The House Foreign Affairs Committee voted on a bipartisan basis on Wednesday to advance a bill designating the entire Muslim Brotherhood globally as a terrorist organization, weeks after the Trump administration took action to target certain branches of the group.

Every Republican on the committee, joined by Democratic Reps. Brad Sherman (D-CA), Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL), Greg Stanton (D-AZ), Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), Jim Costa (D-CA), George Latimer (D-NY) and Brad Schneider (D-IL), voted in favor of the bill, which was led by Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL) and Moskowitz.

The legislation is more expansive than the Trump administration’s executive order, which authorizes designating individual branches of the Muslim Brotherhood. The bill would mandate the administration conduct assessments of all Muslim Brotherhood branches to determine if they meet the standard for designation as terrorist groups, and ultimately designate the entire Muslim Brotherhood network based on those findings.

“This is more than just a political organization. It promotes extreme and destabilizing views which continue to inspire acts of terrorism across the globe, most notably Hamas in its horrific Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel,” Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL), the committee chairman, said. “For too long, the threat the Muslim Brotherhood poses to U.S. national security has been downplayed here in the United States and it’s well past time for a course correction.”

Rep. Greg Meeks (D-NY), the committee’s ranking member, argued against attempting to sanction the entire Muslim Brotherhood, arguing that it is a diffuse ideology, without any true central leadership or coordination.

He said that, while certain Muslim Brotherhood branches, such as Hamas, meet the criteria to be designated as terrorist groups, the authorities already exist to take action against them. And he warned the legislation “would complicate the U.S. engagement with political leaders and parties who have historic and non-violent ties to Brotherhood-affiliated movements, like in Morocco. It would alienate important regional partners in the Middle East, such as Qatar and Turkey.”

Meeks also cautioned that the legislation could also be used to target Muslims generally, including American Muslims as well as Arab and Muslim groups in the U.S. He said the bill could be used to implement a “back-door Muslim ban” and “subject millions of people … to arbitrary and subjective determinations based on indirect or tangential affiliations. The language is so imprecise, this bill invites discriminatory and political targeting under the pretext of national security.”

Democrats who support the legislation, including Schneider and Moskowitz, pushed back, though they both said they do not think the legislation is perfect. Moskowitz rejected the idea that the legislation could facilitate a Muslim ban, and said the U.S. should follow the model of regional allies like Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan and Egypt, which have experience with the Muslim Brotherhood and have themselves banned it.

Schneider said that the pattern of Muslim Brotherhood extremism and violence, most notably by Hamas, “demands Congress take the threat seriously and confront the networks that enable violent extremism.” He emphasized that the legislation includes clear guidelines and grounding in intelligence, as well as strong congressional oversight provisions to prevent overbroad application of the law. 

“Moving this legislation … ensures Congress, not an inconsistent executive or one with personal conflicts, remains the arbiter of how terrorism designations are used in America’s name,” Schneider added.

Rep. Keith Self (R-TX) emphasized that the legislation would “codify key elements” of the Trump executive order and “provide a permanent statutory framework to address the ongoing threat posed by the Muslim Brotherhood and its violent offshoots.” He emphasized that Brotherhood documents have laid out a plan to infiltrate and subvert U.S. institutions and society.

Rep. Randy Fine (R-FL) warned that the American Muslim Brotherhood affiliates are stoking instability and violence at home. “It is more important than it has ever been for us to stand up and say we’re going to follow the lead of 11 other countries … and saying we are not interested in having this organization in the United States. It is a terrorist movement.”

Diaz-Balart, in a statement, praised the committee for advancing the legislation, and said it “further amplifies other efforts, like those of President Trump, to take decisive action against this insidious threat.”

Moskowitz also celebrated the move, saying, “For decades, the Brotherhood has been tied to extremism and instability across the Middle East and around the world. Other nations have already taken steps to investigate the Brotherhood and its affiliates, and the United States must have the authority to do the same.”

