Uncategorized
A scholar sees a common root for antisemitism and racism: ‘Christian supremacy’
(JTA) — Magda Teter’s new book, “Christian Supremacy,” begins in Charlottesville, Virginia, on Aug. 11, 2017. Hundreds of white nationalist neo-Nazis who ostensibly gathered to protest the removal of a statue of Confederate general Robert E. Lee from a local park broke into a chant: “Jews will not replace us.”
Other writers and scholars would note how antisemitism shaped white nationalism. But Teter, professor of history and the Shvidler Chair of Judaic Studies at Fordham University, saw something else: how centuries of Christian thought and practice fed the twin evils of antisemitism and racism.
“The ideology espoused by white supremacists in the US and in Europe is rooted in Christian ideas of social and religious hierarchy,” she writes. “These ideas developed, gradually, first in the Mediterranean and Europe in respect to Jews and then in respect to people of color in European colonies and in the US, before returning transformed back to Europe.”
In the book, subtitled “Reckoning with the Roots of Antisemitism and Racism,” she traces this idea from the writings of the early church fathers like Paul the Apostle, though centuries of Catholic and Protestant debates over the status of Jews in Europe, to the hardening of racist attitudes with the rise of the trans-Atlantic slave trade.
Antisemitic laws and theology, she argues, developed within Christianity a “mental habit” of exclusion and dominance that would eventually be applied to people of color up to and including modern times.
Teter is careful to acknowledge the different forms antisemitism and racism have taken, distinguishing between the Jews’ experience of social and legal exclusion and near annihilation, and the enslavement, displacement and ongoing persecution of Black people. And yet, she writes, “that story began with Christianity’s theological relation with Jews and Judaism.”
Teter is previously the author of “Blood Libel: On The Trail of an Antisemitic Myth,” winner of the 2020 National Jewish Book Award. At Fordham, the Catholic university in the Bronx, she is helping assemble what may be the largest repository of artifacts and literature dedicated to the Jewish history of the borough.
We spoke Thursday about how groups like the Proud Boys embrace centuries-old notions of Christian superiority, how “whiteness” became a thing and how she, as a non-Jew raised in Poland, became a Jewish studies scholar.
Our conversation was edited for length and clarity.
Your book was conceived and written during the COVID lockdown. Where did the idea for the book come from?
It’s an accidental project. I’ve been teaching the history of antisemitism for years, and I live in Harlem so questions of race and racism are very stark in my daily life. And since I grew up in Poland, and American history was not something we were taught or studied, I’ve never been satisfied with the various explanations for the strength of antisemitism and history of racism. And as I mentioned in my prologue, I watched the Raoul Peck documentary, “I Am Not Your Negro,” which has a clip with James Baldwin saying that white people have to figure out why they invented the idea of the N-word and must “embrace this stranger that they have maligned so long.” You could also say that the European Christians created the idea of “the Jew” and that sort of caricature had absolutely nothing to do with flesh and blood Jews. I kept noticing these parallels, as an outsider, reading American and African-American history.
I was also thinking about this idea of servitude that was attached to Jews in Christian theology, and then in law.
You write in your book that “Over time, white European Christians branded both Jews and people of color with ‘badges of servitude’ and inferiority.” What do you mean by servitude in this context?
In Christian theology, from the earliest Christian texts, the idea of servitude and slavery is attached to the concept of Jews and Judaism. Paul does it in his Epistles. He uses this quote from the book of Genesis that “the elder shall serve the younger,” which becomes really embedded in Christian theology. It is the Jews, the elder people, who should serve the Christians, the younger people. Later on in medieval theology and canon law, Jews are in a servile position, consigned for their sin of rejecting Jesus to perpetual servitude. So even though Jews were free people and could live mostly where they wanted to live, marry whoever they wanted to marry — nobody was sold and some even had slaves — that idea of Jews as confined to perpetual servitude to Christians created a habit of thinking of Jews as having an inferior social status.
That language became secularized in modern times, and we see the development of the [antisemitic] trope of Jewish power: that they are in places where they shouldn’t be. I worked on fleshing out the parallels between the idea and then legal status of Jewish servitude and the conceptual perception of Black people in servile and inferior positions.
