Latest news with #JewishCouncilforPublicAffairs
Boston Globe
25-04-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Many Jews say Trump is politicizing the fight against antisemitism
Advertisement On the state level, legislators - mostly Republicans - are also pressing ahead with bills that include a much-debated definition of antisemitism, one that critics say chills legitimate criticism of Israel. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The dispute has exacerbated long-running tensions between liberal and conservative Jews, who increasingly diverge in their views of the Israeli government and in some cases Israel itself, as well as which side of the political divide best represents their values and interests. 'Antisemitism is real and it requires robust, constructive solutions,' said Amy Spitalnick, CEO of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs. 'What's happening now, though, is exploiting the Jewish community's legitimate and real concerns about antisemitism to undermine rule of law, due process, educational institutions and our democracy.' Advertisement Morton Klein, national president of the Zionist Organization of America, a conservative group, disagreed, saying Trump is enforcing federal antidiscrimination law as presidents before him should have done. 'We are deeply grateful to President Trump,' Klein said. 'I assure you these groups that oppose Trump here - if those demonstrators were condemning Blacks and calling them horrific names, or calling Muslims or gay people terrible names - those same people would say, ... 'We have to protect'' the lives of targeted minorities and would be supporting Trump's work, he said. The turmoil began on Oct. 7, 2023, when Hamas militants surged across the Gaza border and killed some 1,200 people, taking an additional 251 hostage. Israel responded with a punishing military offensive that has killed more than 50,000 Palestinians and prompted major protests in the United States. Antisemitic acts surged in the U.S. as well, and the White House said Trump is responding appropriately to that. 'If combating antisemitism is controversial to President Trump's critics, their derangement has reached new lows,' said White House spokesman Harrison Fields. 'No leader has been a stronger ally to the Jewish people than President Trump. His administration is fully committed to enforcing law and order, protecting civil rights, and ensuring pro-Hamas radicals face the full weight of the law in our unwavering fight against antisemitism.' The Trump-Harvard dispute has received much of the attention, but the broader battle shows no sign of slowing. The administration has targeted other universities from Princeton to Northwestern the same way, and continues its crackdown on immigrants in suspects of antisemitic statements. - - - Battle in the states While Trump and his adversaries fight it out on the national level, a quieter debate is playing out in a half-dozen conservative states where bills against antisemitism have been offered in recent months. Advertisement This state-level push has been underway for years, but it accelerated after the Oct. 7 attacks and has been turbocharged by Trump's presidency, said Jeremy Ben-Ami, president of J Street, a liberal pro-Israel group. In Missouri, Republican state Rep. George Hruza has sponsored a measure requiring public schools and universities to adopt policies against antisemitism. The issue is personal for Hruza, whose mother survived the Holocaust and who had two grandparents killed at Auschwitz. 'When I grew up in Czechoslovakia, my mother suppressed our Jewish heritage. She continued suffering from nightmares of being back in a concentration camp,' Hruza said. Those nightmares stopped when she moved to the U.S. because it had so little antisemitism, he said - and his bill is intended to help keep it that way. The flash point, as so often these days and especially since Oct. 7, is the question of when criticism of Israel becomes antisemitism. Hruza's bill adopts a definition of antisemitism that includes such examples as applying 'double standards' to Israel or calling it racist. Missouri state Rep. Elizabeth Fuchs, a Democrat, said such language risks chilling free speech and punishing legitimate criticism of Israel. 'It changes how college campuses are interpreting speech,' Fuchs said. 'It shifts and changes the definition of antisemitism, conflating the real concerns about antisemitism with conversation about the war and what has been happening in Palestine after the October 7th massacre.' Hruza's bill passed the GOP-dominated Missouri House 108-10; the vote was bipartisan, but most of the opposition came from Democrats. It now moves to the state Senate. Advertisement Hruza said he is a big proponent of free speech and his bill is designed to distinguish between rhetoric unleashed at a rally and assaults aimed at an individual. 'It's when Jewish students get attacked, verbally or physically, because they are Jewish - that is what we are driving at,' he said. 