Boris Zilberman, the senior director of public policy and strategy for the Christians United For Israel Action Fund, emphasized in a statement that executive orders can be repealed as easily as they can be signed, and noted that the bill targets Brotherhood branches not specifically called out in the executive order.

“While a close reading of the president’s executive order does not exclude the possibility of sanctioning Muslim Brotherhood affiliates in Qatar or Turkey, this legislation is specific in calling out Doha and Ankara along with many other nations that the Muslim Brotherhood uses to advance its malign activities,” Zilberman said.

Companion legislation in the Senate has yet to move forward.

The committee also voted unanimously in favor of legislation sanctioning the Iran-backed Houthis for violations of human rights and hostage-taking, instructing the State Department to take action to engage with European governments about antisemitism in their countries and creating new procedures to harmonize various U.S. sanctions registries — assessing whether entities sanctioned under certain authorities should also be sanctioned under others.

Another bill, which would sanction specific Iranian leaders who have issued fatwas against President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, passed on a bipartisan basis with 47 votes in favor and two Democrats, Reps. Joaquin Castro (D-TX) and Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), abstaining.

Castro introduced an amendment, which failed on party lines, that would have broadened the legislation to apply to measures taken against any U.S. leader or senior official, or the leaders of major U.S. allies.

Democrats argued that those measures would make the legislation more lasting and applicable in the long term, while Republicans said they wanted to keep the legislation focused on discrete, specific threats against Trump and Netanyahu.

Over the weekend, the California State Assembly passed a bill that is intended to address what Jewish community advocates describe as crisis levels of antisemitism in the state’s K-12 schools. 

The bill passed despite the objections of the powerful California Teachers Association, the state’s largest teachers’ union, which had stalled the legislation in July, claiming that efforts to combat antisemitism could impinge on teachers’ academic freedom when it came to discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. 

It was just one of several examples of influential state and national teachers’ unions presenting a roadblock against efforts to fight antisemitism in public schools, where discrimination against Jewish and Israeli students has skyrocketed over the past two years — even though many of those efforts have broad support from within the Jewish community, and from outside it, too. 

In California, the CTA and anti-Israel groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations were on one side of the issue, facing a diverse coalition of the bill’s backers that included the legislature’s Jewish, Black, Latino and Asian American and Pacific Islander caucuses. In an effort to appease the CTA during negotiations, some parts of the bill were removed, including language that would’ve defined what constituted an antisemitic learning environment. 

But the union never changed course. 

The CTA debacle began in July, just days after the representative body of the National Education Association — the national union to which CTA belongs — voted to cut ties with the Anti-Defamation League, a move that shocked many Jewish educators. And last December, an American Jewish Committee report accused the Massachusetts Teachers Association of promoting anti-Israel educational materials to its members. These developments have come amid a steady trickle of news reports over the last two years showcasing educators bringing controversial and at times antisemitic views into the classroom. 

All of which raises an uncomfortable question for many Jewish parents: Why are unions that are committed to equity and representation often resistant to incorporating protections that Jewish families say will keep their kids safe and supported at school? 

In California, the CTA said that a bill focusing only on antisemitism “might be seen as prioritizing one form of discrimination over others, potentially alienating groups facing other forms of systemic discrimination, such as Islamophobia, ableism or xenophobia.” But a companion bill passed by the legislature this weekend that takes aim at racism, gender discrimination, religious discrimination and homophobia in schools should render that argument moot. A CTA spokesperson declined to comment last week. 

So far, though, the teachers unions have not been successful in their efforts to marginalize Jewish organizations and counter antisemitism measures. 

The NEA’s top leadership quickly backtracked on the anti-ADL resolution (although they took a swipe at the organization in the process). In Massachusetts, a statewide antisemitism committee said in August that K-12 schools should implement the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism. In California, the 300,000-member CTA was not able to muster the political capital to quash the antisemitism bill. Gov. Gavin Newsom now has a month to decide whether to sign it.