Magda Teter’s new book explores how “white European Christians branded both Jews and people of color with ‘badges of servitude’ and inferiority.” (Chuck Fishman)
What other kinds of parallels did you find between racism and antisemitism?
In the Christian theology, Black people, like Jews, will be seen as cursed by God. Jews were [portrayed as] lazy because they didn’t work physically — they made money and exploited Christians. Black people were [portrayed as] lazy because they were trying to avoid physical labor at the expense of white men. Both people were seen as carnal, both as sexually dangerous, and so on.
I was struck by the fact that the racist turn of Christian supremacy — justifying the enslavement of Black people on theological grounds — is a fairly late development, taking hold in the early modern period when Europeans established slaveholding empires.
That’s right. In the summer of 2020, the summer of George Floyd and Black Lives Matter, we were all thinking about these issues of race and racism and America. And as I was in the middle of writing the article that became the book, I felt that there was a deeper history that needed to be told, and that slavery is not bound by color until the enslavement of Black Africans by Europeans during the colonial expansion of Europe.
After the French Revolution, when Jews were offered “emancipation” in much of Europe, there were deep debates about whether they could be citizens and be entitled to the same rights and protections as Christian citizens of France and England and other countries. How was that debate informed by Christianity?
In pre-modern Europe, there was obviously both a religious and legal framework under which Jews existed. They had their place in a social hierarchy. After the French Revolution, people are creating a new political reality. The idea of equality obviously challenged the social hierarchies that existed, including the idea that Christians were the superior religion. And that begins to play a role on two levels. One is the level of, well, “how can you be equal and be our judges and make decisions about us?” It’s fear of power — political power and political equality. That challenges the habit of thinking that sees Jews as inferior, in servitude and otherwise insolent and arrogant.
The other level comes from Enlightenment scholars who begin to place Jews in the Middle East and in the Holy Land, in Palestine. Jews are no longer seen as European. They are seen as “Oriental,” and they are compared to the non-European religions and practices that these Enlightenment scholars have been studying. Their differences are now also racialized. “They are not like us, they can’t assimilate. They can never be Frenchmen, they can never be Germans.”
And I guess it’s a short step from that to regarding people with dark skin as inferior and subordinate.
That’s right. Enlightenment scholars are also trying to to understand why it is justified to enslave Black Africans and they do it through “scientific” and other means. They classify Africans as inferior intellectually and they create this idea of race.
I began to think about these European politicians and intellectuals in terms of creating their identities, and what I ended up arguing is what we saw in Charlottesville, what we’re seeing in Europe. It’s not necessarily just about hate, but it’s about exclusion and rejection of Jews and people of color from equality, from citizenship.
And the common thread here is that whiteness and Christianity become inseparable. You write that “freedom and liberty now came to be linked not only to Christianity, but to whiteness, and servitude and enslavement to blackness.”
That’s right. White Christian “liberty” becomes embedded and embodied in law.
Did you see any pitfalls in drawing parallels between the Black and Jewish experiences? I am thinking of those in either community who might say, “How dare you compare our suffering to theirs!”
Yes, I was tempered. I think what some call “comparative victimhood” has paralyzed conversations about this subject, and I kept it in my mind all the time. What I hope comes through is that there’s incredible value in a comparative approach. Coming from Jewish studies as my primary field, the comparison with the Black experience gave me clarity on the nature of antisemitism as well as on the nature of the Jewish experience, and vice versa: The Jewish experience can also give clarity to some of the aspects of anti-Black racism.
What’s an example?
So, for instance, questions like, “Are Jews white? Are they not white? When did they become white?” That’s a whole genre of scholarship. And when you look at it through the lens of law and ideology, you begin to see that from a legal perspective, Jews were considered white in the United States because they could immigrate and they could be naturalized according to law. They did not have to go to court to become American. Their rights to vote were not challenged. There was discrimination, they couldn’t stay in hotels and in some places they couldn’t find employment, but by law, they were considered citizens. The debate about the whiteness of Jews is creating a fog of misunderstanding.
