Despite objections from leading Democrats, the House on Wednesday passed a bipartisan bill to sanction Russia and extend existing sanctions on Iran, named for the late Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who spent his final months negotiating the legislation.

The bill now heads to the White House to be signed into law. It includes a five-year extension of the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996, which was set to expire in 2026, a late-stage addition to the bill in the Senate after President Donald Trump demanded that the bill include provisions related to Iran.

The legislation received a significantly different reception from Democrats in the House than it did in the Senate, where the bill passed with strong bipartisan support. Fifty-eight House Democrats voted for the bill, while 152 voted against it. Seven Republicans opposed the legislation. The final tally was 262-159.

Democrats who opposed the bill generally raised concerns about the waiver authorities that the administration could use to avoid placing sanctions on Russia — arguing that Trump can’t be trusted to crack down on President Vladimir Putin — and about the tariff provisions included in the bill to target importers of Russian oil.

Democrats have warned that Trump could misuse those tariff authorities to target U.S. partners in trade disputes, unrelated to the war in Ukraine.

“The manner in which this bill has been written doesn’t require the president of the United States to impose sanctions on Russia,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) said on the House floor. “In fact, there are so many loopholes written into the bill, I believe, that it’s very unlikely that the sanctions … contemplated in the legislation will ever see the light of day. That’s particularly the case because President Trump has shown great reluctance over the [past] 10 years … to actually side with the Ukrainian people.”

“Worse yet, what this legislation will do is give Donald Trump perhaps unfettered authority to unleash tariffs on the American people in ways that have already cost everyday Americans thousands of dollars in additional expense per year,” Jeffries continued, questioning why Congress would give Trump “unfettered authority to visit more tariffs on the world.”

Other top Democratic leaders, including Reps. Katherine Clark (D-MA), Pete Aguilar (D-CA) and Greg Meeks (D-NY), also opposed the bill.

But several prominent Democrats, including former Democratic leaders Reps. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and Jim Clyburn (D-SC), supported the bill.

“Nobody in this House believes that I am a defender of Donald Trump’s failure to address this issue head on and effectively. No one has opposed his tariff policies any more than I have,” Hoyer said earlier this week. 

But he emphasized that “nothing we do to pass this bill or defeat this bill” will encourage or discourage Trump from going “far beyond his legal strictures.” 

He said the bill will be “a statement by the Congress of the United States” —  “‘This is what ought to happen. Sanctions ought to be imposed, tariffs or penalize countries who are funding Russia’s ability to make war,’” declaring clearly that Congress supports Ukraine even if Trump’s support is unreliable.

“If we do not pass this bill, there will be great joy in the Kremlin and great devastation in Kyiv, who will see something that they thought they had in hand — a strong statement by the United States of America’s Congress — disappear because of a fight over tariffs,” Hoyer said. “Their morale will tank and we will be still, since April 2024, having not taken the action.”

House Republicans celebrated the bill’s passage.

“House and Senate Republicans are placing maximum pressure on Vladimir Putin and the Russian war machine,” House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) said in a statement. “This legislation strengthens economic sanctions against the Russian government, its financial institutions, and the foreign governments that aid Russian aggression against Ukraine by purchasing cheap Russian oil and gas and helping the Kremlin evade other sanctions.”

AIPAC also praised the bill’s passage, noting, “The Iran Sanctions Act underpins most sanctions on the Iranian regime and was set to expire this year.” The pro-Israel group also urged Congress to quickly pass the Enhanced Iran Sanctions Act, which passed the House earlier this year.

The American Jewish Committee, which has advocated strongly for Ukraine in addition to Israel, applauded the bill’s passage as well.

“We welcome the House’s passage of the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, advancing legislation that would significantly increase economic pressure on Russia over its ongoing illegal war against Ukraine while extending sanctions against Iran,” the AJC said in a statement. “Russia and Iran continue to pose threats that extend far beyond their borders, including through their military cooperation and support for destabilizing actors.”

“This bipartisan action by Congress sends a clear message that the Russian and Iranian regimes must be held accountable for activities that threaten international security and stability,” the statement continued.

A bipartisan group of senators wrote to Trump administration officials on Wednesday urging them to declassify two side letters related to the U.S.-Saudi nuclear deal — written agreements related to the deal that are not part of the text of the deal itself. Congress is currently reviewing the agreement, as mandated by law.

The group notably includes two Republicans: Sens. Rand Paul (R-KY), who has frequently found himself at odds with President Donald Trump, and Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA), generally a Trump supporter who nonetheless has expressed reservations about the nuclear deal, which could allow for nuclear enrichment on Saudi soil.

The letter was led by Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) and Ed Markey (D-MA). It was co-signed by Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Jack Reed (D-RI), Patty Murray (D-WA), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Peter Welch (D-VT).

The letter, addressed to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Energy Secretary Chris Wright, notes that the side letters have never before been classified for any previous foreign nuclear deal: “We are aware of no precedent for classifying and withholding the side letters, particularly when the stated purpose is peaceful nuclear cooperation.”

The lawmakers said that Congress and the public must have “access to the full text” of the deal in order to gain a “clear understanding of the commitments being made on the nation’s behalf and those being made by Saudi Arabia to the United States. The side letters affect the obligations and operations of the underlying agreement and cannot be viewed in isolation from it.”

A bipartisan group of House members introduced legislation on Monday that would require influencers to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act when receiving payments from foreign governments for their work.

The Foreign Propaganda Disclosure Act comes amid suspicion and scrutiny, particularly among different online factions of the conservative movement, about foreign governments driving social media conversation, including accusations of Qatari, Turkish, Ukrainian and Israeli influence.

The bill is sponsored by Reps. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL), Vicente Gonzalez (D-TX), Derrick Van Orden (R-WI) and Jared Moskowitz (D-FL).

It would explicitly add social media influencers to existing FARA registration requirements.

“There is a big difference between having an organic opinion and secretly acting on behalf of foreign interests to push propaganda to Americans,” Luna said in a statement. “Foreign adversaries have been actively using disinformation and psychological operations to divide America, erode our national security, and undermine U.S. foreign policy. Americans deserve to know when the voices shaping what they see online are working on behalf of foreign interests.”

She added that, “Americans should be able to know when the people shaping conversations online are acting on behalf of foreign interests.”

Gonzalez emphasized the need to update existing regulations to keep up with the changing nature of the internet.

“Federal law must adapt to an ever-changing digital media landscape, especially as more Americans turn to social media for news consumption and public discourse,” Gonzalez said. “Our bill increases public transparency around paid partnerships between social media influencers and foreign governments to prevent deceptive practices that may hinder audiences from building a fully informed opinion.”

Luna herself has faced scrutiny over her relationships with leaders in Russia and her efforts to promote diplomatic engagement with Moscow, as well as disseminating alleged KGB files on the assassination of former President John F. Kennedy, as well as her meetings with members of Germany’s far-right AfD party.

She has made various claims about foreign influence in Washington, including asserting recently that an impending FBI investigation would reveal that a foreign government had placed interns to serve as agents on Capitol Hill.

She has also questioned the loyalty of unnamed dual citizen members of Congress, and has at times called for the U.S. to end aid to Israel and other foreign countries..

In a letter to Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin, a bipartisan group of House members reiterated concerns previously communicated to his predecessor about new conditions attached by the Trump administration to funding for the Nonprofit Security Grant Program.

The lawmakers, led by Reps. Brad Schneider (D-IL) and Claudia Tenney (R-NY), said that the 2026 NSGP application “maintains these concerning new compliance requirements” as well as adds a new provision allowing the Federal Emergency Management Agency to terminate grant awards “for convenience” if it determines that the grants do not advance the “national interest.”

The conditions about which lawmakers had previously raised concerns would have tied grant funding to cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement activity and eliminating diversity, equity and inclusion programs.

“This vague and expansive standard gives applicants little guidance about what is expected of them and raises concerns about mid-project terminations without warning,” the lawmakers wrote. “As NSGP requires organizations to front the costs of their security projects, the possibility of mid-award termination and, therefore, no reimbursement, may deter applicants from accepting the grant, leaving their institution vulnerable to attack.”

They noted that they had raised the issue in February with Mullin’s predecessor, then-DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, urging Noem to clarify or waive the new conditions, which they said would “divert limited funds and burden the institutions the NSGP is meant to protect.” 

Noem, they continued, told them the same month that FEMA was working to develop specific guidance for NSGP including particular examples applicable to faith-based nonprofits. But, the lawmakers said, that guidance has yet to be issued.

“We have always believed that NSGP should be as streamlined and effective as possible, with minimal red tape and compliance requirements focused squarely on security,” the lawmakers said. “You rightly expressed this same belief during your confirmation hearing. That is why we urge you to revise the FY 2026 NOFO and issue new guidance that removes or waives terms and conditions unrelated to the security of grant recipients, eliminates the new overly broad termination authority and ensures that the NSGP remains accessible to all eligible faith-based and community organizations.”

The letter highlights the string of attacks on Jewish institutions and Jewish communities in recent years, emphasizing the importance of the funds.

“I’m grateful to partner with Rep. Tenney to push back against onerous new rules that make our synagogues, churches, and mosques less safe. We will continue to root out hate and discrimination in all forms, so everyone can observe their faith safely and without threat of harm,” Schneider said in a statement.

“As threats against houses of worship and community organizations continue to rise, it is important that these institutions have confidence that the program will provide the support they were awarded. Our letter encourages DHS to provide that certainty by ensuring the program remains focused on its core mission of enhancing security for vulnerable communities,” Tenney said in a statement.

The Anti-Defamation League also expressed support for the letter.

“As antisemitism and threats against faith communities remain at historic levels, NSGP is more essential than ever to help at-risk communities protect themselves from threats,” Lauren Wolman, senior director of government relations & strategy at the ADL, said in a statement. “We are grateful to Representatives Schneider and Tenney for their bipartisan leadership in championing this lifesaving program and ensuring organizations can access those resources quickly, with confidence, and without unnecessary delays.”

In a bipartisan vote pushed in part by President Donald Trump, the House passed the Sunshine Protection Act, making daylight saving time permanent, a situation that raises concerns for Orthodox Jewish groups that have long warned that such a move would have negative impacts for Jewish morning prayer and potentially raise dangers for school children who have to travel to school before daybreak.

The bill passed the House by a 308-117 vote, with 95 Democrats and 22 Republicans voting no. The issue has been a priority for Trump, and lawmakers have also included the same legislation in a must-pass transportation bill, with near unanimous support in committee.

Rabbi AD Motzen, the national director of government affairs at Agudath Israel of America, said that, in spite of the popular desire to eliminate time changes, “We are concerned, however, that by choosing permanent daylight saving time for the entire country it will put children at risk and affect our religious practices.”

Motzen emphasized that permanent daylight saving time would set up post-9 a.m. sunrises in parts of the country for several weeks a year, posing potential dangers to students who would have to travel to school in the dark. He also warned that extending daylight saving time “will create an extreme hardship on observant Jews,” making it “extraordinarily difficult — if not impossible — to arrive on time for a job and [effecting] the start time of our schools.”

Nathan Diament, the executive director of the Orthodox Union Advocacy Center, said that making daylight saving time permanent would “raise safety issues for children who would be going to school in the pitch dark for many weeks of the year,” about which health experts have expressed concern.

He said that it would also “interfere with the ability of members of our community to engage in congregational prayers and get to their places of work on time.”

Motzen also emphasized that a previous change to permanent daylight saving time was quickly reversed after Americans experienced its actual impacts.

Attention for the bill’s opponents now turns to the Senate, where the bill has some vocal opponents.

Diament noted that some Senate lawmakers, including Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), expressed “firm opposition to this measure,” offering his thanks for their efforts.

Motzen also placed his hopes on the Senate blocking passage of the legislation.

“We are hopeful that the Senate will consider all of the effects of DST and compare them to the effects of permanent standard time or maintaining the status quo before rushing into this major change,” Motzen said.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who represented South Carolina in the Senate for more than two decades and was a stalwart supporter of Israel during his time in office, died on Saturday, his office announced. He was 71.

Graham, who served in the House of Representatives for more than a decade before being elected to the Senate in 2002, had recently returned from Ukraine, where he met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Prior to Ukraine, he had been part of a bipartisan U.S. delegation in Ankara, Turkey, for the NATO summit.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) @LindseyGrahamSC died Saturday following what his office described as “a brief and sudden illness.”

Israeli Prime Minister @netanyahu called him “a great American patriot and a great champion of the Israel-American alliance.”

President Donald Trump… pic.twitter.com/sKzQc2XnmT

— Jewish Insider (@jewishinsider) July 12, 2026

NBC News reported that emergency personnel had responded on Saturday evening to a call regarding a cardiac arrest at Graham’s home on Capitol Hill.

A longtime advocate for Israel, Graham traveled to the country in the immediate aftermath of the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas terror attacks, making at least 10 trips to the region since the onset of the Israel-Hamas war. He last traveled to Israel days before the outbreak of the Iran war in February 2026, during which he met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Graham was openly critical of Iran and skeptical of Western engagement with the Islamic Republic. He was a vocal opponent of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action and favored military engagement to address the threats posed by the Islamic Republic. He defended the Trump administration’s recent negotiations with Tehran, but said in June that he thought those talks were “going to fail.”

The South Carolina Republican had been up for reelection in November after easily clearing the GOP field in the state’s primary last month. Graham’s death is expected to trigger a special primary in the state to determine who will replace him on the ballot.

The Republican lawmaker was swiftly eulogized by top Israeli political figures.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel had “lost one of its greatest friends.” Graham, Netanyahu said, “understood that the security of Israel and America are inseparable. He devoted his life to defending America, strengthening our alliance and standing up for the free world.”

Israeli President Isaac Herzog said in a statement that he was “shocked and heartbroken” to learn of Graham’s death, calling the senator a “dear friend” and a “great American patriot, a great friend of Israel.”

“Senator Graham was a beacon of moral clarity and a true leader of the U.S.-Israel partnership,” Herzog said. “We will never forget how he stood by the people of Israel in our most difficult moments, and we will remain eternally grateful for his sense of justice, truth, and loyalty.”

In a social media post, former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, who is running in the current election, mourned Graham as one of the country’s “greatest friends,” who “stood with Israel through our darkest hours, with courage.”

A bipartisan group of 58 House members urged the Federal Emergency Management Agency on Thursday to extend the deadline for 2026 Nonprofit Security Grant Program applications, arguing that the current timeline gives states and institutions “insufficient time to complete the application process” and fulfill the program’s goals.

Applications for the program were announced on June 24 and are due to the federal government from state emergency management agencies by July 24. Those state agencies must set their own earlier deadlines for individual institutions to submit applications.

“It is essential that eligible applicants have a fair shot to apply for these funds and fully realize the program’s intended purpose,” the lawmakers, led by Reps. Grace Meng (D-NY) and David Joyce (R-OH), wrote in a letter to acting FEMA Administrator Robert Fenton. “The current timeline imposes significant administrative constraints on both applicants and [state administrative agencies], potentially limiting full and fair participation in this year’s grant cycle.”

The lawmakers argued that organizations would have a short amount of time — potentially just days — to review the program, obtain necessary assessments, develop proposals, gather documents and submit applications. The signatories noted that FEMA has historically provided as many as 80 days from the application announcement to the deadline.

The letter notes that the application period also overlaps state hate crimes grant program application periods in some states, “overburdening” institutions, particularly smaller ones that don’t have large teams to handle grant-writing.

FEMA’s continued delays in releasing 2025 NSGP awards create further issues, the lawmakers explained: “organizations will be applying without knowing their eligibility, creating additional complications since eligibility for this year’s grant is affected by the recipient’s status for last year’s grant.”

The letter urges FEMA to extend the 2026 application deadline, to give state agencies more time to review applications, nonprofits more time to prepare their applications and to guarantee “FEMA receives the strongest possible pool of eligible projects for consideration.”

The Jewish Federations of North America said it organized the letter and was the first to publicize it.

“At a time of rising threats against faith-based communal institutions, Congress has made clear that protecting vulnerable communities is a bipartisan priority,” JFNA CEO Eric Fingerhut said. “Giving state administrative agencies and nonprofit organizations adequate time to complete FEMA’s application process will help ensure these critical security resources reach those NSGP is designed to protect.”

Lauren Wolman, the senior director of government relations and strategy at the Anti-Defamation League, said that “a one-month application window presents significant challenges for the nonprofits that need this funding the most, particularly smaller organizations without dedicated grant writing staff.” 

Wolman added, “Extending the deadline would help ensure every eligible organization has a meaningful opportunity to secure the resources they need to protect their communities.”

Rabbi AD Motzen, the national director of government affairs at Agudath Israel of America, said, “Agudath Israel strongly supports the bipartisan Meng Joyce letter and the request for a longer application period. We have heard from nonprofits that are not sure if they were awarded  the grant from the previous year and have to make a rushed decision whether or not to apply for this year.”

Nathan Diament, the executive director of the Orthodox Union Advocacy Center, said that the OU also agrees that an extension of the deadline would be “very helpful.”

Separately, 15 Democrats on the House Homeland Security Committee wrote to Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin and Fenton, raising concerns about the administration’s handling of various FEMA grant programs including NSGP, accusing them of including language in the application materials “that is confusing, impractical, incomplete, and potentially unlawful.”

The Democrats specifically accuse the administration of “deliberately slow processing” of 2025 NSGP applications, noting the continued delay in announcements of 2025 funding and calling for the outstanding grants to be issued “immediately.”

“At-risk nonprofits are forced to navigate overlapping application cycles without knowing if they even need to apply for the FY 2026 NSGP,” the letter reads. “With the FY 2026 application window already open and set to close in less than a month, FEMA’s internal delays and contradictory directives are creating unnecessary burdens for subrecipients.”

It also criticizes the administration for “conflicting instructions on required documentation” and requirements related to immigration and elections imposed on grant recipients. “Imposing these complex mandates on small, volunteer-run, nonprofit organizations, threatens to penalize the very institutions the program is designed to protect,” the Democrats wrote.

A bipartisan group of House lawmakers wrote to President Donald Trump on Thursday to “express deep concern about any effort to sell F-35s to Turkey.”

The letter comes after Trump and Vice President JD Vance publicly discussed plans to push the sale ahead at the White House last week, in spite of continued legal restrictions prohibiting such a sale, and ahead of a NATO summit in Ankara next week.

“With [Turkish] President [Recep Tayyip] Erdogan’s continued aggression toward our greatest partners along with his troubling defense partnerships with our adversaries, it is not in the best interest of our country to sell them F-35s,” the lawmakers, led by Reps. Mike Lawler (R-NY) and Brad Sherman (D-CA), wrote. “While Turkey has been a NATO ally since 1952, they have hardly been a reliable partner in the present day.”

They emphasized that the first Trump administration removed Turkey from the advanced F-35 fighter jet program for its purchase of a Russian S-400 air defense system in spite of warnings from the U.S. and other NATO allies, describing the S-400 as a “major security threat” to the critical military asset.

They noted that Congress also sent a clear message codifying the ban on F-35 sales to Turkey while it maintains possession of the S-400. There have been no public reports of Turkey disposing of the S-400 system.

“Since 2019, President Erdogan has only further antagonized the U.S. and our NATO allies,” the lawmakers continued, pointing to Turkey’s continued occupation of northern Cyprus, its aggression toward Greece and its “constant and growing anti-Israel rhetoric, all while Turkey maintains bilateral relations with Iran.”

The lawmakers said that reversing course now “would send the wrong message to President Erdogan and to our allies and partners both in Europe and the Middle East.”

The letter was co-signed by Reps. Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY), Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), Jeff Hurd (R-CO), Max Miller (R-OH), Young Kim (R-CA), Stephen Lynch (D-MA), Gabe Amo (D-RI) and Jared Moskowitz (D-FL).

Other lawmakers are currently working on additional efforts to oppose the F-35 sale and other military sales to Turkey, including the White House’s recently announced sale of fighter jet engines to Ankara. Some House members reportedly plan to introduce legislation aimed at blocking that sale, though the administration will likely ultimately be able to proceed if it wishes to do so.

A new bill introduced by the House Abraham Accords Caucus instructs the administration to work to expand the Abraham Accords to include nations in Central Asia and the South Caucasus.

The bill is supported by a bipartisan group of 26 lawmakers, including the co-chairs of the caucus, Reps. Craig Goldman (R-TX), Ann Wagner (R-MO), Brad Schneider (D-IL) and Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL). It follows an announcement earlier this year that Kazakhstan, which has for decades maintained relations with Israel, would be joining the Abraham Accords.

“The more countries that are involved with Abraham Accords … then the more opportunity we [have] to guarantee peace in the Middle East,” Goldman told Jewish Insider. “That’s the overall goal, is to have peace, less war and more peace in the Middle East.”

Goldman said the push was inspired by Trump’s efforts and comments about expanding the agreements into that region, “so we’re following the president’s lead on this” with the goal of providing further momentum, though he said it’s also a “truly bipartisan piece of legislation” that should not be controversial on either side of the aisle.

The legislation is co-sponsored by Reps. Mike Lawler (R-NY), Joe Wilson (R-SC), Earl “Buddy” Carter (R-GA), Don Bacon (R-NE), Dan Newhouse (R-WA), Maria Elvira Salazar (R-FL), Rudy Yakym (R-IN), Randy Weber (R-TX), Addison McDowell (R-NC), Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), Claudia Tenney (R-NY), Darrell Issa (R-CA), Mark Messmer (R-IN), Derrick Van Orden (R-WI), Pete Stauber (R-MN), Don Davis (R-NC), Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), Jimmy Panetta (D-CA), Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), Dan Goldman (D-NY) and Lois Frankel (D-FL).

In addition to the provisions urging the expansion of the Abraham Accords into a new region, the legislation authorizes the ambassador-level special envoy for the Abraham Accords — a position created several years ago by Congress that has not yet been filled — to designate a deputy special envoy with relevant regional expertise, and bring on other necessary staff.

Lawmakers have urged President Donald Trump to fill the still-vacant ambassador post. Goldman, the Republican, said he hopes that the nomination comes “sooner rather than later.”

Trump administration officials made early promises of quick expansion of the agreements, and Trump briefly called for Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states to join the Abraham Accords as a condition for ending the war with Iran. Gulf states have demanded progress toward a Palestinian state before joining the Abraham Accords.

Goldman firmly rejected the idea that looking at other regions for potential expansion of the Abraham Accords was an acknowledgement that Saudi Arabia or other Arab states were unlikely to join in the near future.

He said that the caucus has spoken to ambassadors from some of those countries, and said that expanding the agreements further would trigger a “domino” effect. “The more we can reach out, the more countries will join, we think other countries then will be able to — and will.”

Goldman also said that, coming into Congress, he wasn’t expecting to join many or any caucuses — following the precedent he established during his dozen years in the Texas Statehouse — but he was recruited early on by Wagner to be a co-chair of the caucus, and has ultimately dedicated a significant amount of time and attention to it.

“The Abraham Accords Caucus has been absolutely unbelievable, completely bipartisan, incredibly educational,” Goldman said. “The amount of knowledge — what I know now compared to what I knew a year and a half ago is like night and day.”

He said he’s also prioritized working to grow the caucus, which has picked up more than 30 new members.

The House Appropriations Committee approved a $40 million increase in its funding proposal for the Nonprofit Security Grant Program for 2027, boosting its recommendation to $355 million, in a Tuesday night session that stretched into Wednesday morning.

The funding increase was approved as part of a negotiated bipartisan package of amendments during an Appropriations Committee markup, which passed by a voice vote.

A source familiar with the situation credited Reps. Juan Ciscomani (R-AZ), Celeste Maloy (R-UT), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) and Lois Frankel (D-FL) with securing the increase.

“Nonprofit security grants are absolutely critical to combat surging antisemitism and hate crimes,” Wasserman Schultz told Jewish Insider. “I proudly fought for an increase in NSGP funding and I’m grateful it was included, but we must do more on the floor and in conference to  make sure everybody in America can worship safely.”

In remarks during the committee markup, Wasserman Schultz thanked colleagues for supporting the request, saying that it is not “anywhere near the funding that is necessary … it is certainly a small step in the right direction,” citing recent attacks on Jewish and other communities.

Frankel said that her synagogue is guarded by several armed men, a “really sort of scary” situation.

“As antisemitism continues to rise and threats against religious communities become more frequent, Congress must do more to help houses of worship protect their congregants. No one should have to fear for their safety while practicing their faith,” Frankel said in a statement. “I’m glad we were able to secure an increase this year, but the job isn’t finished. I’ll keep working with Republicans and Democrats alike to make sure protecting synagogues and other faith-based institutions remains a priority and that our funding keeps pace with the threats they face.”

The $355 million proposal is the highest funding level to pass out of committee for the program, but still falls well below the $1 billion that lawmakers and advocates for the program on Capitol Hill say is necessary to fully meet the needs of the Jewish community and other populations under threat.

The proposal could be further increased — or face further cuts — as the appropriations process continues. The process looks to be especially chaotic this year as Senate lawmakers say they are still far apart in negotiating top-line funding levels.

The Orthodox Union, Jewish Federations of North America and Anti-Defamation League worked behind the scenes in support of the amendment, sources said.

“We appreciate this substantial increase in NSGP funding by the committee and we’re particularly thankful to Reps. Ciscomani, Maloy, Wasserman Schultz and Frankel, as well as Chair Amodei,” Nathan Diament, the executive director of the Orthodox Union Advocacy Center told Jewish Insider. “It’s well known that the security needs of the Jewish community and other faith communities are huge and we will continue to work with allies in Congress to fully meet those needs.”

Rachel Dembo, director of policy and government affairs for the Jewish Federations of North America, said JFNA “was proud to play a leading role in securing this additional bipartisan funding.” 

“This increase is a meaningful investment in the safety and security of Jewish communities and other vulnerable nonprofits, though the need for the program continues to exceed available funding,” Dembo continued. “We are grateful to the Committee and bipartisan congressional champions for strengthening this critical investment and recognizing the urgent need for nonprofit security. We look forward to continuing to work with Congress to help close the gap between available funding and demonstrated need.”

Lauren Wolman, the senior director of government relations and strategy at the Anti-Defamation League, said that the funding will be helpful, but remains insufficient.

“ADL welcomes the inclusion of an additional $40 million for NSGP in the House Homeland Security managers amendment. This increase will help more houses of worship, schools, and community centers access the security resources they need,” Wolman said. “But the truth is, the gap between what’s available and what’s needed remains vast. To truly protect vulnerable communities across the country, Congress must go further and fund the program at $1 billion to ensure every at-risk community gets the protection it deserves.”

The House Armed Services Committee blocked an amendment that sought to strip a relatively routine provision on U.S.-Israel cooperation out of the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act by a bipartisan voice vote.

Leaders of the committee on both sides of the aisle spoke out against the amendment, led by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), saying that critics of the provision — who have claimed it would fuse the U.S. and Israeli militaries or subvert U.S. sovereignty — were misrepresenting the legislation.

The provision, Section 224 of the bill, builds upon existing U.S.-Israel cooperative programs in developing and acquiring defense technologies and requires the Pentagon to designate a single official to oversee all U.S.-Israel cooperative programs.

Khanna said, in introducing the amendment, that the “American people are tired of the arrogance and insolence of Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu telling America what we should do,” and described the amendment as a handout of additional U.S. support for Israel. He suggested that it would undermine U.S. sovereignty.

He also claimed, falsely, that Netanyahu had written to the sponsors of the NDAA provision praising them for it and framing it as his initiative and a way to subvert congressional oversight and approval.

Despite misrepresentations online, Netanyahu’s letter pertained to a separate piece of legislation endorsing his call to wind down U.S. aid to Israel, though both touch on the idea of expanding U.S.-Israel cooperative programs and co-development.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle pushed back.

Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), the Armed Services Committee ranking member, said he is “very sympathetic” to Khanna’s “frustration … with Netanyahu’s leadership in Israel” but said that “the way this amendment was described is simply not accurate.” And he emphasized that the vote was not a referendum on the U.S.-Israel relationship broadly.

“This is not a new framework,” Smith said, noting that the U.S. already has three existing cooperative programs with Israel to develop new technologies, and that the provision does not create any new programs. “To say that this is us bowing to the bidding of Israel on this is completely inaccurate. The reason we’re doing this is because we benefit from that technology development.”

He explained that the reason such partnerships exist with Israel is because Israel has developed battle-tested and -proven systems that the U.S. can benefit from.

“Taking a step back from using technology that is available to us just because we strongly disagree with where Israel is at right now, I think would be a mistake,” Smith said.

Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL), the Armed Services Committee chair, emphasized that the provision does not create any new programs but instead improves oversight by designating a single official to be responsible for existing U.S.-Israel cooperative programs.

“Claims that this provision somehow cedes authority to a foreign government are simply ridiculous,” Rogers continued.

Reps. Ronny Jackson (R-TX), Don Davis (D-NC), Don Bacon (R-NE), Joe Wilson (R-SC), Jared Golden (D-ME) and Austin Scott (R-GA) also spoke against the amendment, offering similar arguments. Jackson and Davis were the lead sponsors of the FUTURES Act, on which the provision was modeled.

Jackson and Davis both emphasized that they had not received any communication from Netanyahu about the provision in question, and noted that it builds on an effort that has been established over multiple recent NDAAs.

Jackson noted that the legislation even requires public reporting on the cooperative efforts, including how they benefit the U.S. “Those saying Sec. 224 is a military merger removing U.S. sovereign command simply have not read or do not understand this provision,” Jackson said.

Davis said that the amendment would not stop the existing collaboration between the U.S. and Israel, but would “hinder our ability to cooperate more efficiently” against bad actors globally.

Golden argued, “Opponents of Sec. 224 are really allowing a broader political disagreement and these concerns about Israel … to override a program that fundamentally advances U.S. national security.” 

He emphasized that the provision doesn’t reduce U.S. oversight, provide Israel with access to U.S. data, give Israel control over U.S. defense programs or production, create a backdoor for military aid or “fuse” the U.S. military with Israel’s, referencing various arguments made against the program.

Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-CA) was the only member to join Khanna in supporting the amendment, claiming it would “institutionalize and expand U.S. military integration beyond anything in the history of the relationship, fusing our defense industries across research production and emerging technologies,” claiming that the effort contravenes U.S. arms sales laws, though no sales are involved in the provision under discussion.

She also suggested that the Israeli government was a cybersecurity threat to the U.S., pointing to the U.S. sanctions on the private Israeli spyware firm NSO Group.

AIPAC opposed the Khanna amendment, while J Street and a range of progressive groups supported it. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) has said he would introduce an amendment on the House floor to remove the provision if the Armed Services Committee failed to do so.

The committee rejected, by a 26-30 vote, an amendment by Rep. Pat Ryan (D-NY) to block any further funding for operations in or against Iran, except in defense of the U.S. or its allies and partners from imminent attack. Davis was the only Democrat to cross party lines to oppose the amendment.

“It would prohibit the president and secretary of defense from using my constituents’, our constituents’ tax dollars to continue waging this ill-conceived and unconstitutional war in Iran,” Ryan said, describing the amendment as consistent with the House war powers vote to halt the Iran war.

Rogers said that “this incredibly reckless amendment would prohibit our military from defending our service members and our allies against [Iranian] attacks.”

An amendment by Rep. Wesley Bell (D-MO) to instruct the Pentagon to institute a department-wide policy prohibiting the display of hate symbols and setting uniform standards to identify, address and review hate symbols was adopted by a voice vote.

“The department currently relies on a patchwork of service-specific policies governing tattoos, symbols, and workplace displays,” Bell said. “As a result, standards vary across the military, creating inconsistencies, and how hate symbols are identified, addressed, and enforced. That lack of uniformity creates unnecessary gaps and uncertainty where there should be clarity.”

Bell and other Democrats framed the policy as a response to the Coast Guard’s moves last year to reclassify displays of swastikas as “potentially divisive” rather than inherently banned hate symbols.

“The swastika is not politically divisive. It is one of the most universally recognized symbols of hatred in human history,” Bell said. “It represents racial supremacy, it represents antisemitism, violent extremism and the systemic persecution and murder of millions.”

The Anti-Defamation League praised Bell and the committee for passing the amendment.

An amendment by Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA), which Moulton said sought a full accounting from the Pentagon of the costs of U.S. military operations against Iran, failed in a party-line vote. 

However, the text of Moulton’s amendment, as shared by the committee, included language calling for a diplomatic solution to the war in Iran and describing it as a “unilateral war of choice initiated by the president” without support from Congress, the American people or U.S. allies.

A separate amendment by Moulton, which conformed more closely to his description — requesting a report on the total cost of military operations in Iran including replacement value of equipment damaged or destroyed, the cost of munitions used, the costs for repairing or rebuilding damaged military facilities — was approved without incident as part of a bipartisan package of amendments.

As part of another bipartisan amendment package, the committee approved an amendment by Rep. Pat Harrigan (R-NC) would establish a U.S.-Abraham Accords Defense Cooperation Initiative, to improve cooperation between the U.S. and Abraham Accords countries, with a focus on air and missile defenses, missile development, intelligence, reconnaissance, planning special operations force development and joint military exercises.

The effort is aimed at deterring Iran and its proxies.

As part of that same amendment package, the committee added a request for the administration to provide Congress with a refreshed strategy for integrated air and missile defense with Middle East partners, which Congress first requested in a previous NDAA.

In another amendment package, the committee approved an amendment that would withhold 75% percent of U.S. funding for the Iraqi security forces until the Pentagon certifies that the Iraqi government has taken “credible steps” to reduce the influence and power of Iranian-aligned militia groups within the Iraqi security forces.

The committee also approved, as part of amendment packages, provisions requiring the Defense Department to report to or brief Congress on opportunities to expand defense partnerships in the Eastern Mediterranean to combat Hezbollah and other Iranian proxies, biosecurity risks from Iran, Russian influence and bases in Syria, the civilian harm investigation into the U.S. strike on a girls’ school in Minab, Iran, the Iranian drone attack that killed six U.S. service members in Kuwait on March 1 and the feasibility of using current authorities to support the professionalization of Syrian security forces.

The committee approved the amended NDAA by a 44-12 vote — an unusually large number of Democratic “No” votes on a generally bipartisan bill. Democrats had sought cuts to the overall topline funding proposal for the Pentagon in 2027, which Republicans rejected.

Republicans also successfully incorporated a provision to formally rename the Department of Defense as the Department of War, as the Trump administration has done informally.

All five of Pennsylvania’s living former governors, both Republicans and Democrats, released a statement on Monday calling on state officials to prioritize the safety and security of Gov. Josh Shapiro. 

The bipartisan letter comes days after Pennsylvania Treasurer Stacy Garrity — Shapiro’s leading Republican opponent in this year’s gubernatorial race — said the state would not pay for security upgrades at Shapiro’s private home.

“Combatting political violence and keeping our elected officials safe should always be nonpartisan and a priority,” Democratic former Govs. Tom Wolf and Ed Rendell wrote in a statement with GOP former Govs. Tom Corbett, Mark Schweiker and Tom Ridge.

The security upgrades were already made to Shapiro’s privately-owned family home in Abington, outside of Philadelphia, following the arson attack on the state-owned governor’s mansion in Harrisburg last year. State Police said such upgrades were necessary because Shapiro and his family lived in their private home while repairs were undertaken at the governor’s mansion after the fire.

Shapiro and prosecutors have said that the attack, which occurred on the first night of Passover, was antisemitic in nature, citing the perpetrator’s targeting of Shapiro over his stance on Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza.

The former governors did not specifically mention Garrity, though they did refer directly to the “unspeakable attack” that occurred at the governor’s residence while he and his family were asleep. 

“For us, the attack on Pennsylvania’s First Family was particularly upsetting,” the governors wrote. “In the aftermath of that attack we ask the state’s current leaders and legislators to make the safety and security of the governor and his family a priority.” 

Garrity told reporters last Thursday that the state’s procurement rules don’t allow public funds to be used to pay for construction work on property that is not state-owned, SpotlightPA reported. 

Garrity insisted she was not motivated by politics, saying she calls “balls and strikes here at Treasury.”

A spokesperson for Shapiro said last week that Garrity’s announcement was “a completely unprecedented and shameful political action without legal basis.”

As U.S. discourse about Israel has become increasingly polarized and the left has grown increasingly hostile to the Jewish state, support for Israel’s missile-defense systems that protect the lives of millions of civilians remained a popular bipartisan priority.

Even among many progressives who were otherwise critical of Israel, U.S. aid for systems such as Iron Dome remained a rare exception, with most praising the system as an important protection measure for Israelis and Palestinians alike.

Emblematic of that fact: Just four House Democrats and two Republicans voted last year in favor of cutting $500 million in cooperative missile-defense funding that the U.S. provides to Israel annually.

But in the wake of the wars in Gaza, Iran and Lebanon, that consensus appears to be shifting quickly on the left. A growing number of progressive candidates — along with J Street, the left-wing Israel advocacy group — are now racing to disavow all military support for Israel, including for defensive systems such as the Iron Dome.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), one of the most prominent progressive standard-bearers, has been a trendsetter on the issue. She said earlier this month that she would not support any funding for Israeli missile defense going forward, after previously vociferously defending her vote against last year’s amendment cutting missile defense as a clear and easy choice.

Her reversal on the issue came amid criticism and pressure from Democratic Socialists of America members over that vote, as the far-left group debated whether to endorse her once more in her upcoming reelection bid.

Ocasio-Cortez argued that Israel is fully financially capable of funding Iron Dome and other defensive systems itself  — pointing in part to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s comments earlier this year that he wants to wind down U.S. aid to Israel, which have proven to be a thorn in the side of some pro-Israel advocates.

She was quickly followed by another prominent progressive Democrat, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), who also harbors presidential ambitions, and other left-wing candidates. Another abrupt about-face on the issue came from former New York City Comptroller Brad Lander, who came out in support of Iron Dome funding during his 2025 mayoral campaign, but is now opposing it as he runs to the left of Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) in a congressional primary.

Michael Blake, the far-left challenger to Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY), also said he would continue to support Iron Dome funding just months ago, but has now flip-flopped to oppose it. Meanwhile, Torres doubled down on his support for Iron Dome funding in a post on social media over the weekend, saying, “I will never join that bandwagon—no matter how politically expedient it may become. Even the world’s most committed pacifist should have no objection to Iron Dome. It is purely defensive. It does not attack anyone. It simply intercepts projectiles that would otherwise strike homes, hospitals, schools, and synagogues. Its sole purpose is to prevent mass murder.”

Strikingly, J Street, which frames itself as a pro-Israel group, is echoing the same rhetoric used by far-left lawmakers like Ocasio-Cortez. “What progressives are saying is not radical, and in fact, Benjamin Netanyahu and Lindsey Graham are arguing the same thing. Israel is capable of paying for its own military equipment, including supplies for its missile defense systems,” a J Street spokesperson told JI.

That stance is at odds with J Street PAC’s own endorsement criteria for candidates, as displayed on its website as of Friday afternoon. J Street President Jeremy Ben Ami said in a Sunday Substack post that he wants to see U.S. direct aid and subsidies to Israel ended “responsibl[y] yet rapid[ly]” upon the conclusion of the current U.S.-Israel Memorandum of Understanding, but that the U.S. should continue to sell and co-develop defensive systems to Israel, subject to Israeli compliance with U.S. arms sales law.

Systems like Iron Dome are also co-produced by the U.S. and Israel, and similar arrangements would likely continue even if direct U.S. financial aid to Israel was ended in the short term.

And as the consensus among the left shifts, some anti-Israel Democratic candidates are pushing the envelope even further. Saikat Chakrabarti, a far-left candidate running for retiring Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) San Francisco House seat, said Thursday that “ending funding isn’t enough — we need sanctions.” Chakrabarti previously served as Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff.

There are signs that some more moderate lawmakers are also feeling the pressure from the left amid the declining support for Israel within the Democratic party: Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), who last year rejected efforts to block U.S. arms sales to Israel, said last week he’ll now oppose offensive aid while saying he views missile-defense support differently — a similar position to the one that progressives like Ocasio-Cortez and Lander held just months ago.

The Trump administration intervened to water down a broadly bipartisan sanctions bill targeting Iran’s oil exports to China, sources told Jewish Insider.

The House is set to vote next week on the Enhanced Iran Sanctions Act, led by Reps. Mike Lawler (R-NY) and Sheila Cherfilus McCormick (D-FL), which has nearly 300 cosponsors and advanced out of the House Foreign Affairs Committee in April 2025 by a voice vote, indicating broad bipartisan support. It began moving to the House floor earlier this year using a consensus measure for legislation with at least 290 cosponsors.

But the version of the bill now up for consideration is significantly different from the version that was first introduced and passed out of committee.

A congressional source and another person familiar with the legislation said that the changes, which they said would soften the impact of the bill, had been made at the behest of the Trump administration, which had delayed progress on the bill for months over concerns about placing sanctions on China, which would have been caught up in the expanded sanctions on Iran’s oil trade as the primary importer of Iranian oil. 

The administration has been engaging in trade talks with Beijing, which it felt could have been disrupted by the enactment of sanctions, though the Treasury Department has still sanctioned some oil processing facilities in China under other authorities passed by Congress in 2024.

As currently written, the legislation gives the administration the authority to impose sanctions on foreign individuals or businesses that have “knowingly engaged in any significant transaction related or incidental to the processing, refining, export, transfer or sale of oil, condensates, or other petroleum or petrochemical product in whole or part from Iran” or conducted significant transactions with individuals or institutions sanctioned under a previous Iran oil sanctions bill.

The sanctions would also apply to corporate officers of such companies and immediate family members who “demonstrably benefit” from these activities.

The original version of the sanctions legislation, however, mandated the imposition of such sanctions — providing less latitude to the administration in implementing the bill — and specified that banks and financial institutions, insurance providers, ship-flagging registries, pipeline builders and operators of processing facilities would all specifically be subject to sanctions under the legislation. 

It applied to successors and aliases of sanctioned companies, as well as to individuals or organizations that directly or indirectly owned or controlled a majority interest in a sanctioned institution or were majority owned or controlled by a sanctioned institution. And the sanctions applied to all immediate family members of those directly sanctioned.

The original bill applied to any transaction related to the Iranian petrochemical trade, rather than only “significant” transactions, and included specific mention of natural gas exports as well.

The updated legislation modifies the presidential waiver provision, which originally applied only if the president determined that waiving the sanctions was “vital to the national interests” of the U.S. The updated version allows a waiver if it is “in the national interests” of the country.

The original bill required the administration to notify Congress 15 days before it planned to renew a waiver, if applicable, whereas the new bill does not include any specific timeline for such notification.

The updated bill also entirely eliminates provisions creating an interagency working group responsible for working with international partners to coordinate sanctions and share intelligence.

The new version of the bill includes a provision that would terminate the sanctions if Iran ceases its malign activities.

The House will also vote next week on the Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery (HEAR) Act, which aims to help Jewish families recover Nazi-looted artwork by eliminating loopholes used by museums and other stakeholders that have continued to hold such works.

The bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent.

Both bills are being offered under suspension of the rules, a procedure requiring two-thirds support from the chamber. 

The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights met in Washington on Thursday to hold its first hearing on campus antisemitism in more than 20 years. 

The commission — a bipartisan federal fact-finding agency established in 1957 — is chaired by a Democrat and also includes two Republicans appointed by President Donald Trump, yielding a diverse group of witnesses who sparred over Trump’s approach to campus antisemitism and his administration’s firing of more than half of the attorneys in the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights. 

The 22 witnesses included Craig Trainor, who served as acting director of OCR during Trump’s first year in office; several former OCR attorneys; Matt Nosanchuk, a former deputy assistant secretary at DOE during the Biden administration now at The George Washington University Law School; Brandeis Center CEO Ken Marcus, who led OCR during Trump’s first term; National Jewish Advocacy Center CEO Mark Goldfeder; Jewish Council for Public Affairs CEO Amy Spitalnick; J Street U Director Erin Beiner; and students from Harvard, American University and Cal Poly San Luis Obispo. 

Two former OCR attorneys who lost their jobs last year after Trump slashed thousands of jobs at the Education Department, which he has said he hopes to shutter entirely, testified that the office’s civil rights monitoring and enforcement team had been pulverized, leaving the agency less equipped to investigate complaints of antisemitism at schools and universities.

“The issue now, in the wake of these cuts, is whether sufficient resources remain to combat the ongoing threat of antisemitism in our nation’s schools,” said Linda Mangel, who served as enforcement director at OCR until last March. “Unless immediate and significant steps are taken now to rebuild the agency so it can respond to complaints from students in harm’s way, hate will win.” 

Beth Gellman-Beer, who was director of OCR’s Philadelphia office until it was shuttered last year, said she worried the dramatic reduction in staff in the civil rights office would lead to a diminished ability to monitor universities’ handling of antisemitic discrimination. 

“I didn’t have the opportunity to complete the monitoring for all of the cases that my office helped resolve, and that is going to weigh heavily on me into my career in the future, because I know, from my 18 years of experience at OCR, that the power doesn’t lie in the terms of the agreement, but in rigorous enforcement of that agreement,” Gellman-Beer said.

Nosanchuk — who was a political appointee at the Department of Education during Biden’s term — said that an effective, if bureaucratic, approach to combating antisemitism that he argued was working had since been abandoned for political reasons. 

“What has replaced this approach? In the name of combating antisemitism, the current administration has built a Trojan horse to unleash a frontal ideological attack on higher education,” said Nosanchuk. 

A cadre of more conservative witnesses pushed back, arguing that fewer staff at OCR does not mean less enforcement of federal civil rights statutes, particularly when it comes to antisemitism. Instead, they said the onus has now been taken up by a slew of other federal agencies, including the Justice Department and the Department of Health and Human Services. Even if OCR’s team has resolved fewer cases related to antisemitism than the Biden administration, the forceful strategy by Trump has been more impactful, they argued.  

“If we need to understand what’s happening with the Trump administration, we’re seeing a whole of government approach using not just the Education Department, but also HHS, Justice, the Federal Acquisition [Service] and other agencies in an extraordinary way,” said Marcus. “It’s far more comprehensive than anything we’ve seen before.”

Trainor, who led OCR until he left for a position at the Department of Housing and Urban Development this month, clapped back at critics of Trump’s approach and his cuts to OCR.

“What I just hear is sort of desperate attempts to justify being complicit in a failed OCR operation that was politicized under the Biden administration, and the results and the efforts that were taken by the Trump administration speak for themselves,” said Trainor. “The Biden OCR’s response to these hateful hordes was equivocal, craven and pathetic.” 

At other sessions, witnesses addressed the constitutionality of Trump’s higher education policies, particularly as he has cut funding from universities. A group of law professors debated whether certain efforts to combat antisemitism infringe on students’ and professors’ constitutionally protected free speech. Students discussed whether they felt their concerns had been taken seriously by government officials.

The members of the commission told witnesses that they intended to use the testimony from Thursday’s hearing, as well as public testimony gathered over the coming weeks, to publish a bipartisan report about federal civil rights laws as related to antisemitism. One of the Trump-appointed commissioners said that the witnesses criticizing Trump’s cuts to the Education Department jeopardized that task. 

“I think the problem that is sought to be addressed here is so wicked and evil that bickering about federal bureaucrats losing their jobs is not serving any purpose,” said J. Christian Adams, the Trump-appointed commissioner, who is the president and general counsel at the conservative Public Interest Legal Foundation. “I think complaining about Donald Trump is not going to get a report passed by this commission, because you won’t get the votes.”

The last time the commission produced a report on campus antisemitism was in 2006. One of its findings proved particularly prescient, as witnesses on Thursday discussed the antisemitism that followed the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks in Israel: “Anti-Semitic bigotry is no less morally deplorable when camouflaged as anti-Israelism or anti-Zionism,” the commission wrote 20 years ago.

A pair of senators and a House lawmaker will introduce bipartisan, bicameral legislation on Thursday aimed at boosting U.S.-Israeli cooperation on bilateral defense programs.

The United States-Israel Framework for Upgraded Technologies, Unified Research, and Enhanced Security Act of 2026, abbreviated to the United States-Israel FUTURES Act, will be introduced in the Senate by Sens. Ted Budd (R-NC) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and in the House by Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-TX). The bill establishes a cooperative initiative focused on accelerating and expanding bilateral defense technology research, development, testing and evaluation projects, as well as supporting industrial cooperation. 

The U.S. and Israel have worked together for years on bilateral defense and technology programs, most notably U.S.-Israel cooperative missile-defense programs — including Iron Dome, which offers protection against drones and short-range surface-to-surface rockets; David’s Sling, which can intercept short-to-medium- and medium-to-long-range surface-to-surface missiles fired from 62 to 124 miles away; and the Arrow-2 and Arrow-3 systems, which can intercept longer-range ballistic missiles. Another is the anti-tunneling and counter-unmanned aerial systems programs.

“The U.S. has a long history of working with our ally Israel on defense programs to counter unmanned aerial systems from our adversaries, strengthen missile defense, and detect and neutralize underground tunnels threatening the security of our two respective countries,” Budd told Jewish Insider in a statement on the bill. 

“The U.S.-Israel FUTURES Act offers an opportunity to strengthen existing bilateral programs by advancing joint investments such as emerging technologies, defense industrial base cooperation, artificial intelligence, and biotechnology initiatives,” his statement continued. “I am proud to be working with Sen. Gillibrand to advance regional security in the Middle East and strengthen U.S. and Israeli defense.”

Gillibrand told JI, “This bipartisan initiative will enable long-term collaboration on shared security goals between the United States and our vital democratic ally Israel. We must strengthen our military and technological capabilities to counter continued and future threats in the region.”

Jackson told JI that the bill “secures America’s competitive edge in defense technology and reinforces our alliance with Israel, our greatest partner in the Middle East, to deter evolving global threats.” 

“Under President Trump’s leadership, we are ensuring the technological supremacy of our military and delivering the unmatched capabilities our warfighters need to dominate the battlefield and protect the American people,” Jackson said. 

A bipartisan group of 23 senators introduced a resolution on Wednesday condemning the Iranian government for its crackdown on protesters and attempts to cut off internet access across the country.

The resolution highlights the massive scope of the crackdown, which some reports indicate has included more than 30,000 deaths and more than 40,000 arrests. It puts ultimate responsibility for these actions on Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and notes that the regime has a long-standing pattern of such crackdowns against protesters and other dissidents, as well as religious minorities.

“Iranian civilians’ unprecedented nationwide protests and bravery, confronted with the regime’s unprecedented widespread extrajudicial killing of thousands and disruption of all electronic communication, have profoundly destabilized the country and constitute changed conditions in Iran,” the resolution reads, highlighting that the regime’s suppression and killing of protesters continues.

The resolution “strongly condemns” the Iranian government massacres, as well as its violations of Iranians’ human rights, and “commends the courage of the Iranian people.”

It calls on the Iranian government to hold open elections and “supports the calls of the Iranian people to bring human rights violators to justice.”

The resolution is led by Sens. James Lankford (R-OK) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), and co-sponsored by Sens. Cory Booker (D-NJ), John Boozman (R-AR), Katie Britt (R-AL), Ted Budd (R-NC), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Joni Ernst (R-IA), Deb Fischer (R-NE), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), John Hoeven (R-ND), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), Pete Ricketts (R-NE), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Dan Sullivan (R-AK), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Tom Cotton (R-AR), Andy Kim (D-NJ) and Dick Durbin (D-IL)

Support for the resolution, which includes lawmakers from a wide political and ideological spectrum, highlights the widespread outrage on Capitol Hill at the Iranian government’s actions against Iranian civilians.

“The Iranian regime has a long record of threatening Americans and our allies while denying its own people the most basic freedoms,” Lankford said in a statement. “For weeks, security forces have fired live rounds into crowds, overwhelmed hospitals and morgues, and carried out mass arrests as Iranians gathered to assemble peacefully in protest. Innocent civilians, including children and bystanders, have been killed in the streets. The United States stands with the Iranian people in their pursuit of freedom and will continue to condemn the regime for its ongoing human rights abuses against its own citizens.”

A bipartisan group of 82 House lawmakers wrote to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem on Thursday urging her to roll back new conditions placed on applications for the Nonprofit Security Grant Program amid rising antisemitic attacks.

The bipartisan support for the letter is particularly notable given that, while Democrats have been raising concerns about the conditions for months, Republicans have, publicly, been comparatively quiet.

“We are writing to you today to express our desire to ensure that the NSGP is adequately funded and unimpeded by new requirements that are unrelated to the security of grant recipients and their communities,” the letter, led by Reps. Max Miller (R-OH), Brad Schneider (D-IL), Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) and Michael McCaul (R-TX), reads. “Insufficient funding or unnecessary obstacles to obtaining grants could undermine the right of every religious community to freely and peacefully worship and congregate without fear.”

The letter states that new conditions issued by DHS in April 2025 “create new compliance requirements for recipients that will divert limited funds and restrict the religious conscience of synagogues, schools, and other institutions pivotal to our communities.”

The new conditions may compel religious institutions to cooperate with immigration enforcement activities and eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion programs.

“We encourage DHS to work to make compliance with NSGP requirements as simple and streamlined as possible. We also request that DHS ensures NSGP remains a program designed to protect the security of houses of worship, not to reinforce other policy priorities,” the lawmakers wrote. “In this time of rising antisemitic terror attacks and violence against diverse faith-based institutions, we believe it is crucial that NSGP remains a critical resource for all who seek to worship in safety and free from partisan politicization.”

They called on Noem to issue new guidance that “waives any terms and conditions that do not directly relate to the grant’s purpose, which is to help qualified institutions improve their security against increasing threats.”

The lawmakers emphasized the clear need for and lifesaving impact of NSGP funds in a time of increased hate-motivated violence. They also thanked Noem for her “ongoing support” for the program.

DHS has not yet awarded grants from the 2025 grant cycle, and lawmakers have accused the administration of withholding critical information about which institutions have received funding under separate grant rounds. Democrats have alleged the department is mismanaging the program.

Funding for the grants in 2026 — thought to be finalized just weeks ago — was again thrown into question last week when lawmakers agreed to reopen negotiations over the Department of Homeland Security funding package for the year following the deadly shootings by immigration agents of two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis.

“The Nonprofit Security Grant Program is one of the most vital programs protecting the Jewish community. We continue to encourage every Jewish institution with heightened security needs to apply for these funds,” Jewish Federations of North America CEO Eric Fingerhut said. “We have also heard from our community that the current terms and conditions have had the unintended effect of deterring some organizations from applying, which is why we believe they should be updated appropriately.”

“At a time of rising violence and hatred targeting houses of worship, NSGP is an essential lifeline for synagogues and other faith-based institutions seeking to protect their congregants,” said Lauren Wolman, ADL’s senior director of government relations and strategy. “We are grateful for the bipartisan effort to ensure DHS requirements remain clear, consistent, and focused on what matters most — helping at-risk nonprofits protect themselves from threats. Organizations must be able to access these resources quickly, with confidence, and without unnecessary delays.”

“Jewish and other communities facing violent threats deserve to know that the government is prioritizing their safety, not politicizing it,” Amy Spitalnick, the CEO of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, said. “Yet the chaos created by these new terms and conditions has only created more vulnerability for communities, who are worried that they’ll be forced to choose between their core religious beliefs and their basic security — a concern we’ve been raising for months.” 

“We appreciate Reps. Miller and Gottheimer for helping lead this important bipartisan call to clarify that NSGP should not be used for anything other than the security of our communities,” Spitalnick continued.

A bipartisan group of senators wrote to Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Wednesday urging him to “surge resources to quickly enable critical internet freedom support” to protesters in Iran, pointing to funding cuts that have stretched resources for such programs.

“Today, many of the NGOs and technology providers that maintain these tools are facing closure due to funding cuts and more importantly, fewer Iranian citizens can share their videos and messages with the world and each other,” the letter warns. “Without the continuous operation of internet freedom programming carried out by the State Department and Open Technology Fund, millions of Iranians will lose their last secure window and voice to the outside world.”

The lawmakers, Sens. James Lankford (R-OK), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Cory Booker (D-NJ), warned that if U.S. programs fully lapse, regime-controlled programs and state media will step into the gap, “giving the regime near-total control over the digital space and putting users at far greater risk.”

“As we watch brave Iranians take to the streets, it is clear that supporting the Iranian people’s access to information is not a partisan issue but a matter of national security, as well as meeting legislative requirements for a strategy for promoting internet freedom in Iran,” the lawmakers said, pointing to existing legislation mandating the State Department to expand internet access in Iran. “The United States must pair its maximum pressure on the regime with maximum support for the Iranian people.”

The letter comes at a time when Congress has offered few of its own strategies to respond to the wave of protests around Iran — which, according to Rubio, have now largely been put down by the regime.

Such efforts to promote free internet access to the Iranian people, amid efforts by the regime to impose an internet blackout, have emerged as a key area of bipartisan agreement.

Much of the U.S.’ global communications programming, including funding for promoting internet access, was slashed last year amid cutbacks to various foreign aid programs. Some prominent Republicans have criticized the administration, saying that government-sponsored news programming and communications assistance have failed to meet the moment in Iran.

The letter emphasizes the “long-standing and bipartisan commitment” to supporting internet freedom programs, which are “more important than ever as the people of Iran protest against the regime in record numbers.” The legislators noted that prior administrations have, for two decades, supported various anti-censorship and internet freedom tools in Iran, and that Congress passed legislation in 2024 supporting such programs.

“Without U.S. leadership, an entire generation of Iranians would have remained in the dark — and the most powerful source of pressure against the Islamic Republic, the Iranian people themselves, would have been neutralized,” the letter reads.

It notes that the existing U.S. programs allowing a small number of Iranians to remain online had “proved decisive” during the Israel-Iran war last summer to demonstrate the division between the Iranian people and the regime, and said that expanded internet access now “would put a spotlight on the increasingly securitized atmosphere that is cracking down on dissent.”

A bipartisan pair of House lawmakers will reintroduce legislation on Wednesday to address the threat of killer drone strikes by the Iranian regime and other foreign adversaries through increased cooperation between the U.S. and Israel, Jewish Insider has learned.

Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) and Andrew Garbarino (R-NY) are the lead sponsors of the U.S.-Israel Anti-Killer Drone Act, which the duo first introduced together back in 2023. That bill proposed increasing annual funding caps for existing U.S.-Israel counter-drone programs from $40 million to $55 million. 

This latest iteration of the legislation increases that annual funding cap to $100 million. It also now includes all unmanned drone systems rather than solely covering aerial drones. The updates to the legislation mirror the expansion of the existing U.S.-Israel counter-drone program to address various types of drones — not only airborne ones — in the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act.

The joint counter-drone program is currently set to be funded at $75 million for 2026, based on the appropriations legislation introduced on Tuesday.

The Gottheimer-Garbarino bill states that it is the sense of Congress that the U.S. and Israel should continue to collaborate and expand their ongoing work in counter-drone technology, increases the proposed funding — though any actual funding allocations would have to be finalized separately — and directs the Department of Defense to report to Congress annually on the program.

The legislation comes as Israeli leaders look to shift the future of U.S. aid to the Jewish state, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announcing that he wants to wind down direct U.S. financial support in the next decade.

Analysts and experts have predicted that the next U.S.-Israel memorandum of understanding, and the future of U.S. aid and cooperation with Israel, could focus more heavily on these sorts of jointly funded cooperative programs, which are appropriated through the Department of Defense and aim to benefit both countries, rather than direct financial assistance to Israel.

The bill’s text runs through a litany of incidents of Iranian and Iranian proxy drone attacks and attempted attacks on Israeli and U.S. targets throughout the region; the expansion and advancement of Iran’s drone production capacity; and Iran’s provision of drones to Russia.

Both Gottheimer and Garbarino cited the Iranian drone threat as reason for promoting the legislation back in 2023.

“Iran’s arsenal of killer drones has only grown in recent years, and attacks across the Middle East have killed and wounded Americans — showing once again why the threat of terrorism remains so pervasive,” Gottheimer said at the time. “We continue to see Iran-backed terrorist groups target innocent civilians which is why we must take concrete action to counter their deadly drone capabilities.”

“Time and again, the Iranian regime has used unmanned aerial systems (UAS) to continue its destabilizing behavior, threatening not only the broader Middle East region, but also American troops, interests, and our greatest ally in the region, Israel,” Garbarino said. 

A bipartisan group of 59 House lawmakers sent a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Thursday urging the State Department to continue condemning Iran’s crackdown on protesters across the country. 

The letter, led by Rep. Randy Weber (R-TX), encourages the Trump administration to remain vocally supportive of the protesters amid “the Iranian regime’s ongoing violent suppression of protests across Iran.” The lawmakers urged Rubio to continue speaking out and ensure “whole-of-government support” from the U.S. is presented publicly to Iranians.

“The Iranian people have made clear their demand for a secular, democratic, non-nuclear republic grounded in political pluralism and respect for human dignity,” the letter reads. “Protesters have also explicitly rejected all forms of authoritarian rule, whether Iran’s former monarchy dictatorship or its current theocratic system, and seek the right to determine their own future. Recent international reactions against the regime’s brutalities underscore the urgent global concern over continued violence against civilians and abuses of power in Iran.”

“We urge the Department of State to continue publicly condemning the Iranian regime’s violent repression of protesters, including attacks on hospitals and medical facilities,” it continues. “At this critical juncture, whole-of-government support is essential to reaffirm the United States’ commitment to universal human rights and solidarity with the Iranian people.”

The lawmakers also noted their “deep concern” about the ongoing crackdown against protesters.

“Credible reports indicate the use of lethal force, mass arrests, and intimidation against civilians exercising their fundamental rights,” they wrote. “We are particularly alarmed by reports that Iranian authorities have targeted civilian sites, including hospitals and medical facilities, denying injured protesters access to urgent medical care. Such actions constitute violations of international humanitarian and human rights law.”

Weber’s letter was cosigned by Reps. Don Bacon (R-NE), Andy Barr (R-KY), Austin Scott (R-GA), Nancy Mace (R-SC), Brian Babin (R-TX), James Walkinshaw (D-VA), Beth Van Duyne (R-TX), William Timmons (R-SC), Tom Tiffany (R-WI), Glenn Thompson (R-PA), Tom Suozzi (D-NY), Marlin Stutzman (R-IN), Pete Stauber (R-MN), Chris Smith (R-NJ), Maria Salazar (R-FL), John Rutherford (R-FL), Raul Ruiz (D-CA), Zach Nunn (R-IA), Donald Norcross (D-NJ), Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), John Moolenaar (R-MI), Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-IA), Carol Miller (R-WV), Tom McClintock (R-CA), Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Laurel Lee (R-FL), Mike Lawler (R-NY), Nick Langworthy (R-NY), Nick LaLota (R-NY), Tom Kean (R-NJ), Jeff Hurd (R-CO), Val Hoyle (D-OR), Andy Harris (R-MD), Brett Guthrie (R-KY), Michael Guest (R-MS), Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), Carlos Gimenez (R-FL), Laura Friedman (D-CA), Scott Franklin (R-FL), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), Scott Fitzgerald (R-WI), Randy Fine (R-FL), Randy Feenstra (R-IA), Jake Ellzey (R-TX), Danny Davis (D-IL), Jeff Crank (R-CO), Joe Courtney (D-CT), Herbert Conaway (D-NJ), Mike Carey (R-OH), Brendan Boyle (D-PA), Mike Bost (R-IL), Sanford Bishop (D-GA), Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), Aaron Bean (R-FL), Troy Balderson (R-OH), Mark Amodei (R-NV) and Rick Allen (R-GA).

“The Iranian people have made it unmistakably clear that they reject this regime and the system of repression it has imposed on them,” Weber said in a statement on the letter. “From mass arrests to targeting hospitals, the regime has shown it will use any means to silence political dissent. The United States must continue to condemn these abuses and stand with the Iranian people as they demand the right to determine their own future.”

One of Washington’s few remaining bipartisan traditions is the annual clamoring for a ticket to the White House Hanukkah party — an affair that was smaller than usual this year after the Trump administration tore down the East Wing, prompting disappointment even from some Republican allies who did not score an invite. If you’re a member of the opposing political party, forget about it.  

But even as power changes hands in Washington, one person is a fixture at Republican and Democratic White House Hanukkah parties, as well as Hanukkah gatherings all across the Beltway, from the Pentagon to the Justice Department to the Capitol. That’s Rabbi Levi Shemtov, the executive vice president of American Friends of Lubavitch (Chabad), the Washington arm of the global Chabad movement, and Washington’s unofficial menorah-lighter-in-chief.

“I was raised during the Bicentennial, and I got a very patriotic education in our day school. I felt very American, and I thought this was a strong public expression of a deep Jewish pride that I was able to enjoy,” Shemtov said during Hanukkah last week. “I come from grandfathers on both sides of my family who were arrested and imprisoned, tortured and exiled for being Jews and for practicing Judaism and for leading Jewish communities. So I wasn’t going to let the freedom we are so fortunate to have here just pass without my active participation in it.”

In an interview with Jewish Insider, Shemtov reflected on the importance of spreading a Hanukkah message of light in a region where that’s often missing: the halls of power in Washington. 

During Hanukkah this year Shemtov attended as many as four events in a day, shuttling between government institutions and reciting the blessings in front of dignitaries including President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Attorney General Pam Bondi. He led a bipartisan menorah lighting on Capitol Hill with House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY). 

“The menorah itself is a symbol of bipartisanship, in my opinion, because you almost always have four branches on one side, four branches on the other, and a shamash in the middle,” Shemtov reflected. “In the time of the Temple, we are told that the flames used to point towards the center from either side, and the center flame used to point towards heaven. And that was the connection of divinity with this world.”

“When we point towards the center,” Shemtov continued, “we bring more sensibility and, therefore, divinity to our existence across the board. That’s why, especially when we do this with the two leaders, the speaker and the minority leader together, I think it sends a very powerful message to whoever sees it that there’s hope for togetherness, even in a time of divisiveness.” 

It was Shemtov’s father, Rabbi Abraham Shemtov, who is most responsible for bringing public observances of Hanukkah to Washington. In 1979, Abraham Shemtov participated in the first National Menorah Lighting with President Jimmy Carter, a tradition that his son now leads on the Ellipse, outside the White House, each year. 

But this year’s National Menorah Lighting would be different than the usual large, boisterous affair. Shemtov knew that as soon as he woke up. 

“I was able to tell that it was going to be a very cold day, but that was a small problem compared to what I saw was an unprecedented vicious terrorist attack on a Hanukkah celebration in Sydney, Australia. Sydney is very close to me,” Shemtov said. His wife Nechama is from Sydney and lived down the street from Bondi Beach, where 15 people were killed on the first day of the holiday by terrorists who reportedly pledged allegiance to the Islamic State. 

But the brutality of that day, which sent his wife’s family huddling together for safety, did not keep Shemtov from spreading the message of Hanukkah around Washington. “I think that it’s an important opportunity to bring a message of life, unity, warmth and positivity in a way which might otherwise not even be possible,” Shemtov said. 

It’s no longer a surprise to arrive at the White House or the Naval Observatory and find kosher brisket, freshly made latkes and sufganiyot in a variety of flavors. But the White House Hanukkah party is a relatively recent invention. The first one took place in 2001, hosted by President George W. Bush. It would be a few more years before the event was certified kosher — by Rabbi Shemtov, of course. It’s a responsibility he oversees regardless of who is president.

“They say about the White House, etc., that the moment you don’t feel it’s special to walk into these places — the White House, the Capitol, VPR [the vice president’s residence] — you should stop working there,” said Shemtov. “Access, acceptance and prominence within these hallowed and rarefied quarters of society is something our forebears can only have dreamed of in an ambitious fantasy, and here we are, able to live it. We just have to want to be proud enough to do so, and that’s why, of course, it’s always an honor to be invited, involved, participating and particularly in helping organize such respectable recognitions of our faith.” 

Shemtov’s job is to drive for hours around the Beltway, helping Jews in positions of power practice their faith proudly and publicly. This year, he made it a priority to also be home in time to light his own menorah. 

“I have to have a Jewish home as well, not just a Jewish expression to the outside world. And to do that takes effort because scheduling is so crazy,” said Shemtov. “We have to remember it’s like an airplane. You have to put your own oxygen mask on, or else you won’t be able to help anyone at all.”

A bipartisan group of House members is introducing a resolution that sets out recommendations for tackling the spread of antisemitism through artificial intelligence models and highlights the ways those programs have been used to spread a variety of forms of anti-Jewish hate.

The resolution, led by Reps. Sara Jacobs (D-CA), Don Bacon (R-NE), Juan Ciscomani (R-AZ) and Laura Friedman (D-CA), highlights that AI models can “generate, amplify, or normalize antisemitic content, deepfakes, synthetic media, and deeply anti-Jewish bias, and can be weaponized to target Jewish individuals and institutions, as well as American institutions, normalizing antisemitism and anti-Jewish bias en masse.” It also notes that there is an extensive history of AI models espousing antisemitic attitudes, dating back to at least 2016.

The resolution states that combating antisemitism is a national priority and that technology companies have a “responsibility to implement robust safeguards,” including transparency measures, working with antisemitism experts and taking steps to prevent the spread of antisemitism or violent content targeting Jewish people.

Jacobs told Jewish Insider this week that AI is accelerating conditions of rising antisemitism and danger for the Jewish people “with the rapid creation, spread and amplification of antisemitic content that makes us actively less safe.”

She emphasized that the public is increasingly turning to AI as an information tool with “no checks” to the antisemitic content AI is spreading.

The resolution encourages tech companies to implement standards to prevent antisemitism including “supporting enforcement technology, red teaming methodologies, and datasets to guide risk identification, measurement, mitigation, and governance of AI systems,” as well as expanded data data sharing and access for researchers to study antisemitic content and assess potential responses.

It additionally recommends periodic public reporting by technology companies on antisemitic content on AI platforms and how the platforms are responding.

It urges governments, civil society, academia and the business community to develop “effective interventions” against antisemitic content and harassment, including plans for responding to threats of violence.

The legislation also calls for efforts to improve education and digital literacy among young people to recognize and resist antisemitic narratives and AI-generated hatred.

“Corporations need to step up and maintain standards and safeguards for AI systems that protect human rights and the safety of all people, including the Jewish community,” Jacobs said. “I think there’s a lot more they could be doing, and that’s why we need a whole of society approach to antisemitism, which is what we call for in this resolution.”

Jacobs said that the resolution is a “first step” to highlight bipartisan consensus on the issue, and noted that while it’s nonbinding, it does set out specific standards and recommendations for the industry.

A bipartisan group of House members is re-introducing the Protecting Students on Campus Act on Thursday, legislation that aims to assist students facing discrimination in filing federal civil rights complaints and requiring greater transparency from colleges about complaints they receive.

The legislation was re-introduced earlier this year in the Senate by Sens. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) and John Fetterman (D-PA), and has five additional cosponsors. In the previous Congress, the bill picked up 16 cosponsors in the House.

The latest version of the bill in the House is being led by Reps. Lois Frankel (D-FL), Don Bacon (R-NE), Lucy McBath (D-GA), Juan Ciscomani (R-AZ) and Haley Stevens (D-MI).

Formulated as a response to antisemitism on campus, the legislation would require colleges to prominently display on their homepages a link to the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights page where students can file Title VI discrimination complaints, and to display informational materials in high-traffic locations on campus.

Any schools receiving federal funding would also be required to report annually to the Department of Education’s inspector general about the number of Title VI complaints they received in the previous year and the actions taken by the school.

Schools in the top five percent of total complaints filed, proportional to their student population, would be subject to an audit by the inspector general.

The legislation requires the Office for Civil Rights to brief Congress monthly, for one year, on the complaints it has received in the prior month, how the office plans to address those complaints and how long complaints remain open.

It also requires the Department of Education to conduct a public awareness campaign to make students aware of their rights to file civil rights complaints under Title VI.

The legislation has yet to move forward in either chamber.

“Antisemitism and hate are surging on college campuses and around the world, and the consequences are deadly — as we saw in the vile attack in Bondi Beach,” Frankel said in a statement. “Students cannot learn if they do not feel safe. The Protecting Students on Campus Act gives students clear pathways to report antisemitism and discrimination, strengthens accountability for colleges, and helps ensure campuses are places where hate is not tolerated.”

Highlighting data that more than a third of Jewish students faced antisemitism on campus in 2024 and that nearly half felt unsafe expressing or hid their views or Jewish identity on campus, American Jewish Committee CEO Ted Deutch said in a statement that the legislation “empowers students … while providing critical accountability to ensure the U.S. Department of Education responds appropriately to federal complaints.”

Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt said that “Jewish students deserve better than empty promises when antisemitism erupts on campus.”

Greenblatt said the bill “transforms rhetoric into action by requiring real transparency and giving students the tools to hold their universities accountable,” and that the bill “couldn’t come at a more urgent time” after the terror attack at a Hanukkah celebration in Sydney, Australia last weekend.

The Jewish Federations of North America and Jewish Council for Public Affairs also support the legislation.

A new bipartisan and bicameral bill is pushing for greater accountability and transparency on China’s violations of U.S. oil sanctions on Iran.

China is the largest importer of Iranian oil, in spite of the sweeping U.S. sanctions regime targeting the Iranian oil and gas industry, as well as newer sanctions that target importers of that oil, which have been recently applied to some firms in China. 

Recent reports by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies have found that Iran oil exports, primarily to China, have remained near their peak level in spite of U.S. sanctions, which FDD has attributed to a “failure of U.S. sanctions enforcement.”

The new bill, led by Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Reps. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) and Ben Cline (R-VA), requires the administration, within a year of the bill’s passage, to determine whether the People’s Republic of China is conducting sanctionable activities with regard to Iran.

In advance of that determination, the bill requires the administration to report to Congress within 180 days on China’s purchases of Iranian oil, including how China is using shell companies and other methods to dodge sanctions, as well as on Chinese efforts to sell or transfer chemical precursors to Iran to support its ballistic missile program.

Recent reports have found that Iran has been importing materials from China to rebuild its ballistic missile program, an effort that has prompted concern on Capitol Hill.

“China’s growing purchases of Iranian oil and its support for Iran’s ballistic missile program are not just violations of U.S. sanctions—they are direct threats to regional stability and to our allies,” Krishnamoorthi said in a statement, adding that the legislation “gives Congress the intelligence and transparency needed to expose how the PRC enables Iran’s most dangerous activities.”

“By bringing these transactions into the light, we strengthen our ability to enforce sanctions and hold malign actors accountable,” Krishnamoorthi continued.

Krishnamoorthi is mounting a bid for the U.S. Senate in his home state.

“China’s continued purchases of Iranian oil and its role in enabling Iran’s missile program to pose a direct threat to U.S. national security and to the stability of our allies in the Middle East,” Cline said. He called the legislation and the reporting it requires “a necessary step toward exposing how the PRC uses shell companies, transshipment schemes, and other avenues to evade sanctions.” 

“This report will give Congress and the Treasury Department the insight needed to strengthen enforcement, close loopholes, and ensure that hostile regimes, and those who bankroll them, are held accountable,” Cline continued.

Blumenthal said that China’s purchases of oil are “providing significant financial support for Iran’s terrorist activities in the Middle East and beyond.”

“Transparency is the first step towards accountability, which is why our bill would require a full report on China’s oil and ballistic missile-related transactions with Iran. This information will support robust sanctions enforcement and provide a path forward for additional legislative action,” Blumenthal said.

Graham called the bill “the first step in fully understanding how China and other nations prop up the Ayatollah’s war machine.”

A bipartisan group of 18 House members is urging the State Department to pressure Colombia’s government to change course on what the lawmakers described as a dangerous pattern of antisemitic rhetoric and policies by government officials, including the country’s president.

“As U.S.-Colombia relations continue to be strained by numerous issues, including the increasingly troubling antisemitic rhetoric and discriminatory policies from Colombian President Gustavo Petro, which are directly threatening the safety and well-being of Colombia’s Jewish community, we write to urge the administration to consider even stronger actions, including leveraging U.S. assistance to push for meaningful change in President Petro and his government,” the lawmakers, led by Reps. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) and Maria Elvira Salazar (R-FL), said in a letter sent on Monday to Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

The lawmakers said that Petro’s antisemitic comments on social media and anti-Israel posture “have contributed to an increasingly hostile environment for Colombian Jews,” raising particular concern about the appointment of Richard Gamboa, “a self-proclaimed ‘rabbi’ with anti-Zionist views and dubious credentials who lacks ties with Colombia’s Jewish institutions,” to be the Ministry of Interior’s director of religious affairs.

The letter characterizes Gamboa’s appointment as “a deliberate provocation aimed at legitimizing antisemitic perspectives within government institutions” and a “calculated effort by President Petro to normalize anti-Jewish hatred for political gains.”

“There is genuine concern that Mr. Gamboa will continue to accelerate the deteriorating situation facing Colombian Jewry,” the letter continues.

Gamboa, the lawmakers, noted, has gone on antisemitic “tirades” on social media, writing, “Zionists ARE NOT JEWS,” “true rabbis are not Zionists,” and “The full weight of the law should fall upon … defenders of a genocidal regime that usurps and profanes the name of Judaism.”

They also pointed to media reports that indicate that the government may seek to use Gamboa as its official liaison to the Jewish community, sidelining the Confederation of Jewish Communities of Colombia.

The letter was co-signed by Reps. Laura Gillen (D-NY), Buddy Carter (R-GA), Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), Gary Palmer (R-AL), Mike Lawler (R-NY), Pat Harrigan (R-NC), Chuck Fleischmann (R-TN), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), Pete Stauber (R-MN), Brad Schneider (D-IL), Frederica Wilson (D-FL), Don Bacon (R-NE), Lois Frankel (D-FL), Haley Stevens (D-MI), Ted Lieu (D-CA) and Tom Kean Jr. (R-NJ). 

Carter and Stevens are running for the Senate in Georgia and Michigan, respectively.

The American Jewish Committee supported the effort and “remains deeply concerned by the antisemitic rhetoric and discriminatory policies emanating from Colombian President Gustavo Petro and his Administration, which poses a direct threat to the safety and well-being of Colombia’s Jewish community,” Dina Siegel Vann, the director of AJC’s Arthur and Rochelle Belfer Institute for Latino and Latin American Affairs, said in a statement.

“These actions by the highest levels of government in Colombia must not become normalized,” Siegel Vann continued. “We commend Representatives Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) and María Salazar (R-FL) for their principled leadership in urging Secretary of State Marco Rubio to make clear to President Petro that his government’s continued provocations and embrace of antisemitic rhetoric and policies are inconsistent with our shared values and interests.”

Petro has a long history of anti-Israel and antisemitic comments and accused the Jewish state of genocide, severing ties last year. He declined to condemn the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel, instead comparing Israel to the Nazi regime — something he has done for years, including prior to his time in office.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) championed a U.S. defense agreement with Lebanon during a bipartisan congressional delegation to Beirut on Tuesday, saying it would be the “biggest change in the history of Lebanon.”

Speaking at a press conference alongside Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC), Graham asked, “How many nations have a defense agreement with the United States? Very few. … The number of nations that America is willing to go to war for is very few. Why do I mention Lebanon being in that group? You have one thing going for you that is very valuable to me: religious diversity.”

“Christianity is under siege in the Mideast. Christians are being slaughtered and run out of all over, all over the region, except here. And so what I am going to tell my colleagues is, ‘Why don’t we invest in defending religious diversity in the Mideast? Why don’t we have a relationship with Lebanon where we would actually defend what you’re doing?’” he continued. 

“I think it’s in America’s interest to defend religious diversity, whether you’re Druze or Alawite or a Christian or whatever. The idea that America may one day have a defense agreement with Lebanon changes Lebanon unlike any single thing I could think of,” Graham said.

During their visit, the delegation, joined by U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Tom Barrack, diplomat Morgan Ortagus and U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon Lisa Johnson, met with Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and head of the Lebanese Armed Forces Gen. Rodolph Haykal.

During the press conference, the lawmakers conveyed their encouragement over the progress that Lebanon has made in military, financial and democratic reforms and their hope that the government would be able to execute the changes fully. 

“We all see Lebanon is at a point of change. We’re here to tell you that we’re buying into that change, that we support what you’re trying to do. That if you do make an effort to disarm Hezbollah, we’ll be there trying to help. We’ll try to help your military, we’ll try to help your economy. We think that’s the right thing for you to do, and it benefits the entire region,” Graham said.

“If you’re able to pull this off, Saudi Arabia will look at you differently. If you’re able to pull it off, Israel will look at you differently. If you’re able to pull this off, there’ll be a groundswell of support in Washington to help your economy and to help your military,” he continued.

“Congress is looking at Lebanon differently because you’re behaving differently. If you continue to go down this road, I think you have a wonderful opportunity to secure your nation, economically, militarily, like anything I’ve seen since I’ve been coming to the region with [the late Sen.] John McCain (R-AZ). It all depends on what happens with the Hezbollah file and the Palestinian file.”

Wilson compared recent changes in Lebanon and in Syria with the fall of dictator Bashar al-Assad to the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. “There’s such an opportunity for stability, security, for economic prosperity, for everyone,” he said.

Graham also emphasized the potential for improved relations between Israel and Lebanon if Hezbollah was contained. “If I were the Israeli prime minister, I would be looking at Lebanon differently after Hezbollah was disarmed by the Lebanese people,” he said.

Pressed by reporters on what steps Israel is taking to disarm Hezbollah and de-escalate conflict, Graham answered, “Why do you need Israel to tell you to disarm Hezbollah? That’s not Israel’s decision. That’s yours. Whether [the IDF] withdraw[s from southern Lebanon] or not, it depends on what you do. So don’t tell me anymore, ‘We’re not going to disarm Hezbollah until Israel does something.’ If that’s the model, you’re going to fail.” 

“The reason you disarm Hezbollah is because it’s best for you. This country is going backward, not forward, if you don’t follow through with disarming the Palestinians and Hezbollah and making the Lebanese army the central repository of arms for the nation. If you don’t do that, you’re going nowhere,” the South Carolina senator said.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a statement yesterday that he “acknowledges the significant step taken by the Lebanese Government” and that “in light of this important development, Israel stands ready to support Lebanon in its efforts to disarm Hezbollah and to work together towards a more secure and stable future for both nations.”

Netanyahu pledged that if the Lebanese Armed Forces “take the necessary steps to implement the disarmament of Hezbollah, Israel will engage in reciprocal measures.”

Shaheen and Graham, both of whom serve on the Senate Appropriations Committee, also spoke about their support for supplying U.S. funding for the LAF and Lebanon’s financial recovery.

Shaheen called the steps Lebanon’s government has pledged to make in military and banking reforms “critical” and said the lawmakers will “continue to press for support, through legislation and through the appropriations process, support for the avenue that Lebanon has chosen for your future.”