“We’ve got a long way to go,” the ADL’s CEO, Jonathan Greenblatt, told Jewish Insider in July, to ensure “our community is respected for who we are.” 

The House Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday released a series of bills aimed at reorganizing and reforming the State Department, ahead of a committee meeting next week where the lawmakers are expected to debate a host of amendments related to foreign policy and national security issues across the globe.

The nine bills released this week are part of a State Department reauthorization effort spearheaded by the committee’s new chairman, Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL), and modeled after the congressional Armed Services Committees’ annual markups of the National Defense Authorization Act, the must-pass annual military and national security policy bill.

While Congress has passed an NDAA annually for decades, it has not conducted such a comprehensive authorization process for the State Department in more than two decades, though it has included State Department authorization bills as amendments in the last several NDAAs.

The Trump administration has undertaken its own efforts to reorganize and cut the size of the State Department.

Among the new provisions in the legislation highlighted by the committee’s leadership is one allowing the State Department to revoke the passport of anyone charged or convicted with providing material support to a terrorist organization, or who is determined by the secretary of state to have done so. Revocations would be subject to an appeal.

The administration could seek to use the provision, if enacted, to limit or prevent foreign travel by those it has deemed to be supporting Hamas and other terrorist groups. The legislation states that the provision cannot be used to “abridge the exercise” of First Amendment rights.

The package would also create an Eastern Mediterranean Security Cooperation Group for members of Congress and administration officials to coordinate with Israel, Greece and Cyprus, which would meet twice a year to discuss joint security issues.

It would extend authorities for the U.S. weapons stockpile in Israel, from which the U.S. can offer weapons to Israel in emergency situations. It would also ban U.S. contributions to the United Nations Commission of Inquiry targeting Israel.

The State Department would also be required annually to report to Congress on other countries’ United Nations voting practices, and particularly on their votes on Israel-related resolutions opposed by the United States.

In outlining the duties of the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., the legislation specifically instructs the ambassador to “identify, report, and hold accountable Member States that engage in malign influence operations and United Nations employees who act inconsistently with the princip[les] of impartiality enshrined in the United Nations Charter” and to oppose the election of states “that engage in malign influence operations” as the leader of U.N. bodies.

The package incorporates legislation aimed at countering detention of Americans by foreign adversaries, establishing a new designation for state sponsors of unlawful and wrongful detention. The administration recently established a similar policy through executive order.

As part of the State Department reorganization, the package would create a new position for an assistant secretary for sanctions policy and a Sanctions Policy Bureau to oversee U.S. sanctions activities and develop strategy and policy around the use of sanctions, as well as coordinate on sanctions with foreign partners.

The legislation would also create a new under secretary for foreign assistance to centralize control of all foreign aid programs — following the shuttering of USAID and its consolidation into the State Department — a director and office of foreign assistance oversight, and a Bureau of Strategic Communications aimed at countering foreign adversary propaganda.

It additionally would largely lift the U.S. arms embargo on Cyprus, provided that any weapons transferred are used by the Cypriot government, that Cyprus continues to reform its financial system and does not allow Russian military vessels to use its ports to refuel — continuing indefinitely a waiver first implemented in 2022.

Mast, in a statement about the package, said he “made a promise to restore command and control [in the State Department] — and this legislation delivers.”

“It ensures every dollar and every diplomat puts America First and is accountable to the president’s foreign policy. It also prevents ideologues masquerading as diplomats from using their posts to push left-wing agendas instead of America’s interests,” Mast continued. “This bill is not just a reform for today, or for President Trump; it is a lasting framework that will strengthen the State Department and benefit every commander-in-chief who follows.”

Rep. Seth Magaziner (D-RI) announced on Friday that he is co-sponsoring a bill, pushed by far-left House members, to place strict restrictions on U.S. weapons sales to Israel, which critics have described as an effective arms embargo on the Jewish state.