Black Americans were targeted by specific legal statutes from the very beginning in the Constitution and then in naturalization law and so on. And then there was the backlash even after the Civil War to the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments [aimed at establishing political equality for Americans of all races].
Statues at the Strasbourg Cathedral depict Ecclesia and Synagoga, representing the triumph of the church, at left, and the servitude of Judaism, which is represented by a blindfolded figure, drooping and carrying a broken lance. (Edelseider/Wikimedia Commons)
How much do modern-day white supremacists, like the Oath Keepers or the Proud Boys, see themselves as Christian? Or is this a kind of white supremacy that doesn’t name itself Christian but doesn’t even realize how many of its ideas are based in theology?
I think they might not be conscious of this legacy, but neo-Nazis take from the legacy of the Nazis who themselves were not thinking of themselves as Christian necessarily. But what I argue in the book is that white Christian supremacy becomes white supremacy. It never discards the Christian sense of domination and superiority that emerges from its early relationship with Jews and Judaism.
In the United States, Black people serve as contrast figures to whiteness, in the law and in the culture. You cannot have whiteness without Blackness. For Christians, Jews serve as that contrast figure. Consciously or unconsciously, the Proud Boys are embracing that. They talk of “God-given” freedoms for white people. That is the Christian legacy.
You said that the Nazis didn’t necessarily see themselves as a Christian movement. But I must ask, even though it is not the scope of your book, was the Holocaust a culmination of white Christian supremacy? Because I think many Christian theologians would want to say that Nazism was godless, and a perversion of the true faith.
I’ll say that when exclusionary ideology is coupled with the power of the state, that’s where it can lead.
In the years since the Holocaust especially, there have been many efforts by Christian leaders to address the ideological failings of the past. You write about Nostra Aetate, the 1965 declaration by the Catholic Church absolving Jews of collective guilt in the death of Jesus and some Protestant documents of contrition. But I got the feeling you were disappointed that many denominations haven’t gone far enough in reckoning with the past.
There was a sort of a moral sense that something needs to be addressed after the Holocaust. But then it is not fully addressed. I don’t think anybody has addressed the issue of power — the roots of hate, yes, but not the dynamics of power. We’ll see where the book goes, but maybe theologians will begin to grapple with this legacy of superiority and domination, and the way hierarchical habits of thinking have been developed through theology and through religious culture.
What other impact do you hope the book may have?
White supremacy is very much in the air. We need to speak up against it, and make connections and allyships. I hope that maybe because the book deals with law and power, it may create bridges among people who care about “We the People” as a vision of people who are diverse, respectful and equal, and not the exclusionary vision offered by white and Christian supremacy.
A cross burns at a Ku Klux Klan rally on Aug. 8, 1925. (National Photo Company Collection)
I’d love to talk about your background. You’re not Jewish but you are chair of Jewish Studies at Fordham, a Catholic university. What drew you to the study of Judaism and the Jews?
I grew up in Poland with a father who from the time I was a little girl would point out to me that there had been Jews in Poland. We would drive through the countryside, and he’d say, “This used to be a Jewish town and there used to be a synagogue and there was the Jewish cemetery.” I grew up being very conscious of the past’s presence and this kind of stark absence of Jews in Poland, where in the 1970s when I grew up Jewish history was taboo.
As soon as Jewish books on Jewish subjects began to be published, including those that dealt with antisemitism, we would read it together. We would talk about it. He wouldn’t just shift the destruction and murder of Jews in Poland on to the Nazis.
There was no Jewish studies program in Poland when I was applying to universities, so I studied Hebrew in Israel, and then studied Yiddish in New York at YIVO. I came to Columbia University to get my PhD in Jewish history and my career went in the direction it did. I was a professor of history and director of the Jewish and Israel studies program at Wesleyan University. I came to Fordham eight years ago and created a program in Jewish studies.
Your previous book was about the blood libel, the historic canard that Jews murdered Christian children to use their blood. This one’s about antisemitism. I don’t want to presume, but is your interest in these subjects in any way an act of contrition?
