Kol Yisrael Areivim Zeh La’Zeh, goes the aphorism: All Jews are responsible for one another.

Well, now we’re about to find out if it’s true.

Even as American Jews celebrate the long-yearned-for release of Israeli hostages, some in our community are being threatened by the Trump
administration, which has promised to investigate and prosecute nine left-leaning organizations that, it says, have funded or encouraged protests that led to violence. Some are household names: George Soros’s Open Society Foundation, ActBlue, Indivisible. Others are lesser known, like the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights.

Two are Jewish: IfNotNow and Jewish Voice for Peace.

Per Reuters, the Trump administration is considering “IRS investigations to strip them of tax-exempt status; criminal probes by the Justice Department and FBI; surveillance by federal law enforcement agencies; the use of RICO statutes typically used for organized crime and financial investigations under anti-terror laws to identify donors and funders, according to people familiar with investigations and public statements by officials.”

Will the Jewish community rally to the defense of two relatively small Jewish-led organizations? I wonder.

To be sure, neither IfNotNow nor JVP has endeared itself to the majority of American Jews. Both have been extremely critical (to put it mildly) of Israel — not just the war in Gaza or the occupation in the West Bank but, often, of the Jewish state itself. Most JVPniks are anti-Zionist. Some of their leaders can be loud, obnoxious and arrogant. I have been verbally pilloried by their members many times, even as I have defended them in these pages.

But none of that should matter. These are Jewish-led political organizations doing political activism, and the apparatus of the state is being utilized to punish and immiserate them. (It’s notable that non-Jewish pro-Palestine groups, like Students for Justice in Palestine, were not named in the Trump administration’s list.) Whether you want to use the ‘F’ word or not, this is the hallmark of authoritarian regimes. We’re not talking about some speaker being deplatformed at a college event. We’re talking about innocent people being investigated, thrown into jail, and even, as we have seen, deported.

Moreover, government actions are just the tip of the spear when it comes to reactionary populist violence. Unofficial harassment can be even worse, and it is already happening. Academics on Turning Point USA’s “Watchlist” have been doxxed and harassed. Some have fled their homes as a result. One, at Rutgers, just fled the country out of fear for his family members.

I know what this feels like. During the 2016 election, I was one of many Jews targeted online by anonymous right-wing trolls (we now suspect they were fake accounts being utilized by Russian operatives seeking to sow discord – a wildly successful strategy). The harassment I received was less than others like Bethany Frankel and Jonathan Weisman received. But it was enough to cause me to change my life. I no longer donate to political campaigns, because doing so puts my home address in the public record. I pay DeleteMe hundreds of dollars every month to scrub my information from online sources. I don’t post any pictures of my child.

This is what it is to be a liberal commentator or activist in Trump’s America — again, not just cancellation (which I have also experienced from the Right) but harassment, vandalism and worse.

Now imagine being a radical one.

For years, organizations like Canary Mission and Turning Point USA have been posting the names and pictures of people they deem to be anti-Israel or anti-America. There’s no due process in these campaigns, no way to get one’s listing taken down. (Ironically, while White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said “We will continue to get to the bottom of who is funding these organizations,” we still don’t know who is funding Canary Mission.)

And once you’re listed, the torrent of hate begins.

And now, that torrent is set to be accompanied by sham indictments, expensive tax proceedings, and intrusive financial investigations. The Open Society Foundation can afford to defend itself from these actions, but any one of them can bankrupt a random JVP activist.

Now, has the Far Left’s incendiary rhetoric encouraged criminal actions like the vandalism of the home of Brooklyn Museum director Anne Pasternak? Undoubtedly. But does that justify the weaponization of the DOJ, IRS, and FBI against political dissidents? No, it doesn’t.

Jewish organizations, including those who have condemned JVP and IfNotNow, should speak out against Trump/Miller’s anti-democratic persecution of liberal organizations. (It’s not only radicals of course: ActBlue, which helps fundraise for Democrats, is hardly a radical antifa operation.) It doesn’t matter that Miller is Jewish or that JVP is anti-Israel. It matters that Jews are being disproportionately targeted by a radically anti-American crusade that would’ve made Joe McCarthy blush.

Moreover, given the extremely broad and fact-free ways in which these “enemies of the state” have been described, there are no bright lines dividing JVP from progressive organizations like T’ruah, Bend the Arc, and others. One needn’t be Pastor Niemoller to recognize that targets can easily be placed on many of our backs.

Indeed, the Jewish billionaires who have funded Trump should be wary of the monster they have created. Remember, at this moment, the MAGA movement is splintering over Israel. The majority still stand with Trump, who is deservedly riding the wave of his greatest foreign policy accomplishment. But a large minority, including Marjorie Taylor-Greene, Megyn Kelly, Tucker Carlso and Candace Owens, are increasingly taking strong anti-Israel positions, including conspiracy theories that nefarious Israeli agents assassinated Charlie Kirk. Many of those are explicitly antisemitic.

Many Jewish institutions and leaders are standing by while the foundations of our democracy are being battered — as American citizens are pulled out of their homes and arrested by ICE, as media companies bend to the state’s ideology in order to stay in business, and now, as political foes of the regime are investigated and indicted. Where do we think this will lead? And, looking at the sweep of Jewish history, how could we possibly think this will end well for our community?