The move comes as a surprise from the relatively moderate Magaziner, who has maintained a largely pro-Israel record during his time in office and has not joined in previous prominent calls to suspend weapons shipments to Israel. Though he does not practice Judaism and comes from a mixed-faith background, Magaziner has spoken often about his Jewish heritage and is a member of the House Jewish caucus.

“I have taken this action to do my part to pressure Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu to implement a ceasefire in Gaza, allow significantly increased humanitarian aid into Gaza, and to stop the expansion of settlements in the West Bank,” Magziner said in a statement. “This was not a decision I arrived at lightly. As a person of Jewish heritage, I strongly support the existence of Israel as an independent state and a refuge where Jews from around the world can live in safety.”

But, he continued, “we are well past the point where a continuation of the war in Gaza serves the best interests of Israelis, Palestinians or Americans and the United States must exert pressure on Netanyahu to change course.”

He argued that the continued war puts Israelis at risk by undermining global support for Israel.

He emphasized in the statement that Hamas, “a bloodthirst terrorist organization” started the war and continues to hold hostages and said that Israel “has a right to defend itself from attacks like the horrific atrocities committed by Hamas on October 7, 2023, and I remain sickened by the rise of antisemitism in our country and globally in recent years, including at times in the anti-war movement.”

“The acts of terror committed by Hamas are horrific. But injustice does not justify injustice, and the prolonged suffering of civilians in Gaza must end,” Magaziner said.

Though he backed additional aid to Israel last year, he said that the situation now is different, given Israel’s military successes against Hamas, Iran and Hezbollah and the “crisis [level]” humanitarian situation in Gaza and killing of Palestinians in the West Bank.

“Netanyahu has presented no plan for achieving peace and appears to believe that the United States will comply with his every whim. It is time to try something different,” Magaziner said. 

“I will continue to support defensive systems like Iron Dome that protect civilians, as well as targeted actions to remove what remains of Hamas, but I will not support providing the Netanyahu government with additional offensive weaponry until food and medicine are surged into Gaza, Netanyahu presents a workable proposal to end the war that ensures the safety and dignity for both Israelis and Palestinians, independent journalists are permitted to report from Gaza, and rule of law is enforced impartially in the West Bank,” the Rhode Island congressman continued.

He said that Israeli military actions have endangered and killed civilians “at an unacceptable rate” and said Israel caused “mass suffering” by blocking humanitarian aid. And he said that Israeli claims that Hamas is exaggerating the death toll and extent of the famine are “impossible to verify” when Israel will not allow independent journalists into Gaza.

He also criticized discussions among right-wing Israeli leaders about annexing the West Bank and Gaza and expelling Palestinians, the latter of which has also been suggested by the Trump administration.

Though it stands no chance of passing in the current Congress, the “Block the Bombs Act” that Magaziner is cosponsoring would impose unprecedented new conditions on weapons sales or transfers to Israel, requiring specific congressional authorization for each individual transfer of various weapons systems, and would require Congress to identify specific purposes for which those weapons would be used.

It would apply indefinitely and in perpetuity, beyond the end of the current conflict in Gaza.

Not including Magaziner, the bill currently has 42 Democratic cosponsors, most of them progressives with records far less supportive of Israel than Magaziner’s, including Jewish Reps. Becca Balint (D-VT), Sara Jacobs (D-CA), Jamie Raskin (D-MD) and Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR). 

Magaziner does not currently face any declared primary challengers.

The House Financial Services Committee voted on Tuesday to advance a bill that would place a series of conditions on the lifting of U.S. human rights sanctions on Syria, after a debate over whether the U.S. should instead pursue complete sanctions relief for the new Syrian government.

The bill, led by Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY), would require the Syrian government to comply with various human rights-related conditions, including protecting religious minorities, as a precondition for waiving under the Caesar Civilian Protection Act.

The bill presents an alternative to a parallel bipartisan effort in both chambers to fully repeal sanctions on the new Syrian government — underscoring continued tensions on the issue on Capitol Hill following the Trump administration’s efforts to release sanctions on the new Syrian government.