I grew up in a very secular household. I did not grow up Catholic. But I think growing up in Poland made me very, very aware of antisemitism and the history of antisemitism. I got my PhD from Columbia University in Jewish history, which did not emphasize Jewish suffering, but Jewish life, and I have studied Jewish life and teach about Jewish life — not just about Jewish suffering.
However, in the last few years, antisemitism has certainly been on the minds of many of us. I also am committed to the idea of shared history, and therefore all my scholarship, as much as it is about Jews, it is also about the church and Poland and the law. Jews are an integral part of that history and culture. And, as such, I’m committed to that, to teaching about the vibrancy of Jewish life as much as the dynamics of what made that life difficult over the centuries.
—
The post A scholar sees a common root for antisemitism and racism: ‘Christian supremacy’ appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Trump says US aid to Israel will stop at end of year
(JTA) — President Donald Trump on Tuesday morning said that the United States would halt billions of dollars in annual aid to Israel by the end of 2026, potentially ending decades of military support for one of America’s closest allies in the Middle East.
“We were giving them $4 billion. We are. But it gets cut off at the end of the year,” Trump declared during a call-in appearance on the “Fox & Friends” morning program on Fox News. Israel’s 10-year memorandum of understanding with the United States, which currently gives Israel $3.8 billion annually, runs through 2028 so it’s unclear how easy it would be for the White House to stop the funding this year.
Referencing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s statement in January that he wanted to taper off aid to zero at some point in the future, Trump questioned why Republicans should have to deal with criticism from hardline pro-Palestinian Democrats like Michigan Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed when “we give them more than anybody else and they no longer need it.”
“It’s a bad talking point,” he added. His comments came as Americans across the country are voting Tuesday in midterm elections that will determine control of the U.S. House and Senate.
“We reached an agreement on that” and Netanyahu “brought it up,” Trump continued. “He said: ‘I think it would be appropriate if we do not receive aid,’ because he understands that this is one of their points of contention.”
A growing number of Democratic congressional candidates across the United States have campaigned on a platform of reducing or halting military aid to Israel during the run-up to today’s midterm elections. This April, dozens of senators — almost all of them Democrats — voted in favor of a failed motion to block the sales of certain weapons to Israel.
Yair Golan, chairman of Israel’s liberal Democrats party, slammed Netanyahu in the wake of Trump’s statement, tweeting that “precisely at a time when Israel’s defense spending has reached enormous proportions, when Israel needs to replenish its offensive weapons stockpiles, and after air defense capabilities have been depleted following such a long war—Netanyahu logs another massive failure under his name.”
“The cessation of U.S. aid is heavy damage to Israel’s security” and “a responsible prime minister would have fought to increase American aid, not eliminate it,” added Golan, whose party opposes Netanyahu’s and is trying to form a coalition to oust Netanyahu from power following Israel’s own elections last Tuesday.
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post Trump says US aid to Israel will stop at end of year appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
A ‘unique 20th Century Israelite’ who always made sure we got it right
It’s fitting that I first met Rabbi Capers Funnye in a television studio. And it should surprise no one that the topic that brought us together — by no means accidentally — was a discussion about Black Jews.
We never stopped talking about it. And making sure others got it right.
The spiritual leader for decades of Chicago’s Beth Shalom B’nai Zaken Ethiopian Hebrew Congregation and since 2016 the Chief Rabbi of the International Israelite Board of Rabbis, Funnye died Nov. 2 at 74.
Our friendship spanned decades, beginning before we co-founded the Alliance of Black Jews with Michelle Stein-Evers Frankl in 1995. With Stein-Evers, then in Los Angeles, and me in Boston, the organization brought together Jews of African descent from around the country to celebrate our dual affiliations as normative.
Although the organization did not last beyond its early years, it spawned numerous other groups that exist today. Most significantly, it mainstreamed the fact that Blackness and Judaism are not mutually exclusive.
That’s the message we had been imparting five years earlier, on the Black Entertainment Television show Our Voices in 1990. Having filed a story mentioning Black Jews while a reporter for BET’s news division, I was asked by the network to co-produce a special on the subject. In addition to me, they asked who else should appear.
