Uncategorized
Weinstein approached me ‘Jew to Jew’: Jodi Kantor opens up on the ‘She Said’ movie’s Jewish moments
(JTA) — When the New York Times journalist Jodi Kantor was reporting the 2017 Harvey Weinstein sexual assault story that earned her a Pulitzer prize, the powerful Hollywood producer and his team tried to influence her by using something they had in common: They are both Jewish.
“Weinstein put [Jewishness] on the table and seemed to expect that I was going to have some sort of tribal loyalty to him,” Kantor told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency on a video call from the New York Times newsroom. “And that was just not going to be the case.”
Now, that exchange has been immortalized in “She Said,” a new film adaptation of the nonfiction book of the same name by Kantor and her collaborator Megan Twohey that details their investigation into Weinstein’s conduct, which helped launch the #MeToo movement.
The film, directed by Maria Schrader with stars Zoe Kazan as Kantor and Carey Mulligan as Twohey, is an understated thriller that has drawn comparisons to “All the President’s Men” — and multiple subtle but powerful Jewish-themed subplots reveal the way Kantor’s Jewishness arose during and at times intersected with the investigation.
In one scene, the Kantor character notes that a Jewish member of Weinstein’s team tried to appeal to her “Jew to Jew.” In another, Kantor shares a moving moment with Weinstein’s longtime accountant, the child of Holocaust survivors, as they discuss the importance of speaking up about wrongdoing.
Kantor, 47, grew up between New York and New Jersey, the first grandchild of Holocaust survivors — born “almost 30 years to the day after my grandparents were liberated,” she notes. She calls her grandmother Hana Kantor, a 99-year-old Holocaust survivor, her “lodestar.” Kantor — who doesn’t often speak publicly about her personal life, including her Jewish background, which involved some education in Jewish schools — led a segment for CBS in May 2021 on her grandmother and their relationship. Before her journalism career, she spent a year in Israel on a Dorot Fellowship, working with Israeli and Palestinian organizations. She’s now a “proud member” of a Reform synagogue in Brooklyn.
Kantor spoke with JTA about the film’s Jewish threads, the portrayal of the New York Times newsroom and what Zoe Kazan’s performance captures about journalism.
This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity and length.
JTA: How did you feel having Zoe Kazan, who is not Jewish, play you? Kazan has played some notably Jewish characters before, for example in the HBO miniseries “The Plot Against America.”
JK: I feel Zoe’s performance is so sensitive and so layered. What I really appreciate about her performance is that she captures so many of the emotions I was feeling under the surface in the investigation. You know, when you’re a reporter and especially a reporter handling that sensitive a story, it’s your responsibility to present a really smooth professional exterior to the world. At the end of the investigation, I had the job of reading Harvey Weinstein some of the allegations and really confronting him. And in dealing with the victims, I wanted to be a rock for them and it was my job to get them to believe in the investigation. And so on the one hand, you have that smooth, professional exterior, but then below that, of course you’re feeling all the feelings. You’re feeling the power of the material, you’re feeling the urgency of getting the story, you’re feeling the fear that Weinstein could hurt somebody else. You’re feeling the loss that these women are expressing, including over their careers. And so I think Zoe’s performance just communicates that so beautifully.
What Zoe says about the character is that there are elements of me, there are elements of herself, and then there are elements of pure invention because she’s an artist, and that’s what she does.
I think the screenplay gets at a small but significant line of Jewish sub-drama that ran through the investigation. It went like this: Harvey Weinstein and his representatives were constantly trying to approach me as a Jew. And they’ve done this more recently, as well. There have been times when Harvey Weinstein was trying to approach me “Jew to Jew,” like almost in a tone of “you and I are the same, we understand each other.” We found dossiers later that they had compiled on me and it was clear that they knew that I was the grandchild of Holocaust survivors, and they tried to sort of deploy that. So speaking of keeping things under the surface, I privately thought that was offensive, that he was citing that. But your job as a reporter is to be completely professional. And I wasn’t looking to get into a fight with Weinstein. I just wanted to find out the truth and I actually wanted to be fair to the guy. Anyway, even as he was approaching me “Jew to Jew” in private, he was hiring Black Cube — sort of Israeli private intelligence agents — to try to dupe me. And they actually sent an agent to me, and she posed as a women’s rights advocate. And she was intimating that they were going to pay me a lot of money to appear at a conference in London. Luckily I shooed her away.