'It's telling a Jewish student, 'You should go back to Poland.'' A defining issue The definition of antisemitism in Hruza's bill, originally crafted in 2016 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, is widely used - and increasingly controversial. Israel can be criticized like any other country, it says, but targeting it 'as a Jewish collectivity' is antisemitic. The definition provides examples of language that crosses the line, such as comparing Israel to the Nazis or blaming all Jews for Israel's actions. Those examples are being incorporated into many of the state laws. Kenneth Stern, the lead drafter of the IHRA definition, strongly opposes codifying the examples in this way, saying they were intended only as guidance and that enshrining them in law violates the First Amendment by penalizing opinions on Israel. 'I think it's bad policy, and as a lawyer I think it's unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination,' Stern said. He added, 'I am a Zionist and Israel is important to me, but there are young Jews whose Judaism leads them to a different point of view.' The IHRA definition has many defenders who say it pierces the armor of bigots who have taken to attacking Israel as an acceptable way to go after Jews. 'Criticizing Israel legitimately' is not antisemitism under its definition, ZOA's Klein said. 'But if you start comparing Israel to Nazis and saying they are perpetrating genocide and massacres, then you are crossing the line to antisemitism.' Advertisement Congress has not written the IHRA definition into U.S. law, despite repeated proposals to do so. But Trump signed an executive order in 2019, during his first term, ordering government agencies to consider adopting it. A pastor raises concerns Seven states have recently considered or adopted measures like Missouri's, all of them with conservative and Republican-dominated legislatures, though some have Democratic governors. The dissenters are usually Democrats, but the bills tend to have bipartisan support. A group called the Combat Antisemitism Movement has been encouraging state legislatures to pass antisemitism bills - working with legislators, testifying in the bills' favor, touting them on its website. CAM was founded in 2019 and its advisory board is chaired by Natan Sharansky, a former Soviet refusenik and hard-line Israeli politician. Sacha Roytman, CAM's chief executive, said anti-Jewish acts must be countered at every level of government. 'The threat is real. It is happening. It is happening every day. It is happening in schools and synagogues,' he said. 'Every level of society has its responsibility.' Hruza, the Missouri legislator, said he tweaked his bill's language to stress that it was not aimed at squelching free expression. 'We wanted to make sure it was about behavior and make sure people understood that in no way did we want to interfere with free speech,' Hruza said. Ben-Ami, the J Street president, is concerned about the free-speech ramifications for many of the proposals. 'There is a very troubling pattern of codifying into state and local law - as well as attempts at the federal level - a definition of antisemitism that includes criticism of Israeli government actions and policies that would have the effect not simply of chilling speech, but criminalizing it,' Ben-Ami said. Advertisement The bills' opponents are not solely liberal Democrats. In Oklahoma, Republican state Sen. Dusty Deevers, a Christian pastor, objected that the examples of antisemitism cited in his state's legislation include asserting that the Jews killed Jesus. The Jews of the time did play a role in Jesus' death, Deevers asserted, citing scriptures, and he said pastors should be able to say so. 'While discouraging antisemitism in a worthy cause, the definition would instruct state entities to treat as bigoted the historical facts and biblical teachings surrounding the death of Jesus,' Deevers said in a floor speech. To Fuchs, the Missouri legislator, the state debates are part of the pattern unfolding on the national level - broad or reckless attacks on antisemitism that target legitimate criticism of Israel. 'There is a connection between what is happening at the federal level with Trump's executive orders and what is happening here in Missouri,' Fuchs said. 'If you want to see what is happening in your state, we are going to show you first.' Dinner with Ye Many Jewish groups are struggling to find the right message for the moment. Julie Rayman, managing director of policy and political affairs at the American Jewish Committee, said Trump deserves credit for spotlighting antisemitism. But the AJC also criticized the 'broad, sweeping, and devastating cuts' universities are facing as a result of his actions. Republicans and Democrats, Rayman said, are each quick to see antisemitism in their opponents but slow to see it in their supporters. Ideally, she said, 'the administration can find a way to target not just the left anti-Zionist antisemitism that has become this new dangerous reality, but also recognize the dangers of neo-Nazi fascist antisemitism.' Trump has a Jewish son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and his daughter Ivanka converted to Judaism. But critics say he has a history of antisemitic comments and associations that cast doubt on the sincerity of his antisemitism campaign. Last September, Trump told a gathering of conservative Jews, 'If I don't win this election, the Jewish people would have a lot to do with a loss.' In 2017, he said there were 'very fine people on both sides' of a Virginia rally that included antisemitic chants. In November 2022, Trump had dinner with the rapper Ye, formerly known as Kanye West, who has made anti-Jewish remarks, and Nick Fuentes, an antisemite and white nationalist. (Trump later said he did not know Fuentes's background.) Ed Martin, Trump's interim U.S. attorney in the District of Columbia, has praised a Nazi sympathizer. 