Uncategorized
As Fall Semester Ends, the March of Antisemitism Continues on Campus
A Palestinian flag flies at the University of Maryland, College Park. Photo: Students for Justice in Palestine/Instagram
Heading into the new year, the campus situation continues to be a complex one for Jewish students and faculty. Most universities continue to reject the compacts offered by the Trump administration, which would restore Federal funding in exchange for changes in DEI and other policies. But other institutions have reached settlements with the government, notably Cornell University, which will pay $30 million and invest an additional $30 million for agricultural research. The university will also provide the government with data regarding admissions, conduct campus surveys, and comply with Federal law. The settlement was strongly opposed by Cornell faculty.
Elsewhere, Columbia University’s Advisory Committee on Socially Responsible Investing rejected a series of Israel divestment proposals. The committee determined that the proposals did not meet the standard of broad consensus within the university community.
Despite the Gaza ceasefire, Israeli academics report intensifying boycotts particularly among European faculty and institutions. At least 1,000 incidents have been recorded with approximately 25% occurring since the summer of 2025. Spain has halted academic collaborations almost completely, with Belgium and the Netherlands following behind. Israelis also report a quiet boycott by American colleagues. Warnings regarding the erosion of Israel’s economic and strategic positions as a result of academic boycotts continue to be sounded.
Student associations and governments continue to be the focal point of anti-Israel and antisemitism on campuses.
In a reflection of elite British student politics, after a debate, the Oxford Union overwhelmingly voted in favor of a resolution that Israel was a “greater threat to regional stability” than Iran. Pro-Hamas students attending the debate displayed red hands, a reference to the lynching and mutilation of Israeli soldiers.
Despite the continuing failure of student divestment measures to prompt university action, Harvard’s undergraduate assembly voted on a poll regarding divestment. Reporting was especially convoluted, but the poll apparently showed that 63% of respondents (1,055 of over 7,000) want Harvard to divest from Israel; the precise results were kept secret.
The student government at the University of Maryland unanimously voted to bar Israeli soldiers from speaking on campus. The vote came after an event sponsored by Students Supporting Israel (SSI) was protested by pro-Hamas students. The student government also voted to demand an apology from the university after two student protestors were detained. An event sponsored by SSI at Tulane University was forced off campus by threats of violence, while another at Louisiana State University was met with a violent protest.
Another BDS resolution was narrowly approved by the University of Michigan student assembly, which was then vetoed by the assembly president. The resolution calls on the university to investigate and divest from its financial ties to the Israeli government. The authors of the resolution later accused opponents of doxxing them.
CAIR has been central to both continuing campus pro-Hamas unrest and resulting lawfare. New reports have shown that CAIR provided financial support to pro-Hamas students who had been suspended by their universities for violence and harassment during protests.
In an example of the extremism that characterizes unionized students and potentially the next generation of faculty, the Cornell graduate student union approved a BDS resolution, which included support for terrorism. The resolution stated, “Standing with the strength of Palestinians resisting a genocide, and their unequivocal human right to resist oppression by any means necessary, workers around the world are building power through the belief that we free Palestine, and Palestine frees us.”
The resolution went on to claim that 680,000 Gazans had been killed, ten times the number that Hamas claims, and stated that, “The perpetuation of racist and anti-Muslim rhetoric is part of a broader doctrine of state-sponsored white supremacy that justifies Israel’s atrocities against Palestinians.”
Finally, at Catholic University, the student government debated, “A Resolution to Advocate For A Ban on Clubs in Support of a Nation(s) Commissioning a Genocide.” The resolution targeted the school’s SSI chapter, charging it was supporting “a Nation or organization that is actively pursuing inexcusable evil, such as genocide or terrorism, acts in a way that is contrary to the faith of the Catholic Church.”
In the K-12 sphere, the direct fealty of teachers unions to pro-Hamas causes continues to cause concern. In one case, the Chicago Teachers Union hosted the National Alliance Against Racist & Political Repression annual conference and featured speakers who praised Hamas and “armed resistance,” and called for the downfall of the US. A representative of the union also spoke at the American Muslims for Palestine conference.
Examples continue to multiply regarding individual teachers who promote anti-Israel narratives in classrooms, for example in an Oakland, CA, high school where Palestinian flags were displayed along side posters which decried “genocide” and which praised Cuba.