The bill advanced through the committee by a 31-23 vote, with Republican Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL) voting with most Democrats against it, and Democratic Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) and Brad Sherman (D-CA) voting for the legislation.

“The objective here is to begin the process of lifting the sanctions,” Lawler said. “We have to recognize the fragility of the situation on the ground. We want Syria to be more stable. We want a more stable government. We want the Syrian people to be free from the oppression of the Assad regime. But in order to get there, we can’t just willy-nilly trust that everything is going to be A-OK. And so what we’re trying to do here is give the administration flexibility to begin the process of lifting sanctions. I think a wholesale repeal of the sanctions is premature.”

He said that it would be “foolish” to fully eliminate sanctions while there are still conflicts between the Syrian government and Israel, and amid ongoing attacks against Druze, Alawite and Christian minorities by Syrian government-aligned forces.

“What we are trying to accomplish here is to ensure that a sanctions regime is not completely eliminated, that there are conditions and benchmarks on the ground that have to be met, so that we do hold this new Syrian government accountable,” Lawler said, and “that they are in fact, making decisions and taking actions that create a much better and more stable situation in Syria.”

Lawler said the legislation “recognizes the fragility here and tak[es] a positive step forward so that this fledgling government actually potentially has a chance to succeed, but if you immediately lift the sanctions and there’s no accountability whatsoever, my fear is that [the tenuous stability in Syria] will collapse.”

Lawler added that it’s important for the sanctions infrastructure to remain in place in case the Syrian government falls.

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), the committee’s ranking member, and other Democrats argued that the legislation did not go far enough in repealing the sanctions, and would set up the new Syrian government for failure. She introduced an amendment, which failed, to fully repeal the Caesar Act.

“Only full repeal will assist the Syrian interim government and [the] Syrian people,” Waters said. “We must help the Syrian people to rebuild Syria and to encourage investments in its future. As written, this bill blocks that goal.”

She said that “giving a little bit of money to the Syrian government is a throwaway. It does not accomplish what you think it will accomplish.”

“There will be great expectations of the government [that] they cannot fulfill with your little bitty partial removal of sanctions,” Waters continued.

Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) argued that the sanctions are hurting the Syrian people, and highlighted calls from Syrian-American organizations for full repeal of the sanctions.

Sherman argued that the U.S.’ voice is important particularly in speaking up for Syrian minorities, such as the Christians, Druze and Alawites who are under attack.

He worked during the committee meeting with Lawler and committee leadership on an amendment, which passed, that would modify the language in the legislation around the protection of religious minorities.

The new language states that the Syrian government must “take reasonable steps” to protect religious minorities, on top of the original legislative language requiring that the government not target or detain religious minorities.

Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC), the lead Republican sponsor of the concurrent effort to fully repeal the Caesar Act, said on X that the bill “in its current form is not the right approach forward and does not align with President [Donald] Trump’s agenda for Syria. “

“I believe that a clean repeal of the Caesar Act is most in line with the President’s agenda to ‘give Syria a chance,’” Wilson said. “Keeping Caesar on the books for years will only deter long term reconstruction which could help ISIS resurgence.”

A grassroots campaign urging educators to stop using teaching materials from the Anti-Defamation League reached the highest levels of K-12 education over the weekend.

Inside a packed conference hall in Portland, Ore., the thousands of delegates who make up the governing body of the National Education Association — the largest teachers union in the country — passed a measure that bars the union from using, endorsing or publicizing any materials from the ADL. 

In the moments before the vote, several Jewish delegates spoke passionately in opposition of the measure. 

“I stand here and ask you to oppose [the measure] to show that all are truly welcome here,” a teacher from New Jersey said, according to audio of the closed-door meeting obtained by Jewish Insider. 

Another Jewish teacher quoted NEA Executive Director Kim Anderson from her keynote address earlier in the weekend. “This union has your back,” Anderson told the more than 6,000 assembled delegates.

“Does that include stopping Jewish hate, antisemitism? Some of our members don’t feel they are safe,” the Jewish teacher said during Sunday’s debate. 