“There’s a rabbi in Chicago,” I said unhesitatingly, though I had yet to meet him, “and the police chief in Charleston, South Carolina” — Reuben Greenberg, who passed away in 2014.
Each of us came to Judaism differently: me, the child of a non-Jewish African-American father and non-Black Jewish mother; Greenberg, via conversion first through Reform, then Conservative Judaism (and also “reversion” in that he was reaching back to the religion of his grandfather), and Funnye, who had been Methodist before joining the Ethiopian Hebrew denomination (of African Americans, not Ethiopians) and later underwent a Conservative conversion.
Although his smicha was granted by the Ethiopian Hebrew group (now more broadly termed Israelite) and not by the Conservative body, he was invited to join the Chicago Board of Rabbis as its first African American member in 1997.
His dual affiliations as both Conservative and Israelite — and indeed, that of his largely Black and increasingly Hispanic Chicago shul, which also had merged with an aging Ashkenazi congregation — allowed him to serve as a bridge between many strains of Judaic practices.
“He accomplished what he wanted,” said Rabbi Baruch A. Yehudah of Congregation B’nai Adath Kol Beth Yisrael in New York. “He wanted to be a bridge builder and he built many — into the Ethiopian community, the Nigerian community, South Africa, Ghana, Uganda. He was the first one of us to be on a mainstream board of rabbis.”
“I loved him,” Yehudah added. “He wasn’t just my boss.”
Bruce Haynes, author of The Soul of Judaism, called Funnye “the most unique 21st Century Israelite” because of his role as chief rabbi. “To my knowledge, that (position) was the first of its kind. It elevated him institutionally as the premiere figure among modern-day Hebrew Israelites.”
Yet that outreach went beyond the bima. “Having chosen to move his whole family toward Conservative Judaism was an important step in cementing a personal relationship between Israelite congregations and rabbinic Judaism,” Haynes said.
Rabbi Tamar Manasseh, a protégé of Funnye who in 2021 became the first woman ordained by the Israelite body, said Funnye was “doing the whole bridge thing before anybody knew that they wanted a bridge.
“There were Black Jews who didn’t like that. There were white Jews who didn’t like that, either. It was uncomfortable for everybody until it wasn’t uncomfortable for anybody.”
She praised him for enduring “all of the stuff he had to go through to get us to a point where I can complain about things now, which is remarkable.”
I too find it difficult to separate the personal from the bridge-building. In addition to our numerous Black Jewish campaigns and initiatives — we literally traveled the world together, from Chicago to Boston to San Francisco to Uganda — he served as the rabbi for my mother’s funeral and my daughter’s wedding.
In my ever-diverse family, both were examples of bridge-building in their own right. During the wedding, my now son-in-law, whose native language is Russian, recited the line “I concentrate you to me as my wife,” prompting Funnye to break from the prepared liturgy to correct him.
“No, no. Consecrate. We gotta get this right.”
“I consecrate you to me as my wife,” the groom said, appreciative of the gentle but authoritative guidance.
Because Capers made sure to get it right.
The post A ‘unique 20th Century Israelite’ who always made sure we got it right appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
The Jewish midterms: Races to watch on Election Day
Tuesday’s midterm elections will determine which party controls Congress for the final two years of President Donald Trump’s second term, with Republicans fighting to hold their narrow majorities and Democrats hoping to regain power.
Recent polls suggest Democrats are favored to retake the House and have a strong chance of winning the Senate. Several closely watched gubernatorial races could also shape the field for the 2028 presidential election and increase the number of Jewish governors.
The outcome could have immediate consequences for U.S. foreign policy, particularly American support for Israel and the war with Iran. If Democrats win the House, they would have greater power to investigate Trump’s handling of the war, limit his power and challenge his foreign policy decisions. Democrats will also likely push for restrictions on military aid to Israel, depending on who forms the next Israeli government. Democrats remain divided over Israel and their leadership has so far resisted pressure to pursue major changes to longstanding U.S. policy.
