Toolkit: Demand “NO IHRA”

Amicus Brief: “27 Jewish Scholars of Jewish Studies” (6/9/25)

Changes the character of Jewish identity for political ends
“For millennia, Jewish communities around the world have promoted traditions of robust debate and intellectual engagement. Unfortunately, political events in recent years have seen the rise of social, political, and religious forces that wish to curb those freedoms by requiring loyalty and adherence to the Israeli government or to a narrow vision of what it means to be Jewish— one that conditions Jewish identity and belonging within Jewish communities on one’s support for (or at the very least, one’s willingness to remain silent about) the State of Israel, its reigning political ideologies, and its treatment of the Palestinian people.”

Uses government and universities to exert control over Jewish identity
“What makes today’s trend so pernicious is that this contestation is occurring not only within Jewish community institutions and advocacy organizations, or within Israeli society itself—but also within government institutions and universities, which increasingly attempt to police the boundaries of Jewish identity, belief, and belonging. That is not only deeply troubling—it is also unlawful.”

Violates Title VI by imposing stereotypes (akin to “femininity requirements” for pink-collar jobs)
Adopting IHRA policy “punishes Jewish students, faculty, and others for failing to adhere to a stereotype of what constitutes a ‘proper’ or ‘correct’ set of Jewish beliefs. Antidiscrimination law prohibits reliance on such unlawful stereotypes.”

Harmfully suggests that Jewish or Israeli students’ safety requires violations of others’ rights
IHRA policy “states or implies that viewpoint-based speech-restricting activities are required to protect Jewish or Israeli students.”

Violates the academic freedom of Jewish Studies scholars et al.
Universities must protect Jewish Studies scholars’ “ability to conduct their scholarship, design their curricula, engage in campus discussions and debate, and advocate for their viewpoints without facing adverse action from their universities or the government for failing to conform to a stereotype of what it means to be Jewish, or for espousing viewpoints that ought to be protected as extra-mural speech within academic freedom doctrine.”

Erases the long history of Jewish antizionist community on campus
(Harvard example): “Over the years, a vocal contingent of Jewish students at Harvard has spoken out to question the state of Israel’s policies and practices, as well as different conceptions of Zionism. Vibrant engagement with these issues within the Jewish community at Harvard continues to this day. For example, Harvard Law School recognizes a student organization named Tzedek (the Hebrew word for “justice”), which describes itself as ‘a progressive Jewish organization’ that is ‘a home on campus for a liberatory approach to Judaism, which guides us toward social justice. This space is home for anti-Zionist, non-Zionist, and Zionist-questioning Jewish students looking for a supportive community to explore current events and find support and solidarity.’ Harvard College recognizes the Harvard Forward-Thinking Jewish Union, which aims ‘to create a space for students to engage in discussions questioning Zionism and Jewish life in campus,’ and was formed after one student claimed that ‘he felt he was ‘not allowed’ to ‘question our support for the state of Israel and question Zionism’ in Hillel, where he attends religious services.’ Students from these groups often report marginalization by Harvard. Recently, for example, administrators reportedly attempted to stop a Passover seder organized by anti-Zionist Jewish students.”

Misrepresents academic exploration and complex study as ‘antisemitism‘
(Atalia Omer op-ed): “For several years, I taught in the Religion, Conflict, and Peace Initiative (RCPI) at Harvard Divinity School. Our program approached peacebuilding through deep engagement with histories of structural violence and power, with Palestine/Israel as our central case study. Our students read widely, traveled to the region, and met with a range of voices – including Jewish Israeli veterans from Breaking the Silence, Palestinian artists resisting cultural erasure, and Mizrahi and Ethiopian Jewish activists challenging racism within Israeli society.  It was, by design, intellectually and politically challenging. It exposed students to the complexity of the region and the diverse, often conflicting, ways Jews and Palestinians narrate their pasts and imagine their futures. But according to the authors of Harvard’s report, this was not legitimate scholarship nor responsible pedagogy; it was, essentially, simply antisemitic ideological indoctrination.”

Encourages campus administrators to violate Title VI antisemitism protections
“Jewish scholars and students are already facing a crisis of indifference or differential treatment from university administrators when they do not conform with a preconceived and politicized notion of what it means to be Jewish—namely, pro-Israel or Zionist. Often, their views are dismissed as token, marginal, or inconsequential, even though there is reason to think that is not the case. For example, a poll conducted in May 2024 by the right-wing think tank, the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs, found that nearly a third of surveyed Jewish Americans agreed with the statement that Israel is committing a genocide in Gaza, and over half agreed with President Biden’s decision to withhold arms shipments to Israel, with younger respondents more likely to hold these views.”