The vote occurred by voice. The margin was so close that delegates had to vote three times as the chair considered whether the loudest cheers were in support of the measure or in opposition, but, ultimately, it still received the backing of more than half the delegates. It now heads to the NEA’s nine-member executive committee, which gets the final word on whether the measure will be put into effect. (The passage of the anti-ADL measure was first reported by the North American Values Institute.)

The episode garnered criticism from Jewish teachers and allies. NEA’s national leadership has not yet weighed in on the measure. 

“At a time when incidents of hate and bias are on the rise across the country, this action sends a troubling message of exclusion and undermines our shared goal of ensuring every student feels safe and supported,” a spokesperson for the NEA’s Jewish affairs caucus said in a statement to JI. The caucus said its members plan to continue using ADL materials in their classrooms. 

The ADL slammed the vote, calling it “profoundly disturbing that a group of NEA activists would brazenly attempt to further isolate their Jewish colleagues and push a radical, antisemitic agenda on students,” according to an ADL spokesperson. 

Staci Maiers, an NEA spokesperson, declined to comment on the specific measure. “NEA members will continue to educate and organize against antisemitism, anti-Muslim bigotry and all forms of hate and discrimination,” Maiers told JI in a statement. “We will not shy away from difficult or controversial issues that affect our members, our students or our schools.” (The NEA assembly also adopted a measure pledging to highlight Jewish American Heritage Month each May.) 

The NEA’s adoption of a measure targeting the leading Jewish civil rights organization may be an escalation, but it is only the most recent example of antisemitism — and divisive politics surrounding the war in Gaza — spilling into K-12 education, and teachers unions in particular. 

Since the 2023 Hamas attacks, Jewish parents have raised concerns about discrimination against Jewish students and about the increasingly frequent use of anti-Israel materials in classrooms. Last week, for instance, the parents of an 11-year-old sued their child’s Virginia private school, alleging school administrators ignored antisemitic harassment directed against her for months. 

The NEA’s vote on the anti-ADL measure grew out of a campaign called #DropTheADLFromSchools, which began with an online open letter and gradually garnered the support of some of the country’s most powerful local unions, including United Teachers Los Angeles, which represents 35,000 LA teachers. 

In March, UTLA president Cecily Myart-Cruz wrote a letter asking the superintendent of the LA Unified School District and the LAUSD school board to stop using ADL materials and “refuse to contract or partner” with the ADL, because of its “focus on indoctrination rather than education.” (An LAUSD spokesperson said no action had been taken in reference to the letter.)

Last year, the NEA joined a campaign to pressure then-President Joe Biden to halt all U.S. military aid to Israel. The Massachusetts Teachers Association, an NEA affiliate, has encouraged members to introduce anti-Israel materials into classrooms. 

Last week, the largest teachers union in California published a letter urging state senators to vote against a bill focused on fighting and preventing antisemitism. 

“While we share the same overarching goal of the AB 715 author and sponsors of combating antisemitism, we have serious reservations about the proposed methods for achieving it,” wrote Seth Bramble, legislative relations manager of the California Teachers Association, a 300,000-member affiliate of the NEA. “We are also concerned with academic freedom and the ability of educators to ensure that instruction include perspectives and materials that reflect the cultural and ethnic diversity of all of California’s students.” 

In May, the state assembly voted unanimously to approve the bill, which was co-sponsored by the Jewish, Black, Latino, Native American and Asian American and Pacific Islander legislative caucuses. The legislation would create a statewide antisemitism coordinator in the state’s Education Department and strengthen anti-discrimination protections, while providing additional guidelines to keep antisemitism out of teaching materials. 

But the bill’s fate is now in jeopardy as senators face pressure from one of the state’s most powerful unions to reject it. The California Senate’s education committee is set to vote on the bill on Wednesday. State Sen. Sasha Renée Pérez, the Los Angeles-area Democrat who chairs the committee, did not respond to a request for comment about whether she plans to vote for the bill. 