To some degree I can’t explain why private Israeli intelligence agents were hired to try to dupe the Hebrew speaking, yeshiva-educated, granddaughter of Holocaust survivors. But it’s not my job to explain that! It’s their job to explain why they did that.
Then the theme reappeared with Irwin Reiter, Weinstein’s accountant of 30 years, who kind of became the Deep Throat of the investigation. I quickly figured out that Irwin and I were from the same small world. He was the child of survivors, and had also spent his summers at bungalow colonies in the Catskills just down the road from mine. I don’t bring up the Holocaust a lot. It’s a sacred matter for me, and I didn’t do it lightly. But once I discovered that we did in fact have this really powerful connection in our backgrounds, I did gently sound it with him – I felt that was sincere and real. Because he was making such a critical decision: Weinstein’s accountant of 30 years is still working for the guy by day and he’s meeting with me at night. And I felt like I did need to go to that place with him, saying, “Okay, Irwin, we both know that there are people who talk and there are people who don’t. And we both grew up around that mix of people and what do we think is the difference? And also if you know if you have the chance to act and intervene in a bad situation, are you going to take it?”
We didn’t talk a lot about it, because I raised it and he didn’t want to fully engage. But I always felt like that was under the surface of our conversations, and he made a very brave decision to help us.
That was a very powerful scene in the film, and it felt like a turning point in the movie that kind of got at the ethical core of what was motivating your character. Was that a scene that was important to you personally to include in the film?
What Megan and I want people to know overall is that a small number of brave sources can make an extraordinary difference. When you really look at the number of people who gave us the essential information about Weinstein, it’s a small conference room’s worth of people. Most of them are incredibly brave women, some of whom are depicted, I think, quite beautifully in the film. But there was also Irwin, Weinstein’s accountant of all these years, among them. It’s Megan and my job to build people’s confidence in telling the truth. And as we become custodians of this story for the long term, one of the things we really want people to know is that a tiny group of brave sources, sometimes one source, can make a massive difference. Look at the impact that these people had all around the world.
Did you feel the film captured the New York Times newsroom? There’s a kind of great reverence to the toughness and professionalism in the newspaper business that really came through.
Megan and I are so grateful for the sincerity and professionalism with which the journalism is displayed. There are a lot of on screen depictions of journalists in which we’re depicted as manipulative or doing things for the wrong reasons or sleeping with our sources!
We [as journalists] feel incredible drama in what we do every day. And we’re so grateful to the filmmakers for finding it and sharing it with people. And I know the New York Times can look intimidating or remote as an institution. I hope people really consider this an invitation into the building and into our meetings, and into our way of working and our value system.
And we’re also proud that it’s a vision of a really female New York Times, which was not traditionally the case at this institution for a long time. This is a book and a movie about women as narrators.
“Harvey Weinstein and his representatives were constantly trying to approach me as a Jew,” Kantor said. (The New York Times)
There have been comparisons made between this movie and “All the President’s Men.” One of the striking differences is that those journalists are two male bachelors running around D.C. And this film has scenes of motherhood, of the Shabbat table, of making lunches. What was it like seeing your personal lives reflected on screen?
It’s really true that the Weinstein investigation was kind of born in the crucible of motherhood and Megan and my attempt to combine work with parenting. On the one hand, it’s the most everyday thing in the world, but on the other hand, you don’t see it actually portrayed on screen that much. We’re really honored by the way that throughout the film you see motherhood and work mixing, I think in a way that is so natural despite our obviously pretty stressful circumstances.
I started out alone on the Weinstein investigation, and I called Megan because movie stars were telling me their secrets but they were very reluctant to go on the record. So I had gone some way in persuading and engaging them, but I was looking to make the absolute strongest case for them. So I called Megan. We had both done years of reporting on women and children. Mine involved the workplace more and hers involved sex crimes more, which is part of why everything melded together so well eventually. I wanted to talk to her about what she had said to female victims in the past. But when I reached her, I could hear that something was wrong. And she had just had a baby, and I had had postpartum depression myself. So we talked about it and I gave her the name of my doctor, who I had seen. Then she got treatment. And she not only gave very good advice on that [initial] phone call, but she joined me in the investigation.
