A bill aimed at addressing antisemitism on college campuses was opposed by 70 House Democrats and 21 Republicans

The House of Representatives took a significant step on Wednesday by passing a bill aimed at addressing the issue of anti-Semitism on college campuses.

The bill easily passed with a bipartisan vote of 320-91, with 70 House Democrats and 21 House Republicans voting against it.

Lawmakers who opposed the bill do not necessarily endorse antisemitism or oppose initiatives to combat it. Instead, they had concerns regarding the specific definition of antisemitism that the bill would enforce.

The Antisemitism Awareness Act, spearheaded by Republican Rep. Mike Lawler of New York and supported by 61 lawmakers from both sides of the political spectrum, aims to ensure that the Department of Education incorporates the definitions of antisemitism put forth by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) in their enforcement of anti-discrimination laws.

The IHRA definition of antisemitism, in addition to addressing clear instances of antisemitism, also includes certain criticisms that are often directed towards the State of Israel.

    • Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
    • Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

Claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor denies the Jewish people their right to self-determination.

Comparing contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis is a highly controversial topic.

Progressive lawmakers have expressed concerns about the potential violation of free speech norms and the conflation of anti-Zionism or opposition to Israel with antisemitism.

On Wednesday, Representative Jerry Nadler, who holds the distinction of being the longest-serving Jewish House Democrat, expressed his opposition to the bill during his speech on the House floor. He raised concerns about the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definitions of antisemitism, stating that these definitions could potentially encompass protected speech in certain situations, particularly when it comes to criticizing the State of Israel.

More News:  After assault, a man dies at the age of 64, says Pennsylvania coroner, after four decades

Nadler emphasized that criticizing Israel specifically does not amount to illegal discrimination. He argued that the Department of Education is already equipped to investigate cases of discrimination based on existing legislation.

Pro-Palestinian protests have been sweeping college campuses across the country, and the vote took place on Wednesday.

According to Nadler, a significant portion of the activity observed during these protests is considered legally protected speech, regardless of whether one agrees with the expressed sentiments or not. He acknowledges that there have been instances of shameful antisemitic behavior by certain participants, and he asserts that the Department of Education will conduct a proper investigation into these matters.

In December, Nadler took charge of a group of 92 House Democrats who chose to vote “present” on a GOP-sponsored resolution. This resolution aimed to equate anti-Zionism with antisemitism. However, it’s worth noting that 13 House Democrats went against the resolution and voted against it directly.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries urged House Speaker Mike Johnson to consider a distinct legislation, called the Counter Antisemitism Act. This proposed bill would involve the creation of a National Coordinator who would oversee an Interagency Task Force responsible for combating antisemitism within the White House.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia expressed her opposition to the bill, citing concerns that it could wrongly label Christians as antisemitic for believing in the involvement of Jewish individuals in the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. It is important to note that this notion has been rejected by the Catholic Church since the 1960s.

The fate of the bill in the Senate remains uncertain, as there is no clear timeline for when it will be brought up for consideration. Currently, the bill has garnered support from 30 cosponsors in the Senate, with approximately half of them being Democrats.

More News:  Suspect in Southern California assault arrested in dramatic bus stop hundreds of miles away

Reference Article

Avatar photo
MBS Staff

MBS Staff is a dedicated team of writers and journalists at Montgomery Business Scene, committed to delivering insightful and comprehensive coverage of the latest business trends, news, and developments in Montgomery County. With a passion for storytelling and a keen eye for detail, MBS Staff provides readers with valuable insights and expert analysis to help them stay informed and ahead in the dynamic world of business.

Articles: 8633

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *