Jewish Groups Urge White House to Reject Progressive-Backed Antisemitism Definition

President Joe Biden departs a celebration marking Jewish American Heritage Month in the East Room of the White House in Washington on May 16, 2023. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

The Biden administration is expected to release as soon as this week its strategy to combat antisemitism—but possibly at the expense of reversing U.S. policy on a widely accepted definition of hatred toward Jews and their homeland, the State of Israel.

Progressives have been pressuring the White House to abandon the U.S. adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, according to the publication Jewish Insider.

The Obama State Department adopted the IHRA definition in 2016 before the Trump administration adopted it government-wide in 2019. In addition to the United States, dozens of other countries have adopted it.

The administration’s latest draft includes the IHRA definition but also an alternative one, called the Nexus Document, that was created by left-wing scholars, reported Jewish Insider.

The IHRA definition states: “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

The issue at play for progressives is that the definition encompasses instances of animosity toward Zionism, which is the Jewish belief and right to their ancestral homeland, the State of Israel. This hostility is known as far-left antisemitism.

Examples of anti-Zionism under the IHRA definition include, but are not limited to, “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”; “applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation”; and “using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.”

Kenneth Marcus, the founder and chairman of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, which combats antisemitism, called the IHRA definition “the single international standard by which we can distinguish what is antisemitic from what is not.”

Marcus, who led the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights during the Trump administration, warned that the Nexus Document makes it “easier for antisemites to disguise what they’re doing as extreme anti-Zionism” and “insulates extreme anti-Zionism from criticism, including when it leads to the exclusion and marginalization of Jewish Americans.”

Jewish and pro-Israel groups, including the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), have called on the Biden administration to keep the IHRA definition.

The Endowment for Middle East Truth “very strongly” supports the IHRA definition, citing that it protects Jewish students on college campuses, said its leader, Sarah Stern. She noted that “anti-Zionism has become the most prevalent form of anti-Semitism on college campuses” and that Jewish and pro-Israel students have come under attack “under the guise of free speech.”

Stern said that her organization supports free speech but said that Jews should be afforded the same protections that other minorities get in accordance with the Civil Right Act of 1964. She called for the Biden administration to keep the IHRA definition.

Zionist Organization of America President Mort Klein said, “[President Joe] Biden refusing to invoke the IHRA powerful and comprehensive antisemitism definition proves his claims to fight antisemitism is a lie.”

“Any national strategy to combat Jew-hatred that excludes the IHRA working definition—the most authoritative and widely accepted delineation of all forms of contemporary antisemitism globally—would be severely compromised from the start,“ said Combat Antisemitism Movement CEO Sacha Roytman Dratwa. ”It is the world’s gold standard definition and a key pillar in government strategies to combat all forms of antisemitism.”

StopAntisemitism, another group that combats hatred against Jews, called on the administration to buck the far-left pressure campaign and adopt the IHRA definition.

“Antisemitism has to be defined to be fought, and StopAntisemitism believes that adopting the IHRA definition should be a key part of the Biden administration’s antisemitism strategy,” said Liora Rez, StopAntisemitism’s executive director. “Responses to antisemitic incidents are too frequently bogged down by semantic debates, and it’s important to have a clear standard by which to assess potential Jew-hatred.”

StopAntisemitism blasted the progressives seeking for the IHRA definition to be dumped.

“StopAntisemitism is not surprised that bad actors are attempting to coerce POTUS into not adopting IHRA, or to use it alongside other competing definitions,” said Rez. “IHRA is by far the most widely recognized definition of antisemitism in the world, and equating it with less comprehensive or specific definitions would muddy the waters, hampering America’s efforts to fight antisemitism.”

Bryan Leib, a Republican who is the head of CASEPAC, which supports federal office candidates dedicated to fighting antisemitism, echoed Rez’s sentiment.

“President Biden shouldn’t allow radical fringe groups such as JStreet and the New Israel Fund to influence his decision on this matter,“ Leib said. ”Jewish groups from all stripes—Democrats and Republicans from the Reform, Conservative and Orthodox movements—all support the IHRA working definition of antisemitism that clearly states, amongst other items, that anti-Zionism is antisemitism.”

Rep. Max Miller (R-Ohio), one of two Jewish Republicans in Congress, blasted the Biden administration and said that the progressive pressure is part of an ongoing trend by the White House.

“We see this time and time again that this administration and these individuals, our colleagues on the left, like to change definitions to fit their narrative,” Miller said. “That’s exactly what they’re doing.”

In 2022, the number of antisemitic incidents was 36 percent greater than the previous year, an all-time record since the Anti-Defamation League reported that statistic. Jews are the leading target of hate crimes among religious groups annually in the United States, according to the FBI.

In a letter to the American Zionist Movement shortly after Biden took office, Secretary of State Antony Blinken wrote that the administration “enthusiastically embraces” the IHRA definition.

Rep. Kathy Manning (D-N.C.), co-chair of the Bipartisan Task Force for Combating Antisemitism in the House, supports the IHRA definition. She touted the upcoming report as “historic” and noted that it is unprecedented that there has been a national strategy to combat hatred toward Jews. She cited Germany and the United Kingdom as having a national strategy to combat antisemitism.

Manning, who is Jewish, expressed hope and assumed that the soon-to-be-released report will include the IHRA definition.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a progressive, said that while he is not an “expert” on the IHRA definition and therefore could not say whether the White House should have it in its strategy to combat hatred toward Jews, “We have to keep our focus on fighting antisemitism in the world as people understand and see it. And we don’t need anything that would divide the community of goodwill.”

Raskin, who is Jewish, warned against entering “into definitional or semantic combat” and “would rather maintain our focus on antisemitism as common sense has it.”

Marcus said that were the Biden administration not to “do what it has promised to do with respect to the Trump executive order on combatting antisemitism,” Congress may have to step in and codify the IHRA definition as the law of the United States.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment about the strategy and whether it will include the IHRA definition.