I think the theme is responsibility. Our relationship was forged in a sense of shared responsibility, primarily for the work – once we began to understand the truths about Weinstein, we couldn’t allow ourselves to fail. But also Megan was learning to shoulder the responsibility of being a parent, and I had two kids. And so we started this joint dialogue that was mostly about work, but also about motherhood. And I think throughout the film and throughout the real investigation, we felt those themes melding. It’s totally true that my daughter Tali was asking me about what I was doing. It’s very hard to keep secrets from your kid in a New York City apartment, even though I didn’t tell her everything. And Megan and I would go from discussing really critical matters with the investigation to talking about her daughter’s evolving nap schedule. It really felt like we had to get the story and get home to the kids.
And also, we were reporting on our own cohort. A lot of Weinstein victims were and are women in their 40s. And so even though we were very professional with this and we tried to be very professional with the sources, there was an aspect of looking in the mirror. For example, with Laura Madden, who was so brave about going on the record, it was conversations with her own teenage daughters that helped her make her decision.
We didn’t write about this in our book because it was hard to mix the motherhood stuff with this sort of serious reporter-detective story and all the important facts. And we didn’t want to talk about ourselves too much in the book. But the filmmakers captured something that I think is very true. It feels particular to us but also universal. When Zoe [Kazan] is pushing a stroller and taking a phone call at the same time, I suspect lots of people will identify with that. And what I also really like is the grace and dignity with which that’s portrayed.
It must have been surreal, seeing a Hollywood movie about your investigation of Hollywood.
I think part of the power of the film is that it returns the Weinstein investigation to the producer’s medium, but on vastly different terms, with the women in charge. Megan and I are particularly moved by the portrayals of Zelda Perkins, Laura Madden and Rowena Chiu — these former Weinstein assistants are in many ways at the core of the story. They’re everyday people who made the incredibly brave decision to help us, in spite of everything from breast cancer to legal barriers.
Working with the filmmakers was really interesting. They were really committed to the integrity of the story, and they asked a ton of questions, both large and small. Ranging from the really big things about the investigation to these tiny details. Like in the scene where we go to Gwyneth Paltrow’s house and Megan and I discover we’re practically wearing the same dress — those were the actual white dresses that we wore that day. We had to send them in an envelope to the costume department, and they copied the dresses in Zoe and Carey’s sizes and that’s what they’re wearing. There was a strand of extreme fidelity, but they needed some artistic license because it’s a movie. And the movie plays out in the key of emotion.
—
The post Weinstein approached me ‘Jew to Jew’: Jodi Kantor opens up on the ‘She Said’ movie’s Jewish moments appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
White House Religious Liberty Panel Member Decries ‘Zionist Supremacy,’ Vows Not to Resign Despite Backlash
Carrie Prejean Boller speaks during a White House Religious Liberty Commission hearing on Feb. 9, 2026. Photo: Screenshot
Carrie Prejean Boller, a member of the White House Religious Liberty Commission, has vowed to combat so-called “Zionist supremacy” in the United States, sparking fresh outrage amid ongoing furor over her recent comments condemning the Jewish state and defending antisemitic podcaster Candace Owens.
“I will continue to stand against Zionist supremacy in America. I’m a proud Catholic. I, in no way will be forced to embrace Zionism as a fulfillment of biblical prophesy [sic]. I am a free American. Not a slave to a foreign nation,” Prejean Boller posted on the social media platform X on Tuesday.
Thank you all for the love and support I’ve received. I will continue to stand against Zionist supremacy in America. I’m a proud Catholic. I, in no way will be forced to embrace Zionism as a fulfillment of biblical prophesy. I am a free American. Not a slave to a foreign nation.
— Carrie Prejean Boller (@CarriePrejean1) February 10, 2026
The comments came on the heels of furor over Prejean Boller’s conduct during Monday’s hearing of the 13-member White House Religious Liberty Commission, which descended into a tense back-and-forth after she asked pointed questions about Israel’s policies and whether rejection of the Jewish state’s legitimacy should itself be labeled antisemitic.
The council was established by US President Donald Trump to examine religious freedom issues and was intended to focus on concrete challenges facing Jewish communities, including bias and harassment. Prejean Boller’s conduct, which included an impassioned defense of antisemitic personalities Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson, and her peddling of unsubstantiated claims that Israel has intentionally starved and murdered Palestinian civilians, raised alarm bells among pro-Israel advocates.