'I take no comfort in their so-called concern about antisemitism,' said Wesleyan University President Michael Roth. 'I find it shocking that so many of my co-religionists are happy to see enemies of Israel punished, even if the ways they're punished are extralegal. For the Trump allies, many of whom are vicious, proud antisemites, this sudden Judeophilia will be short-lived.' Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-New York) agreed that schools like Columbia University may have seen antisemitism on campus as the Gaza war has unfolded. But he said slashing their research funds makes little sense as a response. 'Let's assume there is antisemitism. How does taking hundreds of millions of dollars from medical research help that?' Nadler said. 'Because there is antisemitism at Columbia, we're going to say more people should die of cancer, more people should get Alzheimer's?' Muslim and Arab leaders, too, say they are deeply concerned about Trump's campaign. Wa'el Alzayat, CEO of Emgage, a group that mobilizes Muslim voters, said the president is falsely equating support for Palestinians with antisemitism. 'It's protected by the First Amendment and it's not antisemitism,' Alzayat said. 'We strongly stand against antisemitism and all forms of hate, but this is not doing the Jewish community any favors. It is misusing a very important fight to achieve other objectives.' Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, added that 'it doesn't take a genius' to see that antisemitism is a real problem, but Trump is using it as a pretext to target Muslims. 'You cannot use bigotry to fight bigotry,' Awad said. 'The tactic of using Islamophobia to fight antisemitism is a nonstarter. Antisemitism and Islamophobia are two faces of the same coin, in my view.' Jews divided The U.S. Jewish community has rarely faced the level of internal turmoil it is now confronting. Even before the Oct. 7 attacks, American Jews were increasingly divided over Israel, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pursued hard-right policies that pitted many Jews' traditional liberalism against their attachment to the world's only Jewish state. That tension escalated after the Hamas attacks and Israel's fierce response, as some younger Jews sided openly with Palestinian activists. Trump's victory added more fuel, as he proclaimed his determination to protect a Jewish community that supported his opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris, 78 percent to 22 percent. 'It puts Jews in a very difficult position,' said Jeff Sovern, whose father Michael Sovern was Columbia's first Jewish president in the 1980s. 'It's divisive among Jews, and also it makes it somewhat harder to defend action against antisemitism when you are troubled by what is being done to attack antisemitism.' Some liberals, including J Street's Ben-Ami, contend that leading Jewish groups have been too slow to condemn Trump's repressive actions taken in their name. 'There have been a few voices and an occasional murmur, but like too many other segments of our society - like corporate America and media companies or law firms or in some cases university presidents - too many people are bending the knee rather than standing up and fighting back,' Ben-Ami said. On April 1, Washington Post columnist Matt Bai took aim at the Anti-Defamation League, a leading group combating antisemitism, and its leader, Jonathan Greenblatt, for 'remaining silent during the Trump administration's thuggish roundup of pro-Palestinian activists.' Two days later, Greenblatt wrote a piece denouncing the administration's practice, as part of its antisemitism campaign, of targeting foreign nationals without due process. 'It was shocking to see the images of plainclothes officers stealing people off the streets in an act of rendition that seems straight out of a movie,' he wrote. Greenblatt's piece appeared as an opinion column on the eJewishPhilanthropy website, rather than as an official statement of the ADL. Efforts to reach Greenblatt through ADL were unsuccessful. A growing number of Jewish organizations are now publicly opposing Trump's tactics taken in the name of protecting their rights. On Tuesday, a coalition of 10 organizations, representing three of Judaism's four denominations, issued a statement saying that while antisemitism is an urgent problem, 'These actions do not make Jews - or any community - safer. Rather, they only make us less safe.' At the same time, many of the groups say Trump's focus on antisemitism is long overdue. In the Biden administration, second gentleman Doug Emhoff spearheaded a campaign against anti-Jewish discrimination, but Trump has made it a bigger part of his presidency. 'It's fair to say this is a 3,000-year-old problem, and we don't know what the solutions are,' Rayman said. 'It's easy to identify something as not the silver bullet. But until we find whatever the silver bullet is, we have to keep trying.'
Yahoo
22-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Anti-Defamation League reports record number of antisemitic incidents
The Anti-Defamation League recorded a record amount of antisemitic incidents in the U.S. throughout 2024, with anger at Israel as the driving force behind them, according to a report released Tuesday. Each year since 1979, the ADL has tracked antisemitism in the U.S., and the 9,354 occurrences it recorded in 2024 were a record high — surpassing last year's then-record of 8,873 incidents. However, the organization has also faced increased criticism for how it defines antisemitism. For example, the phrase 'from the river to the sea,' a common chant at pro-Palestine protests nationwide, counts as antisemitic, according to the ADL. However, the ADL claims, 'Legitimate political protest, support for Palestinian rights or expressions of opposition to Israeli policies' do not automatically count as antisemitic. 'The fears of antisemitism are legitimate and real — and we don't want to see those real fears exploited to undermine democracy,' said Amy Spitalnick, CEO of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs. 'I feel that a majority of American Jews can believe that two things are true at the same time.' Unsurprisingly given the criteria, the ADL found an 84% increase in antisemitic incidents on college campuses compared to 2023. The organization said 18% of all antisemitic events occurred on campuses. New York led all states with 1,437 antisemitic incidents, according to the ADL. New Jersey was third with 719 such events. More than half of all 9,354 antisemitic incidents were related to Israel, the ADL said. 'Israel-related incidents' accounted for 2,856 events, and 'incidents at anti-Israel rallies' accounted for 2,596 incidents, according to the ADL. The ADL has also been criticized for standing by as President Trump's administration targets certain students for participating in pro-Palestine rallies. 'We appreciate the Trump Administration's broad, bold set of efforts to counter campus antisemitism — and this action further illustrates that resolve by holding alleged perpetrators responsible for their actions,' the ADL said after Mahmoud Khalil was detained in March. With News Wire Services
Yahoo
21-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
As Donald Trump targets student visas, UT should defend free speech for all
The messaging emblazoned across the University of Texas campus embraces a global outlook: 'What starts here changes the world.' Yet the federal government's sweeping efforts to rescind international students' visas — so far ensnaring at least 176 students across the entire UT system, a sizable chunk of the more than 1,000 students impacted across all American universities — sends a much different, ominous message. Speak out here and it's time to leave. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said his office is working 'every day' to deport the 'lunatics' who engaged last year in pro-Palestinian protests — a plainly unconstitutional use of government power to suppress political speech. Equally alarming, court records suggest some international students at other universities had their visas revoked over infractions as minor as traffic citations, or for no discernible reason at all. This is a moment for the University of Texas to stand firm in defense of free speech, and for alumni and the community at large to stand firm with UT. The Trump administration's targeting of international students is an attack on U.S. values — a chilling of protected speech, a stifling of the diverse viewpoints central to learning and innovation, an erosion of the American experiment. The stakes affect us all. To be clear, it is not protected speech to threaten or harass someone. Anyone whose conduct endangered others has forfeited their right to remain on campus. The uptick in antisemitism in America, and specifically on college campuses, is deeply troubling and demands effective response from campus leaders. But just as UT and state troopers overreacted with force against pro-Palestinian protesters a year ago, the Trump administration is overreaching now in deporting foreign students based on their political activity. A coalition of Jewish organizations led by the Jewish Council for Public Affairs this week rejected 'the false choice between confronting antisemitism and upholding democracy.' 'Our safety as Jews has always been tied to the rule of law, to the safety of others, to the strength of civil society, and to the protection of rights and liberties for all,' the coalition wrote. 