A Democratic takeover of Congress would put House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, both longtime supporters of Israel, in charge of their respective chambers and navigating any divides within their caucus.
The elections will also test whether Democrats can win back voters who shifted toward Trump and will reveal how much influence the party’s progressive wing may have, particularly on Israel and foreign policy going into the presidential primary season.
For Jewish voters, the stakes are especially high. Although they make up only about 2% of the population nationwide, Jewish voters could help decide close races in New York, Michigan, Georgia and Ohio. The results could also show whether frustration with Democrats over Israel is driving more Jewish voters toward Republicans or whether concerns about antisemitism on the right and disapproval of Trump are keeping them in the Democratic camp.
Here are the key races we’re watching and what’s at stake.
– Senate –
Michigan: Abdul El-Sayed (D) vs. Mike Rogers (R)
Issues: The race has become one of the largest tests of the Democratic divide on Israel and antisemitism. El-Sayed, a progressive and fierce critic of Israel, defeated Rep. Haley Stevens in the contested Democratic primary despite millions spent by AIPAC and other pro-Israel groups. Now, Stevens is backing Rogers. El-Sayed has refused to moderate his views and has doubled down on ending Israel aid and his association with Hasan Piker, a popular left-wing pundit who has been accused of antisemitism. El-Sayed said he disagreed with the content of an ad from a PAC supporting his campaign that blamed U.S. aid to Israel for rising grocery prices.
The Jewish vote: The state has an estimated 130,000 Jewish residents, who make up 1.4% of the electorate. The Republican Jewish Coalition spent $2 million to target 50,000 Jewish voters in Oakland County who opposed El-Sayed in the primary; those votes could matter in a close race.
Georgia: Incumbent Jon Ossoff (D) vs. Mike Collins (R)
Issues: Ossoff, the state’s first Jewish senator, has angered some Jewish voters for backing measures to block some aid to Israel. Collins criticized Ossoff for supporting El-Sayed. The Republican has been accused of ties to white nationalists and antisemitic figures, including his son-in-law, who promoted antisemitic conspiracies. Collins rejected their views and condemned antisemitism.
The Jewish vote: Georgia is home to an estimated 150,000 Jews, primarily in Atlanta. Though that represents 1.3% of the electorate, Jewish voters could play an important role in a state where recent elections were decided by narrow margins. The outcome could test whether dissatisfied Jewish Democrats will still support Ossoff over a Trump-aligned Republican and whether his Jewish identity still provides a political advantage.
Florida: Incumbent Ashley Moody (R) vs. Angie Nixon (D)
Issues: Moody, who was appointed to the Senate in 2025 after Marco Rubio became Secretary of State, is a staunch supporter of Israel and led on combating BDS in her previous role as attorney general. Nixon is the first member of the Democratic Socialists of America on a major party ticket. She did not make Israel the centerpiece of her Senate campaign, which focused heavily on affordability, health care and other economic issues. But on Israel and Gaza, her record puts her broadly in line with the DSA’s platform.
The Jewish vote: Florida is home to 750,000 Jews, who make up an estimated 3-5% of the state’s electorate. Moody leads Nixon by an average of 6 percentage points.
– House –
New York 17: Rep. Mike Lawler (R) vs. Cait Conley (D)
Issues: Support for Israel and antisemitism were central in outreach to the Jewish community, though the two candidates have more in common on those issues than their campaigns suggest. Lawler highlighted his ties to Jewish voters and questioned whether Conley would stand up to anti-Israel voices in the Democratic Party, while Conley accuses him of associating with Republicans who have faced accusations of antisemitic rhetoric and ties to white nationalists.
The Jewish vote: The district has 150,000 Jewish residents who make up 19% of the population. At least 20,000 members of the growing Hasidic communities in Rockland County voted for Lawler in 2024. His first race was won by a narrow margin of about 2,000 votes. The margin of victory could determine whether a pro-Israel moderate Democrat could peel away Jewish voters from Lawler’s camp.