“I would really appreciate it if you would stop calling Candace Owens an antisemite,” Prejean Boller said to Seth Dillon, CEO of the political satire site Babylon Bee, during the hearing. “She’s not an antisemite. She just doesn’t support Zionism, and that really has to stop. I don’t know why you keep bringing her up, and Tucker.”
Owens, one of the country’s most popular podcasters, has spent the past two years spreading antisemitic conspiracy theories on her platform. She has called Jews “pedophilic,” argued that they oppress and murder Christians, and asserted that they are responsible for the trans-Atlantic slave trade.
Prejean Boller, a conservative activist and former Miss California, repeatedly pressed witnesses about Israel’s actions in Gaza and religious leaders on their views of Zionism, drawing audible boos from the audience and confusion from her colleagues. At one point she asked a Jewish activist if he would condemn Israel’s military response to Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel, despite the hearing’s official focus on domestic antisemitism. Prejean Boller also donned a Palestinian flag pin on the lapel of her suit, telegraphing her support for the anti-Israel ideological cause.
“Since we’ve mentioned Israel a total of 17 times, are you willing to condemn what Israel has done in Gaza?” Boller asked Jewish activist Shabbos Kestenbaum.
During the hearing, she also accused Rabbi Ari Berman, president of Yeshiva University, of Islamophobia after he declared that anti-Zionism — the belief that Israel does not have a right to exist —is an antisemitic ideology. Berman argued that attempts to delegitimize the existence of the world’s sole Jewish state, while showing ambivalence toward the existence of dozens of Muslim states, indicates anti-Jewish sentiment.
Panel members repeatedly stressed that American universities and communities must do more to confront bias and ensure Jewish students can live without fear of harassment.
Members of the commission expressed visible surprise at Prejean Boller’s line of questioning and repeated downplaying of antisemitism. Kestenbaum took aim at Prejean Boller after she asserted that the young activist had conflated antisemitism with harboring anti-Israel sentiment.
“She decided that this should be a debate on Israel’s conduct in Gaza, which I’m not entirely sure how that affects American students being discriminated against,” Kestenbaum said, “given that there are hundreds of millions of Catholics, including some who are on this commission, speaking at this commission today, who would vehemently disagree with such a grandiose assertion.”
Spectators suggested that the hearing also spotlighted deeper fissures within the conservative movement. Prejean Boller’s impassioned defense of Owens and Carlson, who have spent the past few years peddling anti-Israel conspiracies, suggest that their narratives may be penetrating deeper into the Republican base. The hearing also raised questions about the White House’s vetting process for the commission.
A recent analysis by the Jewish People Policy Institute found that both Carlson and Owens dramatically increased the volume and intensity of negative content about Israel in 2025, with Owens also incorporating explicit antisemitic language and conspiracy narratives, including accusations of disproportionate violence and undue influence over US policy into her commentary.
Carlson, the former Fox News host whose podcast remains influential among conservative audiences, has in recent years amplified fringe voices, including figures such as white nationalist streamer Nick Fuentes. Carlson’s interviews have featured conspiratorial depictions of “Christian Zionists” as afflicted by a “brain virus,” and his platforming of extremists and Holocaust minimizers has drawn widespread condemnation from lawmakers and civil rights advocates across the ideological spectrum.
Some prominent conservative voices have demanded for Prejean Boller to resign or be removed from the commission, arguing that her views are counter to the mission of the initiative. Prejean Boller has repeatedly refused to relinquish her position, arguing that her Catholic faith does not allow for support of Israel and doing so would signal a surrender to “Zionist supremacy.”
However, conservative reporter and podcaster Laura Loomer stated that sources at the US State Department are pressing for the Trump administration to remove Prejean Boller from the panel.
“Carrie’s behavior is unacceptable and is not representative of the Trump administration’s values. We have asked the White House to take action,” Loomer posted on social media, attributing the quote to an unnamed State Department official.