'All' includes foreign students learning at American institutions. In protecting the rights to free speech and assembly, the First Amendment does not distinguish between citizens and noncitizens. Rather, it bars the government from interfering with those fundamental acts of self-expression. Perhaps the Trump administration hopes that most Americans will be indifferent to the fate of a relatively small group of foreign students. Those whose visas were rescinded account for just a fraction of the 1,900 international undergrads and 4,600 international graduate students at UT Austin. But moments like these are a test and a sign of things to come. The Trump administration is unleashing a barrage of strategies to silence dissent and sideline institutions that stand for the pursuit of truth — from strong-arming law firms that crossed President Trump, to gutting research funding at universities (including more than $6 million at UT), to attempting to dictate hiring and student discipline policies at Harvard University, to planning to eliminate the federal dollars supporting public media such as NPR, PBS and their Austin affiliates. Having sent hundreds of undocumented immigrants to a prison in El Salvador, Trump now muses about sending 'homegrown' American offenders to that brutal lockup. It is equally likely that Trump's efforts to silence foreign students through intimidation is a warm-up act for cracking down on the free speech of U.S. citizens. That makes it essential for UT and all Texans who value free speech to stand in defense of it. Last year, in a lengthy statement affirming their commitment to free speech, the UT Board of Regents concluded: 'The UT System and the UT institutions have a solemn responsibility not only to promote a lively and fearless freedom of debate and deliberation, but also to protect that freedom when others attempt to restrict it.' That moment is here. This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Opinion: UT must defend free speech, protect student visas
Yahoo
15-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Some Jewish Americans wrestle with Trump's sweeping crusade against antisemitism
LOS ANGELES — In recent weeks, President Donald Trump's administration has pointed to the fight against antisemitism as one reason it is threatening to pull hundreds of millions in funding from Ivy League universities and attempting to deport international student activists who protested against Israel's war in Gaza. In some instances, Jewish organizations have cheered what they view as Trump's crackdown on the antisemitism that has swelled since the Oct. 7, 2023, terror attacks on Israel and the subsequent invasion of Gaza. But in many other cases, leading Jewish groups and advocates have expressed deep discomfort with what the government professes to do in the name of Jewish safety. The divide echoes some of the internal political divisions among Jewish Americans over the last 18 months. Rabbi Sharon Brous, the founding and senior rabbi of IKAR, a Jewish community based in Los Angeles, succinctly captured that unease with a sermon she delivered to her nondenominational congregation on March 8. It was titled, 'I Am Not Your Pawn.' 'What may feel, today, like a welcomed embrace is actually putting us at even greater danger,' Brous said, according to a copy of her sermon published on IKAR's website. 'We, the Jews, are being used to advance a political agenda that will cause grave harm to the social fabric, and to the institutions that are best suited to protect Jews and all minorities.' 'We are being used. Our pain, our trauma, is being exploited to eviscerate the dream of a multiracial democracy, while advancing the goal of a white Christian nation,' Brous added. Brous is not alone in voicing displeasure with the Trump administration's tactics and strategy. In a joint statement Tuesday, a coalition of 10 organizations representing a wide swath of American Jewry flatly rejected what they characterized as 'the false choice between confronting antisemitism and upholding democracy.' The organizations — assembled by the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, a pro-democracy group — made clear they believe that antisemitism has become more 'visible, chilling, and increasingly normalized,' and 'requires urgent and consistent action.' But they forcefully criticized the Trump administration's sweeping crackdown on universities and pro-Palestinian protesters. 'In recent weeks, escalating federal actions have used the guise of fighting antisemitism to justify stripping students of due process rights when they face arrest and/or deportation, as well as to threaten billions in academic research and education funding,' the 10 organizations said. 'Students have been arrested at home and on the street with no transparency as to why they are being held or deported, and in certain cases with the implication that they are being punished for their constitutionally-protected speech.' 'Universities have an obligation to protect Jewish students, and the federal government has an important role to play in that effort; however, sweeping draconian funding cuts will weaken the free academic inquiry that strengthens democracy and society, rather than productively counter antisemitism on campus,' the groups added. 