The pervasiveness of anti-Israel and antisemitic bias in public schools was also documented by a report from the Massachusetts Special Commission on Combating Antisemitism.Hearings and investigations noted that bias was systemic through all of K-12 education including educational materials, teachers, and classroom behavior. Jewish students, teachers, and staff also reported growing harassment and ostracization, with many opting to hide their identity.
Examples of direct harassment and abuse of Jewish students continue to accumulate. In one recent case from Seattle, a Jewish family has sued the public school system alleging that their daughter was exposed to antisemitic abuse from fellow students to the point of being locked in a classroom by a teacher, in order to shelter her from an angry mob.
Arab and Muslim groups have reacted strongly to efforts that combat antisemitism and anti-Israel bias in public schools. In one case, CAIR and other groups blocked the appearance of Luai Ahmed, a gay, pro-Israel influencer, at Bay Area high schools, which accused him of “pinkwashing.”
Responses to antisemitic bias also came under fire in California, where the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee has sued over a new law establishing an Office of Civil Rights and an antisemitism monitor. The group claimed that combating antisemitism undermined the First Amendment rights of children and “hands classrooms to a foreign agenda.” The claim is yet another that essentially declares that antisemitism is protected speech. Members of the California Faculty Association, including ethnic studies faculty who develop anti-Israel and anti-Western curriculum, have also called the bill “racist.”
In response to growing reports on the antisemitism crisis in K-12 education, the House Education and Workforce Committee has launched an investigation of the Berkeley Unified School District in California, Fairfax County Public Schools in Virginia, and the School District of Philadelphia. In each case, there are numerous documented incidents of harassment and intimidation led by staff, teachers, and students, as well as the use of biased educational materials. These include student walkouts, staff endorsements of violence, partnerships with CAIR, a reenactment of October 7, and harassment of Jewish students.
The author is a contributor to SPME, where a completely different version of this article appeared.
Uncategorized
6 Jewish takeaways from the midterm elections
(JTA) — The sheer size and geographic scope of the Republican wipeout Tuesday makes it hard to read anything definitive into the results beyond a nationwide repudiation of President Donald Trump (and his candidate selections). But whether or not any other factors were at play in the GOP bloodbath, the fallout will have a range of reverberations. Here are 6 takeaways that point to what comes next.
1. A significantly weakened Donald Trump doesn’t bode well for Netanyahu
For Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump has been a longshot bet that keeps on paying off. It’s hard to overstate how significant Trump’s improbable wins in 2016 and 2024 were in bolstering Netanyahu’s domestic standing and giving him space to advance his regional agenda. Trump also served as a security blanket, leaving Netanyahu and his allies with a sense for many years that they need not worry too much about skyrocketing Democratic and international anger with Israel.
In fact, there was even a hope in Bibi world that The Donald’s support could save Netanyahu from political defeat at home (and, to be fair, his 11th-hour endorsement may have). Whether Netanyahu holds on or chief rival Gadi Eisenkot succeeds in replacing him, Israel is entering uncharted territory. There is little chance that the combination of a weakened Trump and an emboldened Democratic Congress produces similar levels of support for aggressive action against Iran and its proxies, and other policies that a wide spectrum of Israelis see as crucial to their security.
2. Jeffries and Schumer have a massive headache coming their way
With Tuesday night’s Democratic wave, Hakeem Jeffries is on track to become Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives and Chuck Schumer will likely get a second shot as U.S. Senate Majority Leader. These New Yorkers have longstanding ties to the pro-Israel community and are among their party’s strongest Israel supporters – putting them at odds with the growing number of congressional Democrats who want their party to take a much harder line against Israel. It won’t be long before members in each caucus are demanding concrete action, including meaningful limits on U.S. military sales.
Both Democratic leaders have ratcheted up their criticism of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his government in the wake of its war on Hamas in Gaza, but they have ultimately voted against various legislative attempts to punish Israel. This past April, Schumer was one of only seven Senate Democrats to vote against a pair of resolutions that together would have blocked the sale of D-9 bulldozers, widely used in military operations, and 1,000-pound bombs to Israel. In July, Jeffries voted against ending U.S. military aid to Israel, but the measure was supported by almost half of the Democratic caucus. As leaders of their respective chambers, Jeffries and Schumer will likely face immense pressure for more such votes and face much tougher scrutiny from the party base over continued support for Israel.