Uncategorized
13-Year-Old Boy Brutally Assaulted in Paris in Second Antisemitic Attack in Less Than a Week
Tens of thousands of French people march in Paris to protest against antisemitism. Photo: Screenshot
In a shocking second antisemitic attack in less than a week, a 13-year-old boy in Paris was brutally beaten Monday by a knife-wielding assailant, prompting authorities to open a criminal investigation and step up security amid a rising tide of antisemitism.
On his way to a synagogue in Paris’s 18th arrondissement, the schoolboy was physically attacked by a group of five assailants who beat him, pressed a knife to his throat, called him a “dirty Jew,” and stole his belongings, the French news outlet Le Parisien reported.
According to the Paris prosecutor’s office, the victim was walking to a synagogue, clutching his kippah in his hand rather than wearing it for fear of being recognized, when five attackers confronted him; stole his AirPods, sneakers, and coat; and forced him to empty his pockets.
The boy also told authorities that he was shoved, punched in the face, and threatened with a knife to his throat before his attackers stole his belongings, shouting antisemitic remarks throughout the assault.
Local police have arrested and taken an 18-year-old suspect into custody after he was recognized during the assault by someone on a video call with the victim. The four other attackers remain at large as of this writing.
The prosecutor’s office has opened an investigation into armed robbery and armed violence, committed as a group and aggravated by discrimination, as authorities continue to work to identify and apprehend the remaining suspects.
This latest antisemitic attack marks the second such incident in less than a week, underscoring a growing climate of hostility as Jews and Israelis face a surge of targeted assaults.
Over the weekend, three Jewish men wearing kippahs were physically threatened with a knife and forced to flee after leaving their Shabbat services near the Trocadéro in southwest Paris’s 16th arrondissement, European Jewish Press reported.
As the victims were leaving a nearby synagogue and walking through the neighborhood, they noticed a man staring at them. The assailant then approached the group and repeatedly asked, “Are you Jews? Are you Israelis?”
When one of them replied “yes,” the man pulled a knife from his pocket and began threatening the group. The victims immediately ran and found police officers nearby. None of the victims were injured.
Like most countries across Europe and the broader Western world, France has seen a rise in antisemitic incidents over the last two years, in the wake of the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
According to the French Interior Ministry, the first six months of 2025 saw more than 640 antisemitic incidents, a 27.5 percent decline from the same period in 2024, but a 112.5 percent increase compared to the first half of 2023, before the Oct. 7 atrocities.
Last week, a Jewish primary school in eastern Paris was vandalized, with windows smashed and security equipment damaged, prompting a criminal investigation and renewed outrage among local Jewish leaders as targeted antisemitic attacks continued to escalate.
Uncategorized
Over 90% of American Jews Feel Less Safe After Recent Antisemitic Attacks, Survey Finds
A friend organized a vigil for Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Lynn Milgrim, both Israeli embassy workers who were allegedly murdered by an anti-Israel activist, in Washington, DC on May 22, 2025. Photo: ZUMA Press Wire via Reuters Connect
Nearly all Jews in the United States feel less safe after a recent wave of antisemitic attacks, and the majority have changed their behavior over the last year as a result, according to a major new survey.
The American Jewish Committee (AJC) on Tuesday published its annual State of Antisemitism in America report, revealing a growing level of fear among American Jews — especially the 31 percent directly targeted by antisemitic hate themselves in the past year. Of those who reported being the target of antisemitism, 80 percent said they changed their behavior in response.
“We need Americans to wake up to the reality of what their Jewish neighbors are experiencing,” AJC CEO Ted Deutch said in a statement announcing the report.
The AJC’s researchers found that 91 percent of American Jews feel more unsafe in the country following last year’s antisemitic attacks against Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro’s residence in April and pro-Israel demonstrators in Boulder, Colorado in June, in addition to the slayings of Israeli embassy staffers Sarah Milgrim and Yaron Lischinsky at the Capital Jewish Museum in May.
Seventy-eight percent of survey respondents said they feel less safe as a Jewish person in the US because of Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of southern Israel. During the onslaught, Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists perpetrated the biggest single-day massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, killing 1,200 people and kidnapping 251 hostages.
“Right now, in America, when Jews gather, whether at synagogue or a community event, it’s routinely behind metal detectors and armed guards,” Deutch said. “No one in America should have to change their behavior because of what they believe, but that’s how most Jews are living their lives. What we’re asking for is what every other minority group expects in America: the freedom to be who we are without fearing for our safety.”