The post The Trump administration is targeting Jewish organizations — what are we prepared to do? appeared first on The Forward.

(JTA) — Hours after freeing 20 living hostages to a jubilant Israel, Hamas released the remains of four deceased hostages — far fewer than the 28 it is holding and obligated under the terms of the ceasefire to release.

The group had already indicated that it was not prepared to release all of the deceased hostages’ remains immediately, following two years of war in Gaza, and Israel and negotiators had accepted that it could take some time. Still, the small number of bodies released on Monday represented a disappointment for many who had hoped that Monday would bring closure to those who have spent years lobbying for the hostages’ release.

Hamas said the hostages released on Monday were Guy Illouz, Bipin Joshi, Daniel Perez and Yossi Sharabi. Subsequent DNA testing confirmed that Illouz and Joshi were in the group; the identities of the other two remains were not immediately confirmed at their families’ instruction.

• Illouz, 26, was injured during the attack on the Nova music festival. A returned hostage said he had been killed.
• Joshi, 23, was a Nepalese agriculture student who had arrived in Israel just weeks before Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack. He had not previously been confirmed dead, though Israel had expressed “grave concern” about his life. His family had joined lobbying efforts on behalf of the hostages and last week released a video produced by Hamas that showed him alive in Gaza at least a month after he was taken hostage.
• Perez, 22, was a soldier who responded to the Hamas attack. The IDF announced in March 2024 that he had been killed on Oct. 7, along with two other soldiers in his tank. A fourth soldier in the tank, Matan Angrest, was released alive on Monday and paid tribute to Perez in his first message to Israelis.
• Sharabi, 53, was abducted from Kibbutz Beeri. He was likely killed in an IDF airstrike, the IDF said in February 2024. His brother Eli, whose wife and daughters were killed on Oct. 7, was released during the first phase of the current ceasefire and has become a prominent voice among freed hostages.

Israel reportedly believes that Hamas is in possession of at least some additional hostages’ remains but chose not to release them. It is pressing for their swift release, but especially with U.S. President Donald Trump emphasizing that he views the war as permanently over, has no way to apply pressure on Hamas.

The post Hamas releases remains of just 4 deceased hostages, leaving 24 still unaccounted for appeared first on The Forward.

Teachers, parents and schools have long debated what students should learn about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But lesson plans have typically been discussed in PTA gatherings, faculty meetings, and curriculum committees — not determined by legislation.

That’s changing, as new laws around the country seek to regulate how narratives about the conflict are taught. The measures are testing the boundaries of classroom free speech, teeing up legal battles between teachers who want to express pro-Palestinian viewpoints in the classroom and those who see such lessons as unprofessional or antisemitic.

The latest flashpoint is in California, where a new “antisemitism prevention” bill was signed into law this month, partly in response to controversy created by the state’s ethnic studies curriculum, which Gov. Gavin Newsom made a graduation requirement in 2021.

A tale of two curriculums

“Is Israel a settler colonial state?” and “If so, what does that mean for us in regard to who to support?”

Those were questions a San Jose, Calif., teacher posed to students in January 2025, along with a YouTube video titled “Zionism is not the same as Judaism,” featuring a spokesperson from the anti-Zionist group Neturei Karta.

In April, the California Department of Education found that the lesson “discriminated against Jewish students” and required the school district to provide teacher training on presenting controversial topics in a balanced, non-discriminatory way.

Such disputes have become prevalent in California in the four years since the adoption of the state’s ethnic studies curriculum.

Many Jewish groups support a curriculum that includes lessons on antisemitism and Jewish identity, alongside units on Black, Latino, Native American, and Asian American and Pacific Islander communities.

But an alternative curriculum, created by the “Liberated Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum Consortium,” has drawn sharp criticism for portraying Israel as a colonial state and omitting discussion of antisemitism while covering other forms of bigotry. For instance, it defines the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement as a “global social movement that currently aims to establish freedom for Palestinians living under apartheid conditions.”

“If I look at the materials that they’re putting forward, it doesn’t provide any balance,” said Larry Shoham, a Jewish English and business teacher at Hamilton High School in Los Angeles. “And I’m just afraid that when students are exposed to this curriculum, we’re planting seeds of prejudice and hatred in the next generation.”

Several Jewish groups have sought to keep the “liberated” curriculum out of public schools. But achieving that goal through legal avenues has yielded mixed results.

A coalition of Jewish groups had success in Santa Ana, Calif., where in February the school district settled a lawsuit that alleged ethnic studies courses were biased against Jews. As part of the discovery process, the plaintiffs uncovered several antisemitic messages from the school board, including a text message from a committee member suggesting that “we may need to use Passover to get all new courses approved,” since Jews would not be present. As part of the settlement, the district agreed to terminate their “liberated” ethnic studies classes and redesign the courses with public input.

But in Los Angeles, a federal judge issued a rebuke of parents who sought to use the law to change curriculum. A group under the name “Concerned Jewish Parents and Teachers of Los Angeles” sued the Liberated Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum Consortium, arguing that they had a religious belief in Zionism, and the “liberated” ethnic studies curriculum made it unsafe to express Zionist beliefs.