Amicus brief: Jewish Voice for Peace (6/9/25)

Much of U.S. Jewry is antizionist, and opposes or is uncommitted to a Jewish state
“JVP [an anti-Zionist  U.S. Jewish organization] is made up of 720,000 members and supporters with chapters in nearly every state, JVP represents an important, sizeable and vocal minority Jewish viewpoint. Studies show a fifth to a third of American Jews share JVP’s viewpoint, and 45% of Jewish students believe Israel should not be a Jewish state or are undecided on the issue.”

Unconstitutionally restricts Jews’ practice of religion
>>“Discriminating against one type of Jew in favor of another, here Zionist Jews over antizionist Jews, restricts Jews from practicing their religious beliefs by adopting a narrow view of what it means to be Jewish.”
>>“Israeli law professors Itamar Mann and Lihi Yona recently analyzed this issue, arguing that while ‘antisemitism is often weaponized against Palestinians and their liberation struggle,’ there is ‘an additional layer of harm, imposed upon U.S. Jews,’ namely, that by ‘[c]onstructing Jewish identity along rigid and fixed lines, the contemporary legal definition of antisemitism imposes upon Jews a straitjacket of Zionism.’

Unconstitutionally dictates Jewish religious belief
IHRA’s claim that “actions opposing Zionism or criticizing Israel [are antisemitic] would mean that Zionism and supporting Israel are required parts of the Jewish faith…  would be redefining the Jewish faith. [It] would force Jews to adopt a political ideology—Zionism—as part of their religious beliefs, and enshrine “do not criticize the nation-state of Israel” as a foundational religious belief in Judaism.”

Unconstitutionally dictates that Jews must have certain political beliefs
IHRA dictates “who is and is not a Jew, [and]  what Jews are required to believe.”

Discriminates against Jews whose antizionism is central to their Judaism and Jewish identity
“[As Harvard’s former long-time] Hillel director argues… Jews must ‘be boldly critical of Israel—not despite being Jewish, but because [they] are.’”

Factually misrepresents Jewish history for nationalist political purposes
IHRA claims “ignore that Judaism is a millennia old religion by claiming that this ancient religion requires complete and uncompromising loyalty to Israel, a nation-state just 77 years old.”

Ignores Jewish student & faculty opposition to IHRA campaigns themselves
(Harvard examples): “ignores Jewish students and faculty at Harvard who view the IHRA definition as ‘intellectually vacuous’ that ‘muddles what speech is considered immoral.’ It ‘punish[es] reasonable and valid criticism of Israel, including that which Jewish students initiate’ as antisemitic.”

Ignores Zionist campus organizations antagonism toward campus Jewish communities
“It ignores Jewish Harvard faculty who oppose Harvard Hillel’s ‘longstanding hostility to dissent despite [the Jewish] community’s persistent disagreements on Israel, Palestine, [and] Zionism.’… .” It ignores the former Hillel Director of 18 years when he states ‘it is not antisemitic to demand justice for all Palestinians living in their ancestral lands.’ It even ignores opposition to adopting the IHRA as policy from Kenneth Stern, the lead drafter of the IHRA itself. This ‘cynical weaponization of antisemitism by powerful forces’ is intimidation that ‘ultimately silence[s] legitimate criticism of Israel and of American policy on Israel.’”

Misappropriates civil rights protections for marginalized groups, misapplies them to a nation-state
IHRA dictates “that criticism of a political ideology and nation-state is as heinous as hatred towards a religious group.”

Strips Jews of their Jewish identity and legal protections
IHRA’s efforts to mandate particular Jewish religious and political beliefs “render antizionist Jews as not being Jews at all, and dilutes the protected classes that decades of precedent and lawmaking have defined.”

Attempts to undo Jewish religious groups’ work to construct international laws against genocide, apartheid, and human rights violations
“Religious organizations played a key role in launching and sustaining the human rights movement including paving the way for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)… It is the Jewish community’s suffering and persecution in the Nazi Holocaust that led to the enactment of the Genocide Convention in 1948… The Genocide Convention prohibits targeting specific groups for their national, ethnic, racial or religious affiliation, deliberately inflicting living conditions to destroy this group, and forcibly transferring this group, as well as conspiring to commit and complicity in these acts. The Genocide Convention built the foundation of numerous international human rights and humanitarian laws and principles celebrated today, such as the Fourth Geneva Conventions mandating occupying powers protect civilians and ensure their care and survival, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), and the Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid.”

IHRA policy has already materially harmed Jews, Palestinians, scholars, academic freedom, and the university
(Harvard examples): “In the past six months alone, Harvard has cancelled an antizionist Jewish Passover Seder, suspended their Religion, Conflict, and Peace Program and demoted the directors, let go of the heads of the Center for Middle East Studies, suspended their research partnership with Birzeit University in the West Bank, fired a librarian for taking down an Israeli hostage poster, and cancelled a medical school panel featuring patients from Gaza.”