State Sen. Scott Wiener, a Democrat from San Francisco and the co-chair of the legislative Jewish caucus, said it is “frustrating” seeing the CTA oppose the bill instead of collaborating with its authors.

“We need, as a matter of state policy, to be very, very clear that antisemitism will not be tolerated in California public schools,” Wiener told JI. “I was really disappointed to see CTA’s letter which basically says, ‘Oh, we hate antisemitism, but we can’t possibly do anything meaningful about it.’” (A CTA spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.)

More than two dozen California Jewish groups released a statement on Monday slamming the CTA, saying that advocates for the bill have already put its passage on hold for more than a year to try to negotiate with the union. The sponsors pivoted from an earlier version of the bill — which was intended to root out antisemitism in the state’s ethnic studies curriculum — at the urging of the CTA. 

“We call on the legislature to stand firmly in support of California’s Jewish students and move the bill forward,” wrote the Jewish organizations, including the ADL, StandWithUs, American Jewish Committee and the Jewish federations in Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco and several other communities. 

Jewish community activists plan to spend the next two days lobbying for passage of the bill. Jay Goldfischer, a teacher in Los Angeles County, is traveling to Sacramento to urge lawmakers to vote for it. 

“Jewish students across California are being silenced. Many are afraid to walk into their schools, unsure if they’ll be targeted for who they are,” Goldfischer told JI. “As a CTA member, I am personally disappointed that CTA doesn’t feel Jewish students are worth protecting.”

A bipartisan group of House members reintroduced a bill on Wednesday to allow the president to provide Israel with bunker-buster bombs — the heavy ordnance used by the U.S. against Iran’s Fordow and Natanz nuclear facilities — and the planes needed to drop them.

The bill is part of a long-standing effort led by Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), one of its lead sponsors, to give the administration the option to provide Israel the capabilities to act independently against Iran’s most highly fortified nuclear facilities. The legislation’s sponsors argue that it remains relevant even in the aftermath of the U.S. strikes in the event Iran attempts to reconstitute its nuclear program.

Transferring the systems — which are unique to the U.S. — to Israel has been seen by some experts as a way to ensure Israel has the ability to destroy underground nuclear sites in Iran while avoiding direct U.S. involvement in the conflict.

Stating that Israel and other U.S. allies should be “prepared for all contingencies if Iran pursues development of a nuclear weapon” and that the U.S. must “send a clear signal to Iran that development of a nuclear weapon will never be tolerated,” the bill authorizes the president, at his discretion, to take steps to transfer the bombs and aircraft to Israel for the purpose of striking Iran’s nuclear sites, if certain conditions are met.

If the president certifies to Congress that Iran has violated or changed its implementation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty or reduced access for International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors such that they cannot fully verify Iran’s nuclear material and activities and that Israel has no other method to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities, then the president would be authorized to transfer the bunker busters and aircraft.

Under the legislation, either the president or, by his delegation, the secretary of defense would be authorized to give the order to transfer the weapons.

Iran is currently in violation of its NPT obligations and has limited access for IAEA inspectors, enacting a law on Wednesday suspending cooperation with the body.

In advance of the potential transfer, the legislation authorizes the administration to build infrastructure in Israel to allow Israel to host and operate the relevant systems — which Israel currently does not have — including extended runways for the aircraft and facilities to house the aircraft and store the bunker busters. It also authorizes the administration to store bunker busters in U.S. facilities in Israel.

The legislation also allows the U.S. to train Israeli personnel in the use of the bunker busters, and to engage in joint research with Israel to improve U.S. weapons and develop weaponry to destroy Iran’s underground nuclear facilities and Hezbollah’s underground rocket storage sites.

The bill further states that the U.S. should “seek to extend limitations on Iran’s enriched uranium, including through engagement in multilateral diplomatic initiatives,” and notes that the legislation does not constitute an authorization for use of military force against Iran.