The parents, the judge wrote in his decision, had the right to petition for curricular changes. But the curriculum, even if offensive to some, was not discriminatory or illegal.

“It is far from clear that learning about Israel and Palestine or encountering teaching materials with which one disagrees constitutes an injury,” Judge Fernando Olguin wrote.

Bills aimed at restricting the “liberated” ethnic studies curriculum have also stalled. Last spring, the Jewish Public Affairs Committee of California championed a bill that would have required school districts to submit ethnic studies curricula to the California Department of Education for review, ensuring “content is historically accurate, free from antisemitic bias, and aligned with educational best practices,” JPAC wrote on its website.

But facing opposition from some civil liberties groups, the bill never made it into committee. JPAC shifted its focus to a broader measure creating a new statewide office to combat antisemitism in public schools, JPAC executive director David Bocarsly said in an interview.

That bill, with the requirement that curricula be “factually accurate” and “consistent with accepted standards of professional responsibility, rather than advocacy, personal opinion, bias, or partisanship,” just passed.

The new law’s impact

The law establishes a state Office of Civil Rights and an antisemitism prevention coordinator, who will track complaints, issue guidance, and coordinate training about antisemitism.

As for curriculum, supporters say the law simply reinforces longstanding norms for teachers: that lessons should be grounded in fact and free of political bias — requirements which don’t bar thoughtful discussions about Israelis and Palestinians.

“There’s nothing in this bill or existing law that prevents teachers from bringing up international conflicts or controversial issues, and to be able to provide opportunities for students to engage with it with critical thought,” Bocarsly said.

Critics, however, see the law’s vague language as a deliberate attempt to stifle speech and make educators think twice before broaching the subject at all.

“Are you allowed to talk about the occupation of the West Bank?” said Jenin Younes, national legal director at the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. “Are you allowed to talk about the Nakba from the Palestinians perspective in 1948? That’s not clear.”

Younes said she’s also troubled by a provision that allows anyone — not just students or parents — to file a complaint about antisemitism. That, she said, “opens up the door to people from outside who want to harass teachers.”

Some educators share those concerns. Mara Harvey, a Jewish social studies teacher at Discovery High School in Sacramento, wrote an op-ed calling California’s law “the wrong response to a real problem” and part of a broader push to bring “right-wing, Trump-style censorship to California schools.”

“Consider what it could mean in a real classroom: A student brings in an article from Haaretz (one of Israel’s most respected newspapers) criticizing government policies. Could a discussion on this be deemed antisemitic?” Harvey wrote. “Yes, it could.”

Combatting antisemitism or ‘attacking teachers’?

Similar debates about curriculum have played out in schools across the country. In Plano, Texas, a high school classroom used a Jeopardy-style game with the prompt, “Group who wants to gain back the country they lost to Israel.” The correct answer: “Who are the Palestinians?”

In August, Texas Attorney general Ken Paxton launched an investigation into Plano Independent School District, writing in a letter that “accounts have circulated that teachers are presenting biased materials and insisting that students take a pro-Palestinian view.”

“Any teacher or administrator that has facilitated or supported radical anti-Israel rhetoric in our schools should be fired immediately,” Paxton wrote on X.

In a statement, the school district said the claims of antisemitism were false and amounted to “political theater.”

Other states are also grappling with how best to address alleged bias in schools.

In Kansas, a law passed in May prohibits “incorporating or allowing funding of antisemitic curriculum.”

Arizona considered an even tougher approach. Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoed a bill that would have let parents sue educators for teaching antisemitism — meaning teachers would have been personally liable for lawyer fees and financial damages.

“Unfortunately, this bill is not about antisemitism; it’s about attacking our teachers,” Hobbs wrote in a letter explaining her veto.

In other cases, the curriculum has simply been removed. In Massachusetts, the state teachers association’s “curriculum resources” for lessons on “Israel and Occupied Palestine” included an image of a Star of David made of dollar bills. The curriculum resources were taken down after intense backlash.

Incidents like that are what Rebecca Schgallis, senior education strategist at the CAMERA Education Institute — which describes itself as “fighting antisemitism and anti-Israel bias in education” — cites in arguing for closer review of classroom materials nationwide.

She pointed to resources such as “Teaching While Muslim,” a group of New Jersey Muslim educators who say they are “working to actively include social justice, anti-racist & anti-Islamophobic curricula and educators in our schools.” Content on the group’s website includes a worksheet instructing students to color the Palestinian flag over the entire map of Israel — though it’s unclear whether such a lesson has ever actually been taught in public school classrooms.

Because curriculum decisions are made locally, Schgallis said, it’s difficult to track how widespread such lessons are. Often, she added, the problem comes not from official materials but from individual teachers going “rogue.”

“I think teachers have an obligation to teach curriculum and not to insert their personal viewpoints,” Schgallis said. “Everyone has the right to free speech outside of the classroom, but when teachers are teaching, they have a job to do.”

The post Why there are new laws shaping how schools teach about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict appeared first on The Forward.