New York 10 and 12: Brad Lander and Micah Lasher
Lander and Lasher are heavily favored to win their races in the deep blue districts. They represent a generational transition in the debate over Israel and Jewish influence in Congress, as Jerry Nadler, co-chair of the Congressional Jewish Congress who served as the leading voice in Congress for liberal Jews, is set to retire. Lander, an ally of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and of the pro-Palestinian movement, supports halting all aid to Israel and has called the Gaza war a genocide, while Lasher supports continued aid and calls himself a Zionist.
The Jewish vote: The 12th District has the nation’s largest Jewish population – 24%, while the 10th ranks fourth, at 21%.
New York 13 and 7: Daraliza Avila Chevalier and Claire Valdez
The election of Avila Chevalier, a former Columbia University Gaza War encampment activist, in the 13th District — where Jews make up 6% — and Valdez in the 7th District in Brooklyn — where Jews make up 13% – will put two fierce Israel critics and DSA members at the center of debate over Israel in Congress.
Florida 20: Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D) vs. Brent Andersen (R)
Wasserman Schultz, one of the most prominent Jewish members in Congress, is favored to win reelection after easily winning the Democratic primary in a redrawn majority-Black district, surviving GOP redistricting. Jews make up just 5% of her new district.
Florida 25: Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D) vs. Scott Singer (R)
Issues: Moskowitz, who built a reputation as an outspoken supporter of Israel and one of the more bipartisan members of the House, easily defeated Oliver Larkin, a democratic socialist and fierce critic of Israel, in the August primary as he clashed with progressives over Israel. Singer, the Jewish former mayor of Boca Raton, highlighted his support for Israel and his roots in the district and, if elected, could increase the Jewish Republican caucus to five members.
The Jewish vote: The district is home to 67,000 Jews, at 8%. Recent polls show a close race, in which Jewish voters will play an important role in deciding whether they are represented by a Jewish Democrat or a Jewish Republican.
California 11: Scott Wiener vs. Connie Chan
Issues: This race to succeed Nancy Pelosi, the former House Speaker, is a test of how far left on Israel is good enough for San Francisco. Both Weiner, who is Jewish and advanced to first place in the Democratic primary, and Chan say that Israel committed genocide in Gaza and want to end U.S. military aid to Israel. Chan, however, is the favored candidate among pro-Palestinian activists, who say Weiner’s characterization of the conflict as a genocide was too little, too late.
Jewish vote: The district is home to 57,000 Jews, 7.5% of the population. Wiener leads Chan by an average of 6 percentage points.
Colorado 1: Melat Kiros (D) vs. Shimon Blau (I)
Issues: Israel has been a defining issue in the race. Kiros, a democratic socialist, has repeatedly declined to call the 2025 firebombing of a walk for Gaza hostages antisemitic. The attacker was heard yelling “Free Palestine” as he threw molotov cocktails, injuring 13 people, including an 82-year-old woman who later died from her injuries. Kiros has since said she understands “the immense pain and fear the Boulder attack caused.” Kiros has also argued in favor of a one-state solution, called for ending both offensive and defensive weapons sales to Israel, and called Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023 attack the “inevitable consequence of apartheid.” Blau, an Orthodox Jew, said he was inspired to get into the race by what he described as Kiros’ antisemitic rhetoric. He told Axios he’ll caucus with Democrats if elected.
The Jewish vote: Jewish voters make up about 2% of the state’s electorate. Kiros is favored to win and become the first Gen Z woman elected to Congress.
Ohio 7: Rep. Max Miller (R) vs. Brian Poindexter (D)
Issues: Miller, a Jewish Republican and former Trump White House aide, has been an outspoken supporter of Israel and a critic of antisemitism on the left. But his reelection campaign has been overshadowed by allegations of domestic violence and abuse made by his ex-wife, Emily Moreno, the daughter of Republican Sen. Bernie Moreno. Last year, a local doctor was arrested after threatening to kill Miller. Poindexter, a union ironworker endorsed by J Street and the Jewish Democratic Council of America, largely avoided discussing Israel in the campaign.
The Jewish vote: The Cleveland area is home to one of Ohio’s largest Jewish communities, though the Jewish share of the 7th District is estimated at 2%.