The bill is led by Gottheimer and Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY), and co-sponsored by Reps. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), Juan Vargas (D-CA) and Tom Suozzi (D-NY).

“It’s a pivotal moment to see what happens in terms of Iran agreeing … not to develop a nuclear weapon or not, to continue their nuclear program proliferation or not, to let in monitors or not,” Gottheimer told Jewish Insider. “This [bill] is poised to see what Iran does moving forward, and obviously why it gives the president discretion to make the decision on selling these weapons to Israel.”

Gottheimer said that whether the bunker busters will be needed again in the future is “really dependent upon what Iran does next.”

“If Iran continues to develop its program, we cannot allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon,” he said. “If Iran decides to reconstitute its program and move ahead and break out and go to 90% enrichment, I think you want to make sure that they’re strongly deterred from doing so.”

Lawler said that the bill is a “bipartisan stand to protect Israel and stop Iran’s nuclear threat. Iran’s uranium stockpile makes clear that the danger is real. This bill gives the president the authority to equip Israel with the tools and training they need to deter Tehran and make the world a safer place.”

Tyler Stapleton, the director of government relations at FDD Action, a lobbying group affiliated with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, which is supporting the bill, said that, following the U.S. and Israeli airstrikes on Iran, “it remains critical that the U.S. continue to support Israel in training and equipping its forces to target and destroy fortified nuclear facilities that could be rebuilt in the coming years.”

“The United States should assist Israel in developing the capability to store bunker-buster munitions and create an aerial delivery system that can be deployed independently by Israeli forces if necessary,” Stapleton said. “Congress should authorize the Department of Defense to take these actions without delay, ensuring both the U.S. and Israel retain the operational flexibility needed to counter the ongoing threat of a nuclear-armed Iran.”

The Knesset on Thursday struck down a bill that would have called an election later this year, with Haredi parties agreeing to another week of negotiations on penalties for yeshiva students who avoid the IDF draft.

The bill to disperse the Knesset was voted down 53-61 at about 3 a.m., and as a consequence, opposition parties will not be able to propose similar legislation for six months. The Haredi parties, however, could still submit a bill to call an early election should negotiations not go their way.

Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee Chairman Yuli Edelstein was optimistic that the sides would come to an agreement, announcing shortly before the vote that “agreements about the principles on which the conscription bill will be based,” had been reached. 

“Only a real, effective bill that will expand the IDF’s basis of enlistment will come out of a committee that I lead,” Edelstein added. “We are on the way to a real repair of Israeli society and the security of the State of Israel.” 

Haredi parties Shas and United Torah Judaism had threatened to bring down the government over legislation regarding the draft of yeshiva students into the IDF. 

The High Court of Justice ordered the government last year to actively conscript Haredi yeshiva students after they were exempted for decades. Leading Haredi rabbis have said they oppose any young men from their communities enlisting in the IDF, even if they are not learning Torah full time.

The bill in question sets rising target numbers for Haredi conscription, reaching 50% in five years. The dispute between Edelstein and Haredi parties centered around the penalties for Haredi men aged 18-26 who do not report to the IDF after receiving draft notices. 

Edelstein reportedly agreed to delay some of the sanctions on yeshiva students who do not enlist. The new version of the bill will include immediate bans on receiving drivers licenses and leaving the country and canceling affirmative action for government jobs and subsidies for college degrees for those who do not report for IDF service. However, the discount on daycare tuition will remain in place for six months after a missed draft date, and welfare payments will continue for a year. Housing subsidies would not be canceled for two years after avoiding the draft. 

Yeshivas with students that avoid conscription will lose government subsidies; if 75% of the annual draft target is not met, the government will stop subsidizing all Haredi yeshivas.

Israeli Opposition Leader Yair Lapid accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of “spitting in the faces of IDF fighters. Once again you sold out our combat soldiers  — for what? For two more weeks? Three more? … The government allowed [the Haredim] to ignore the reservists and help them [ensure] draft avoidance for tens of thousands of healthy young people.”