3. The impact of the anti-Israel vote was diluted
On the other hand, the massive Democratic victory dilutes the power of the anti-Israel lawmakers in Congress. Their numbers will grow, causing problems for party leaders trying to keep anti-Israel measures off the agenda. But they will remain a relatively small subset within a much larger Democratic majority that includes many moderates and Israel supporters.
Not only will anti-Israel members have less ability to hold Congress hostage, the overall issue of Israel loses some of its potency when the broader political winds indicate that all Democrats were boosted.
4. John Fetterman just lost his juice
Just as the sizable Democratic House majority makes Jeffries less dependent on anti-Israel lawmakers in his caucus, the next Senate Majority Leader won’t need to rely on Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman. For years, Fetterman has been driving fellow Democrats crazy with his cozying up to Republicans, with progressives especially upset over his die-hard support for Israel. Fetterman has even said that the one thing that could cause him to leave the Democratic Senate caucus would be his party turning decisively against Israel.
Had things broken differently, with Democrats grabbing a narrow 51-49 majority in the chamber, Fetterman’s influence would have been hypercharged. Now, not so much. The Democrats no longer need him to keep control of the chamber. So Schumer, should he regain the majority leader role, will have to worry much less about keeping the party’s top pro-Israel cheerleader happy. In 2028, he’ll be up for reelection and highly unlikely to survive the Democratic primary.
5. AIPAC has not found a formula for success
A few years back, the leading pro-Israel lobby decided the best way to counter the initial anti-Israel rumblings in Congress was to jump deep into the campaign fundraising business. Hundreds of millions of dollars later, the number of Israel critics in Congress – especially on the Democratic side of the aisle – has grown, with a fresh batch on the way. Moreover, in many races, anti-Israel candidates and AIPAC critics managed to turn the lobby’s backing into a liability.
Meanwhile, Trump’s seemingly impromptu announcement Tuesday that his administration would end aid to Israel after this year suggests that Republican backing for such support is dropping alongside Democrats’. And Tuesday’s results suggest AIPAC’s strong support for the U.S. and Israeli military strikes against Iran is out of step with the American public and many incoming lawmakers.
All of this indicates that AIPAC has yet to figure out how to manage the anti-Israel turn sweeping through American politics.
6. It was a great night for Jewish presidential hopefuls
U.S. Sen. Jon Ossoff says he isn’t running for president in 2028. But that won’t stop the speculation from skyrocketing after his impressive reelection in Georgia – Georgia?! – with nearly 60% of the vote. More importantly, he probably just grabbed frontrunner status in the race to become America’s first Jewish president. Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro also registered a similarly sized reelection victory in a state that Trump won just two years ago, but Ossoff – a fierce Trump antagonist and, increasingly, a critic of Israel’s military actions – cemented his rock star status among Democrats this cycle and has demonstrated an ability to bridge the gap between younger progressives and more traditional liberals.
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker also cruised to reelection. Meanwhile in Michigan, moderate Elissa Slotkin – another senator and likely presidential hopeful (of course, which senator isn’t a presidential hopeful?) – may have at least propped open the door to some progressive support by campaigning hard for Abdul El-Sayed. All four have been highly critical of Netanyahu, with both Ossoff and Slotkin joining most of their fellow Democratic senators in voting in April for a curb on various weapons sales. Both senators have declined to label Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide.
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post 6 Jewish takeaways from the midterm elections appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
El-Sayed declares victory in Michigan Senate race that left many Jews uneasy
(JTA) — DETROIT – Democrat Abdul El-Sayed has declared victory in the hotly contested race for Michigan’s open U.S. Senate seat, capping a campaign that has prompted deep anxieties among Jews in the state and beyond.
With 88% of the ballots counted at around 2:27 a.m. ET, The Associated Press called the race for El-Sayed, who had 52% of the vote compared with 46% for his Republican rival, former U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers.”
In his acceptance speech, El-Sayed thanked supporters whom he said had welcomed him into “your homes, your churches, your synagogues.”
He also referenced his ardently pro-Palestinian views, saying, “They try to call you hateful if you believe that Palestinian kids should get to grow up in the land of their forefathers without being martyred by our tax dollars… We don’t want our money to be sent to do apartheid or genocidal war.”