The report documents that 55 percent of Jewish respondents to the survey said they changed their behavior in response to fears of antisemitism, while 17 percent noted they have considered leaving the US in the past five years as a result of rising hate, an increase from 13 percent in 2024.
Majorities of American Jews are attuned to the threats of online hate and the dangers of the popular large language model (LLM) chatbots marketed as so-called “artificial intelligence,” including SpaceX’s Grok, OpenAI’s ChatGPT, and Anthropic’s Claude.
Seventy-three percent of American Jews who were surveyed said they have experienced online antisemitism, and 65 percent expressed concerns at either the “very” or “somewhat” levels that LLM chatbots will spread more bigotry against Jews.
In addition, 69 percent of American Jews worry that information and misinformation from LLMs will inspire antisemitic incidents, according to the data.
More American Jews surveyed in 2025 said they saw antisemitism on social media platforms than those in 2024. Jews reporting seeing antisemitism on billionaire Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook social media website rose from 47 percent in 2024 to 54 percent last year, while those experiencing the hate on his Instagram photo-sharing app shot up from 32 percent to 40 percent.
American Jews seeking to enjoy online videos also reported rising bigotry targeting them on Alphabet’s YouTube (increasing from 27 percent to 38 percent) and Oracle’s TikTok (up from 18 percent to 23 percent).
The picture of life for younger American Jews is much more dire than for the middle-aged and elderly, with 47 percent of respondents 29 and younger saying antisemites had personally targeted them in the last year. This compares to 28 percent for Jews 30 and older.
The survey also affirms reports in recent years of increased antisemitism at the outposts of American academia.
Among Jewish college students, 42 percent said they experienced antisemitism while on campus, and 25 percent reported feeling or being excluded from a group or event because of their Jewish identity.
Jewish institutions remain widely under threat, with 28 percent of respondents saying that antisemites had targeted at least one synagogue, Jewish school, or community organization where they affiliated.
The survey also found that the protest slogan “globalize the intifada,” which references previous periods of sustained Palestinian terrorism against Jews and Israelis and has been widely interpreted as a call to expand such violence, provokes fear among 88 percent of Jewish respondents, with 27 percent saying they would feel “very unsafe” hearing the words. Among the general public, only 13 percent of respondents said they knew the phrase while 32 percent had heard the similar controversial war cry “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.”
More Americans (73 percent) knew the “Free Palestine” chant. The AJC noted that the alleged killer of Milgrim and Lischinsky “is reported to have shouted ‘Free Palestine’ during the shooting. The alleged attacker in Boulder is also reported to have yelled ‘Free Palestine’ as he threw a Molotov cocktail at the crowd of people gathered to support hostages held by Hamas in Gaza, ultimately leading to the death of 82-year-old Karen Diamond.”
In a parallel survey the AJC conducted of the American general public, researchers found that 70 percent of respondents called antisemitism a problem, 63 percent said it had increased since Hamas’s Oct. 7 atrocities, and 45 percent had seen or heard an antisemitic incident in the last 12 months.
Deutch on Tuesday highlighted some of the key findings in an op-ed published by the New York Post announcing the report.
“Among Americans who know a Jewish person, only 54 percent said they had personally seen or heard one or more antisemitic incidents in the last year,” Deutch wrote. “Among those who don’t know any Jews? Thirty-two percent.”
Deutch continued, “I am not advocating for special attention or treatment for my community. I’m calling for, rather, the same care, awareness, and collective outrage we would rightly see if these daily assaults were being made against members of any other religious or ethnic group in the United States.” He warned that “the fortress of metal detectors and bulletproof glass we’ve built around the Jewish community is a physical sign of the deep cracks undermining the foundation of our society.”
Holly Huffnagle, the AJC’s director of antisemitism policy, warned in a statement that tolerating the spread of antisemitism “corrodes social trust, legitimizes extremism, and weakens the democratic institutions that protect everyone, making a clear, dedicated government response not just optional, but necessary.”
The AJC’s survey took place between Sept. 26 and Oct. 29, 2025. Researchers drew data from responses provided by 1,222 Jews, ages 18 and up, as well as 1,033 adults in the general population. The margin of error for Jewish respondents was +/-3.7 percent while for the general population it was 3.4, at a 95 percent confidence level.