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.”

Reps. Brad Schneider (D-IL) and Craig Goldman (R-TX), co-chairs of the Abraham Accords Caucus, convened on Thursday with former U.S. Ambassador to Jordan Yael Lempert and Karen Young, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, to discuss the global energy crisis stemming from the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

Schneider in a statement after the event, highlighted rising gas prices, utility bills and inflation as a result of the global developments.

“I teamed up with my Republican colleague Rep. Craig Goldman to talk through what Congress can do about it, including diversifying energy routes, deepening regional integration, and building a more interconnected and stable Middle East,” Schneider said.

Goldman told reporters after the event that “no one wants to be in this situation, I think everybody wants this conflict [with Iran] to end sooner rather than later. No one’s happy.” But he said that if the U.S. is able to bring stability and reformed leadership in Iran, it will have transformative effects for the region.

“With this more stabilized Iran, with a regime or leader in there who we can actually have a discussion with, negotiation with, when we see that the Iranian people have the freedoms that we enjoy over here in the United States, I think we will see more nations join the Abraham Accords,” Goldman said.

He said he had been told by representatives of other countries in the region that they would normalize relations with Israel “tomorrow” if they did not think it would produce backlash in the region. “It all starts with a stabilized Iran.”

Goldman acknowledged, however, that there remain competing power centers inside Iran, and that some remain unwilling to compromise.

“I think we’re at the point where no one can predict the future, but we certainly want a leader in Iran that we can negotiate with and deal with to bring stability to the region,” Goldman said.

Asked whether he sees ways for the U.S. and its partners to leverage the Abraham Accords to move products currently impacted by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz to global markets, Goldman deferred to the State Department.

Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL), who chairs the moderate New Democratic Coalition, called on Democrats on Tuesday to reject and distance themselves from Hasan Piker, the far-left media figure boosted by an increasing number of Democrats and Democratic candidates.

Piker has faced repeated criticism for antisemitic comments and support for terrorism, in addition to a range of other offensive remarks and activity. Schneider, in addition to his leadership in the New Dems -— one of the largest groups in the House Democratic Caucus — is a co-chair of the Congressional Jewish Caucus.

“Hasan Piker is an unapologetic antisemite,” Schneider said on X on Tuesday. “Democrats risk losing our credibility to condemn those on the right who traffic in bigotry, antisemitism, & hate when our own Members of Congress & candidates are celebrating or, worse yet, platforming those who espouse hate of any kind.”

Schneider said he is proud that the Democratic Party “welcome[s] a broad diversity of opinions and priorities. But we cannot allow those who preach hate & seek division to find safe harbor among us. We must call out hate & reject those who champion ideologies of exclusion and demonization.”

The moderate Democratic leader’s comments come on the same day that Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed announced a rally alongside Piker, and after numerous other colleagues have appeared on Piker’s livestream show or defended him.

They also follow similar condemnation from Third Way, a prominent moderate Democratic group.

Additional pro-Israel Democrats joined colleagues on Friday in criticizing Israel’s plans to take over Gaza City, which were approved Friday after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel intends to take over Gaza City as part of an expanded military operation.

It’s a further sign that Israel’s ongoing war plans are causing growing gaps between the Jewish state and some of the country’s most critical left-of-center allies in Washington.

Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL), a co-chair of the House Jewish caucus and pro-Israel stalwart who is currently visiting Israel, said in a statement that the plan to take over Gaza City “is tactically questionable and strategically self-defeating.”

“If implemented, the decision is more likely to play into Hamas’s original objectives in starting this war and further unite much of the world against Israel than it is to bring home the last surviving hostages and advance the security needs of the nation,” Schneider continued. “In fighting what is unquestionably an existential war against absolute evil, Israel must also uphold its responsibility to do all it can to protect civilians in Gaza and enable humanitarian aid to reach those in need.”

At the same time, he emphasized that Hamas started the war with the intent of eliminating Israel, and that Israel has the “absolute right” to defend itself and free the hostages. He said that if the world wants the war to end, it must commit to working with Israel, the U.S. and European and Arab states to “open new pathways for relief, recovery and renewal.”

Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) warned in a statement that Israeli military officials oppose the Gaza occupation effort and that it “could extend [the war] for years, will only result in further loss of life among the hostages, Palestinian civilians, and the members of the IDF required to undertake such a calamitous task. The situation in Gaza is unendurable; this will make it worse. This war must end, not escalate.”

“To be clear: Hamas must be held to account for its mass murder, torture, and rape of Israelis, and for any diversion of food from those who are hungry. No call upon the Israeli government to act to stop this unendurable suffering by civilians in Gaza can ignore the barbaric acts committed by Hamas that brought this war about, the need to ensure they can never threaten Israel again, and the even more urgent need for the release of all of the hostages,” Schiff continued. “The international community must be persistent in its demand for the immediate release of the hostages and not ignore the casus belli of this terrible war.”

He said that the U.S.-Israel relationship should transcend any particular government on either side, and urged U.S. allies not to abandon Israel, “But that does not mean we can or should ignore or fail to call out continued perilous action — and inaction — by both this Prime Minister and this President — and insist on a dramatic change in the policies of both.”

