsom has suggested a redistricting in his state to offset Republican actions. (But unlike in Texas where legislators decide district lines, Newsom does face a major obstacle in the form of a bipartisan redistricting commission, which oversees California's maps.) The response from Democrats has enticed other Republican-controlled states to potentially jump in too. Missouri Republicans are pondering a plan to give their party a geographical leg up, and legislatures in other states such as Florida and New Hampshire have the ability to reevaluate maps like Texas. Texas Democrats eye leaving the state Back in Texas, Democrats have a limited number of options to counter a GOP-controlled state House and Senate. Their primary tool is a controversial and seldom used move to flee the state and break the quorum necessary to proceed in the legislative session. State Democrats last used the measure in 2021 to protest new voting restrictions. After that episode, in which representatives halted operations for 38 days, Republicans approved a $500 a day fine for breaking quorum. The monetary punishment could be enough to give Democrats pause about leaving the state this time. However, the Texas Tribune reported deep-pocked Democratic donors are ready to assist and enable a potential walkout.
San Francisco Chronicle
22 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Texas Republicans propose new US House map with more winnable GOP seats
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Texas Republicans on Wednesday unveiled a new congressional map that creates five additional GOP-leaning districts, bolstering their chances of maintaining control as they brace for a challenging midterm election. The redrawn map comes during a special legislative session called by Republican Gov. Greg Abbott, as President Donald Trump urges Texas Republicans to reshape districts in the party's favor. Republicans hope the new Texas map will strengthen their chances of holding the U.S. House in 2026, and Trump officials have signaled their efforts may expand beyond the state, with similar pushes now underway in Missouri. Republicans in Texas currently hold 25 of the state's 38 seats, and the new map ups the total they could win to 30. All of those new 30 seats were won by Trump in November by at least 10 percentage points, leading to conservative optimism they can hold them even in what's likely to be a tough midterm environment for the party. The new seats come from making two Rio Grande Valley seats that have been narrowly won by Democrats recently slightly more Republican, collapsing two seats held by Democrats Lloyd Doggett and Greg Casar in the Austin and San Antonio area into a single liberal district and turning two Democratic-held seats in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area into GOP-majority ones. Rep. Greg Casar, one of the Democrats who could face a more difficult reelection under the new map, called the proposed changes 'illegal voter suppression,' pointing to the merging of his district with another Democratic-held seat.