During his victory speech, chants of “Free Palestine” were heard throughout the crowd. Mahmoud Khalil, the Palestinian Columbia University activist who was detained by the Trump administration, was in attendance.
The race had been viewed as crucial to Democrats’ hopes of retaking the chamber. But for many of Michigan’s estimated 105,000 Jewish voters, the campaign was defined instead by El-Sayed’s tumultuous relationship to the community.
That animosity extended beyond the Democrat’s fierce criticism of Israel to encompass his statements about attacks targeting the state’s Jewish community and his early campaigning with streamer Hasan Piker, who has made several controversial comments about Jewish voters.
His uncompromising stances on Israel have also made him a target among pro-Israel groups, including AIPAC, which has spent heavily against him in both the primary and general election. AIPAC’s rare entry into a general election race was in support of Rogers.
One of El-Sayed’s positions on Israel — to end all U.S. military aid — was once thought a far-left pipe dream. But that has changed. On Election Day morning, Trump announced that, under his watch, nearly $4 billion in annual U.S. military aid to Israel would wind down by the end of the year. Trump said Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was in agreement with the need to end aid and deny Democratic critics a point of attack.
El-Sayed’s campaign has galvanized young voters and a range of other constituencies, and he pulled ahead in the polls in the race’s final stretch. But his questioning of Israel’s existence as a Jewish state and whether it or Iran posed a greater threat to the United States, as well as his prior associations with figures such as Hasan Piker, the streamer who has spread extreme rhetoric about American Jews, have sparked concern among Jewish Michiganders.
So, too, did comments the candidate made following the March terror attack on Temple Israel, a major synagogue in the state, in which El-Sayed appeared to link the attack to Israel’s war in Lebanon after reports that the attacker lost family in an Israeli strike. Hostile behavior from some of El-Sayed’s supporters toward pro-Israel Democrats, most prominently on display at the state party’s spring convention, has also alarmed Jews. El-Sayed has pledged to stand up to antisemitism.
Some Jews who had long considered themselves Democrats, including several local Jewish leaders, have cited such controversies in pledging to vote for Rogers. In some Michigan Jewish neighborhoods, yard signs proclaim that a vote for Rogers is a vote “against antisemitism.”
The post El-Sayed declares victory in Michigan Senate race that left many Jews uneasy appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Moskowitz wins Florida seat in race between two pro-Israel candidates
(JTA) — Democratic Rep. Jared Moskowitz beat Republican Scott Singer, the former mayor of Boca Raton, in a battle between two staunchly pro-Israel politicians in a redrawn district.
The redrawn district covers a stretch of Florida shoreline north of Miami and includes large Jewish communities in areas including Boca and Fort Lauderdale, and is seen as leaning slightly Democratic.
Moskowitz, who was endorsed by the lobbying group AIPAC, has touted himself as “the most pro-Israel Jewish Democrat in Congress.” Singer, meanwhile, was endorsed by President Donald Trump and the Republican Jewish Coalition.
Moskowitz has said there is an “ostracizing” associated with being staunchly pro-Israel in a Democratic Party that is increasingly including anti-Zionist voices. Singer seized on that sentiment, saying during a synagogue candidates’ forum that Moskowitz will be drowned out by the Democrats’ anti-Israel wing if he is reelected.
The candidates themselves have largely been aligned on the issue of Israel. Both have condemned accusations that Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. They each oppose any effort to condition or cut off U.S. military aid to Israel. Both supported Israel’s strikes on Iranian facilities in 2025, though Moskowitz has since called for the U.S. to end its war with Iran, whereas Singer said during a forum that the U.S. needs “to ensure victory here.”
Both candidates have also emphasized combating antisemitism in their campaigns, and say they would push to expand the Nonprofit Security Grant Program to increase funding for security at Jewish schools, synagogues and other institutions. They also are both in favor of codifying the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism into federal law; critics say the definition wrongly lumps in some criticism of Israel.
In a campaign ad targeting antisemitism, Moskowitz pulled from the story of his family, some of whom — including his great-grandparents — were killed in Auschwitz during the Holocaust.
“In every generation, they rise against us,” Moskowitz said in the ad.
The post Moskowitz wins Florida seat in race between two pro-Israel candidates appeared first on The Forward.
