A number of resolutions and legislation have been introduced by Congress in reaction to the recent increase of antisemitism in the United States, particularly on college campuses. Some resolutions contain serious constitutional issues, while others are innocuous and only state Congress’s view on the matter. Among these laws, the Antisemitism Awareness Act (S.558/H.R.1007) is the most deadly.
For the purposes of Title VI of the Civil Rights Acts, the Antisemitism Awareness Act would codify the Working Definition of Antisemitism established by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance into federal law. The definition is: a certain attitude against Jews that can manifest as anti-Semitism. Antisemitism can take the form of physical or verbal attacks on Jewish or non-Jewish people, their belongings, Jewish community organizations, and places of worship.
This concept is overbroad, unlawful, and could restrict free expression on college campuses, where Title VI is applicable. The problem with the IHRA definition is that it makes no real definitions. The term “a certain perception of Jews” has no effect on limiting speech or behavior that could be seen as antisemitic. The concept is also not sufficiently narrowed by the sentence’s second clause, which could be interpreted as anti-Semitic sentiment. Furthermore, there is absolutely no clarity in the second statement. According to this, antisemitism can be aimed at either Jews or non-Jews.
To what extent is that definition inclusive? Which behaviors are covered by it and which are not? For words or behavior to be considered antisemitic, it must be directed particularly toward one person. These responses are ambiguous given the definition that the bill seeks to establish. In their haste to enact antisemitism legislation, the bill authors appear to be ignoring two important constitutional concerns: vagueness and overbreadth. But there are more issues with the IHRA’s definition than that.
The definition goes on to list a number of alleged instances of antisemitism, many of which are problematic: saying that the State of Israel is a racist endeavor, comparing Israeli policy today to that of the Nazis, requiring Israel to behave in a way that is not expected or demanded of any other democratic country, saying that Jews killed Christ, etc.
Critiques of Israel are included in many of these examples, although even those that appear unjust are not necessarily directed at all Jews. Furthermore, the First Amendment protects speech that criticizes Israel (or any other foreign nation, for that matter). People can utilize their own First Amendment rights to protest criticism of Israel if they believe it is unfair or unjustified. However, it is not constitutional nor good policy for the government to stifle free expression.
For Christians, the last example is particularly troubling. Scripture makes it quite evident that the Romans were given Christ to be crucified by the Jewish authority. Will Congress be preventing pastors from preaching about Christ’s crucifixion on college campuses if they enact this legislation? In an essay concerning the 2023 version of the Antisemitism Awareness Act (H.R. 6090 by Rep. Lawler), Albert Mohler, President of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, articulated similar worries.
The increase in antisemitism in America is undoubtedly a problem. Congress must, however, make sure that its actions stay within the parameters of the Constitution, just like it does with any other matter. Free speech, including that which some may consider hateful, is protected by the First Amendment. More freedom of speech, not repression, is the right response to that speech.
Regretfully, the Antisemitism Awareness Act was approved by the US House in 2024, 320-91. In Kentucky, Reps. McGarvey and Massie rightly rejected the unlawful bill, while Reps. Barr, Comer, Guthrie, and Rogers backed it. If the Antisemitism Awareness Act is brought up again in Congress, I implore all of Kentucky’s senators and congressmen to vote against it because it is harmful and unlawful.
Jesse Green is a Jessamine County-based conservative lawyer and activist. He is currently the Jessamine County Republican Party’s Youth Chair. His X handle is @JesseGreenKY.