Virginia 2: Rep. Jen Kiggans (R) vs. former Rep. Elaine Luria (D)
Issues: Luria, a Jewish Navy veteran, is challenging the Republican incumbent in a closely watched rematch after losing the seat in 2022. In her farewell speech on the House floor, Luria accused some of her colleagues of engaging in antisemitic tropes. Democratic Majority for Israel invested $1 million in a digital ad campaign supporting her political return. Both candidates have military backgrounds, making national security and foreign policy central to the contest.
The Jewish vote: The district’s 8,400 Jewish residents make up 1% of the population.
– Governors –
Ohio: Amy Acton (D) vs. Vivek Ramaswamy (R)
Issues: Ramaswamy, an American First candidate, campaigned twice at a church whose pastor called modern Judaism “fake.” Acton, who is Jewish, faced antisemitic attacks while serving as Ohio’s health director during the COVID-19 pandemic. Ramaswamy boasted during the campaign that he was the first Republican, during the 2024 presidential primary, to propose sunsetting the $38 billion aid for Israel. If Acton wins, she would be Ohio’s first Jewish governor, while Ramaswamy would be the state’s first Hindu governor.
The Jewish vote: Ohio is home to 180,000 Jews, 1.5% of the state’s population. Acton has a four-point lead over Ramaswamy.
New York: Kathy Hochul (D) vs. Bruce Blakeman (R)
Issues: Blakeman, the Jewish Nassau County executive, has made support for Israel and opposition to antisemitism on the left central themes of his campaign against Hochul. But Blakeman has struggled to match the support former Republican gubernatorial candidate Lee Zeldin received from Jewish voters and Hasidic voting blocs four years ago. Hochul has maintained strong ties with Jewish leaders even while working closely with New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani. She remained a strong supporter of Israel despite growing criticism of the country within her party. A recent Netanyahu critic, Hochul was the first foreign elected official to visit Israel shortly after Oct. 7 and criticized the pro-Palestinian protests on campus. Her most recent state budget included a measure establishing a buffer zone around houses of worship to prevent disruptive protests from blocking access.
The Jewish vote: The state’s 1.8 million Jews have historically played an outsized role in elections, exceeding their 9% share of the population. Organized Hasidic voting blocs are sought after by both parties. This year, most groups endorsed Hochul, in part because of her decisions to pause the implementation of state regulations on secular education in yeshivas and to join the federal tax-credit program created under Trump that would help families pay for private school tuition.
– Other races –
LA Mayor
The competitive race for mayor of Los Angeles features the incumbent, Karen Bass, against Nithya Raman, a democratic socialist, who has threaded the needle on Israel, putting her at odds with the national Democratic Socialists of America, which requires candidates to take an anti-Zionist stance. Bass has rejected the use of the term “genocide” and opposes the movement to boycott Israel. She has also faced criticism from parts of the Jewish community for what some considered an inadequate response to the Pacific Palisades wildfires and for failing to establish protest-free buffer zones outside synagogues.
Colorado Governor
Phil Weiser, the state’s Jewish attorney general, is hoping to succeed Jared Polis, the Jewish governor who is term-limited. Victor Marx, the Republican nominee, has faced antisemitism allegations for depicting Weiser with red horns in an attack ad.
2028 watch
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker are both favored to win reelection. Both Jewish politicians have been floated as possible 2028 presidential candidates so how well they perform, and how strong their coattails are, may influence their future prospects.
Texas railroad commissioner
Jewish state Rep. Jon Rosenthal accused his Republican opponent, Bo French, of sending an antisemitic fundraising email in July. French has focused his campaign on culture war issues, despite the office’s limited role: regulating the state’s gas and oil industries.
Michigan Board of Regents
Lena Epstein, who is Jewish, is seeking a seat on one of the two open seats for the Michigan board of regents in an election seen as an Israel litmus test for Democrats. The Democratic nominee, Amir Makled, has faced scrutiny over past social media posts viewed as pro-Hezbollah and antisemitic.
The post The Jewish midterms: Races to watch on Election Day appeared first on The Forward.