'These actions do not make Jews — or any community — safer. Rather, they only make us less safe.' The groups behind the message included the National Council of Jewish Women, the Central Conference of American Rabbis and the Union for Reform Judaism. The statement was released a day after the government said it would freeze more than $2 billion in grants to Harvard University after the school said it would not accept demands from the administration's Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism. The demands included limiting the acceptance of international students who are 'hostile to the American values and institutions.' Columbia University signaled last month it would comply with the administration's demand in exchange for restoring some $400 million in federal funding. The administration has also paused university funding for grants and contracts at Brown, Cornell, Northwestern, Princeton and the University of Pennsylvania. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the most prominent Jewish elected official in the country and the author of a recent book about antisemitism, blasted the White House for 'making unprecedented demands of universities aimed at undermining or even destroying these vital institutions.' Schumer, who is a Harvard graduate, said Monday that institutions of higher learning 'must do more to fight antisemitism on campus,' but applauded the nation's best-known Ivy League school for bucking Trump's demands: 'Harvard is right to resist.' The American Jewish Committee, an influential advocacy group, recently reiterated calls for universities to 'take action to counter and prevent antisemitism on their campuses.' But the organization took issue with what it called 'the broad, sweeping, and devastating cuts in federal funding that a growing number of American research universities have been subjected to in recent weeks.' The organization added that the administration's cuts, initiated 'under the auspices of combating antisemitism, will damage America's standing as a center of innovation and research excellence.' But crucially, some Jewish organizations have vocally supported Trump's second-term agenda, while others have refrained from harshly criticizing the president. Nathan Diament, the executive director of public policy for the Orthodox Union, the nation's largest Orthodox Jewish umbrella organization, said in an interview Tuesday that his constituents were pleased that the White House appears to be taking antisemitism seriously. 'I would say, overall, without getting into each individual instance, certainly the segment of the American Jewish community that we represent appreciates that President Trump and his team are being much more aggressive in fighting the surge of antisemitism that we've seen for more than a year and a half,' Diament said. He said his organization had repeatedly lobbied the Biden administration to take a tougher line on antisemitism, adding that while he recognized that the previous White House 'took some steps,' he was glad to see Trump's more bellicose approach. Matt Brooks, the chief executive of the Republican Jewish Coalition, said his organization 'enthusiastically applauds the Trump administration for taking bold, decisive action to combat anti-Americanism and antisemitism in higher education after years of weakness and appeasement of the campus mobs by the Biden-Harris administration.' 'There's a new sheriff in town, and his name is Donald J. Trump,' Brooks added. The Anti-Defamation League, one of the nation's foremost Jewish advocacy groups, drew criticism after it backed the March 8 arrest of Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian graduate student who played a prominent role in the sprawling protests last year against Israel at Columbia University. 'We appreciate the Trump Administration's broad, bold set of efforts to counter campus antisemitism — and this action further illustrates that resolve by holding alleged perpetrators responsible for their actions,' the ADL wrote in part in a March 9 post on X. 'Obviously, any deportation action or revocation of a Green Card or visa must be undertaken in alignment with required due process protections,' the ADL added. 'We also hope that this action serves as a deterrent to others who might consider breaking the law on college campuses or anywhere.' Khalil is a 30-year-old legal permanent resident from Syria. In a ruling last week, a federal judge said the Trump administration can deport him. The administration has cited Khalil's beliefs in justifying his deportation. In one memo, Secretary of State Marco Rubio wrote that allowing Khalil to stay in the U.S. would create a 'hostile environment for Jewish students.' In the midst of the Trump administration's flurry of activity, some Jewish voices have expressed a certain ambivalence about the White House's confrontation with universities. The publisher and editor-in-chief of The Jewish Journal, a publication based in Los Angeles that prints editorials from a conservative viewpoint, recently wrote he was 'torn between two sentiments.' 'On the one hand, it's good to see that our government is taking seriously the anti-Jewish onslaught that began on college campuses right after the Hamas massacre of Oct. 7,' David Suissa wrote in an editorial published April 2. 'But if the government goes too far and uses 'antisemitism' as an excuse to unlawfully kick out agitators, the effort will end up backfiring on the Jews. The last thing we need is to be held responsible for the overreach of an overly aggressive government.' This article was originally published on
NBC News
15-04-2025
- Politics
- NBC News
Some Jewish Americans wrestle with Trump's sweeping crusade against antisemitism
LOS ANGELES — In recent weeks, President Donald Trump's administration has pointed to the fight against antisemitism as one reason it is threatening to pull hundreds of millions in funding from Ivy League universities and attempting to deport international student activists who protested against Israel's war in Gaza. In some instances, Jewish organizations have cheered what they view as Trump's crackdown on the antisemitism that has swelled since the Oct. 7, 2023, terror attacks on Israel and the subsequent invasion of Gaza. But in many other cases, leading Jewish groups and advocates have expressed deep discomfort with what the government professes to do in the name of Jewish safety. The divide echoes some of the internal political divisions among Jewish Americans over the last 18 months. Rabbi Sharon Brous, the founding and senior rabbi of IKAR, a Jewish community based in Los Angeles, succinctly captured that unease with a sermon she delivered to her nondenominational congregation on March 8. It was titled, 'I Am Not Your Pawn.' 'What may feel, today, like a welcomed embrace is actually putting us at even greater danger,' Brous said, according to a copy of her sermon published on IKAR's website. 'We, the Jews, are being used to advance a political agenda that will cause grave harm to the social fabric, and to the institutions that are best suited to protect Jews and all minorities.' 'We are being used. Our pain, our trauma, is being exploited to eviscerate the dream of a multiracial democracy, while advancing the goal of a white Christian nation,' Brous added. Brous is not alone in voicing displeasure with the Trump administration's tactics and strategy. In a joint statement Tuesday, a coalition of 10 organizations representing a wide swath of American Jewry flatly rejected what they characterized as 'the false choice between confronting antisemitism and upholding democracy.' The organizations — assembled by the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, a pro-democracy group — made clear they believe that antisemitism has become more 'visible, chilling, and increasingly normalized,' and 'requires urgent and consistent action.' But they forcefully criticized the Trump administration's sweeping crackdown on universities and pro-Palestinian protesters. 'In recent weeks, escalating federal actions have used the guise of fighting antisemitism to justify stripping students of due process rights when they face arrest and/or deportation, as well as to threaten billions in academic research and education funding,' the 10 organizations said. 'Students have been arrested at home and on the street with no transparency as to why they are being held or deported, and in certain cases with the implication that they are being punished for their constitutionally-protected speech.' 'Universities have an obligation to protect Jewish students, and the federal government has an important role to play in that effort; however, sweeping draconian funding cuts will weaken the free academic inquiry that strengthens democracy and society, rather than productively counter antisemitism on campus,' the groups added. 'These actions do not make Jews — or any community — safer. Rather, they only make us less safe.' The groups behind the message included the National Council of Jewish Women, the Central Conference of American Rabbis and the Union for Reform Judaism. The statement was released a day after the government said it would freeze more than $2 billion in grants to Harvard University after the school said it would not accept demands from the administration's Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism. The demands included limiting the acceptance of international students who are 'hostile to the American values and institutions.' Columbia University signaled last month it would comply with the administration's demand in exchange for restoring some $400 million in federal funding. The administration has also paused university funding for grants and contracts at Brown, Cornell, Northwestern, Princeton and the University of Pennsylvania. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the most prominent Jewish elected official in the country and the author of a recent book about antisemitism, blasted the White House for 'making unprecedented demands of universities aimed at undermining or even destroying these vital institutions.' Schumer, who is a Harvard graduate, said Monday that institutions of higher learning 'must do more to fight antisemitism on campus,' but applauded the nation's best-known Ivy League school for bucking Trump's demands: 'Harvard is right to resist.' The American Jewish Committee, an influential advocacy group, recently reiterated calls for universities to 'take action to counter and prevent antisemitism on their campuses.' But the organization took issue with what it called 'the broad, sweeping, and devastating cuts in federal funding that a growing number of American research universities have been subjected to in recent weeks.' The organization added that the administration's cuts, initiated 'under the auspices of combating antisemitism, will damage America's standing as a center of innovation and research excellence.' But crucially, some Jewish organizations have vocally supported Trump's second-term agenda, while others have refrained from harshly criticizing the president. Nathan Diament, the executive director of public policy for the Orthodox Union, the nation's largest Orthodox Jewish umbrella organization, said in an interview Tuesday that his constituents were pleased that the White House appears to be taking antisemitism seriously. 'I would say, overall, without getting into each individual instance, certainly the segment of the American Jewish community that we represent appreciates that President Trump and his team are being much more aggressive in fighting the surge of antisemitism that we've seen for more than a year and a half,' Diament said. He said his organization had repeatedly lobbied the Biden administration to take a tougher line on antisemitism, adding that while he recognized that the previous White House 'took some steps,' he was glad to see Trump's more bellicose approach. Matt Brooks, the chief executive of the Republican Jewish Coalition, said his organization 'enthusiastically applauds the Trump administration for taking bold, decisive action to combat anti-Americanism and antisemitism in higher education after years of weakness and appeasement of the campus mobs by the Biden-Harris administration.' 'There's a new sheriff in town, and his name is Donald J. Trump,' Brooks added. The Anti-Defamation League, one of the nation's foremost Jewish advocacy groups, drew criticism after it backed the March 8 arrest of Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian graduate student who played a prominent role in the sprawling protests last year against Israel at Columbia University. 'We appreciate the Trump Administration's broad, bold set of efforts to counter campus antisemitism — and this action further illustrates that resolve by holding alleged perpetrators responsible for their actions,' the ADL wrote in part in a March 9 post on X. 'Obviously, any deportation action or revocation of a Green Card or visa must be undertaken in alignment with required due process protections,' the ADL added. 'We also hope that this action serves as a deterrent to others who might consider breaking the law on college campuses or anywhere.' Khalil is a 30-year-old legal permanent resident from Syria. In a ruling last week, a federal judge said the Trump administration can deport him. The administration has cited Khalil's beliefs in justifying his deportation. In one memo, Secretary of State Marco Rubio wrote that allowing Khalil to stay in the U.S. would create a 'hostile environment for Jewish students.' In the midst of the Trump administration's flurry of activity, some Jewish voices have expressed a certain ambivalence about the White House's confrontation with universities. The publisher and editor-in-chief of The Jewish Journal, a publication based in Los Angeles that prints editorials from a conservative viewpoint, recently wrote he was 'torn between two sentiments.' 'On the one hand, it's good to see that our government is taking seriously the anti-Jewish onslaught that began on college campuses right after the Hamas massacre of Oct. 7,' David Suissa wrote in an editorial published April 2. 'But if the government goes too far and uses 'antisemitism' as an excuse to unlawfully kick out agitators, the effort will end up backfiring on the Jews. The last thing we need is to be held responsible for the overreach of an overly aggressive government.'