Schiff added, “I find no shared value in the preventable starvation of the people of Gaza. I see no common principle in the forced displacement of Palestinians from Gaza or plans for settler colonies there, only a moral and legal failing of terrible proportion. I am compelled to speak out, because I believe in an Israel that has been, and can be again, a light unto other nations.”

Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) called the Gaza City plan “a dangerous and counterproductive move that will not secure the release of the remaining hostages or bring an end to the fighting that has already taken so many lives.”

“This approach will without question worsen the already terrible humanitarian conditions in Gaza, and Israel’s own military leaders have expressed serious concerns about the feasibility and risks of this strategy,” Warner continued. “The priority must be to end this war immediately through diplomatic efforts and coordinated pressure to ensure the safe return of hostages and protect innocent lives. Pursuing this path will only guarantee prolonged conflict and greater suffering.”

Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), one of Israel’s most vocal defenders in the House, took a somewhat different tack, saying in a statement and an interview on CNN that Netanyahu had told him in a meeting this week that Israel does not plan to occupy Gaza in the long term.

“I’m opposed to long-term occupation and annexation — but Hamas must go,” Gottheimer said on X. “I strongly support crushing Hamas terrorists and their last strongholds. I fervently back surging humanitarian aid and preventing Hamas from blocking it. We must urgently free the hostages being starved by Hamas, remove Hamas from power, and transition to an Arab-led peacekeeping force to bring lasting peace and safety for both innocent Palestinians and Israelis.”

He said in the CNN interview that Hamas could end the war by agreeing to surrender.

The Anti-Defamation League also voiced “significant reservations about the Israeli Cabinet’s decision to expand operations in Gaza” in a statement on Friday. The group declined to weigh in on the strategy involved but said that the move could further endanger the hostages and worsen the humanitarian situation for Palestinian civilians.

Democratic Majority for Israel said that “Pro-Israel Democrats have questions and concerns about the reported escalation of the conflict,” while emphasizing Hamas’ responsibility for the war and the need for a deal to free the hostages and increase humanitarian aid.

“We call on the Trump Administration to ensure sufficient humanitarian assistance and exert maximum pressure on Arab states such as Qatar to force Hamas to accept a ceasefire and free the hostages,” the DMFI statement continued.

The House Ways and Means Committee split along partisan lines on Tuesday over two bills that Republicans said would punish colleges and universities for campus antisemitism by imposing tax penalties and potentially reassessing their tax-exempt statuses. 

Both bills, the University Accountability Act and the Protecting American Students Act, passed the committee by party-line votes. Democrats argued that the bills were not serious or effective efforts to combat antisemitism.

The University Accountability Act would impose tax penalties on colleges and universities when a federal court finds that they have violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which bans discrimination based on race, color and national origin. Those penalties, enforced by the Internal Revenue Service, would total $100,000 or 5% of the total of their administrative salaries, whichever is greater.

If a school is found to have violated Title VI on three separate occasions, the Treasury Department would be required to review the school’s tax-exempt status.

Rep. Jason Smith (R-MO), the committee chair, argued that colleges and universities, in failing to protect Jewish students, are not fulfilling the educational purpose for which they receive tax exempt status, and should be subject to penalties.

“It’s time that these universities learn their inaction has consequences,” Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY), the bill’s lead sponsor, added. “They have a responsibility to keep their students safe.”

Democrats argued that the bill was rushed and ill-conceived, and would largely not address current issues. They said that increased funding for the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights, which evaluates and adjudicates Title VI complaints, would be a better approach to the problem.

Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL) said that the proposal takes an insufficiently tailored approach and emphasized the need for education.

“This bill fails to address the issue head-on and focuses on punishing schools instead of working to improve them,” Schneider said. “I’m concerned about this bill’s unintended consequence: the very real potential for creating a vicious cycle of aggressive and tendentious claims against universities.”

The Orthodox Union supported the bill, arguing in a letter to committee leaders that it would “give strength and meaning to the demands of Title VI and hopefully compel recalcitrant administrators to do what they ought to already.”

The Protecting American Students Act would change the way that taxes on college and university endowments are assessed, with the goal of incentivizing schools to admit more American citizens or permanent residents, and fewer non-citizens. Schools with larger non-citizen populations would be subject to taxes on their endowments. Smith said the bill would expand endowment taxes to around a dozen additional schools.

Smith and other Republicans, suggesting that antisemitic activity is being driven in significant part by non-American students, argued that incentivizing wealthy, elite schools to increase their populations of American students would help protect against antisemitism.

“Universities — many of whom have ever-growing foreign student populations and receive massive amounts of foreign funding — focus more on appeasing those with antisemitic views on their campuses than protecting all students, upholding their institutional values and holding those accountable who violate such policies and values,” Smith said.

Republicans also argued that schools should be incentivized to admit more U.S. students for other reasons as well, and that the change would also align tax policy with Department of Education policy for determining student aid eligibility.

Rep. Judy Chu (D-CA) and other Democrats said that the proposal was both xenophobic and would fail to actually address antisemitism.

“Instead of protecting victims of hate this bill would simply blame campus unrest on supposed foreign agitators and use this as an excuse to punish institutions that enroll international students regardless of where they come from,” Chu said. “Scapegoating these students does not represent a solution to antisemitism or other forms of discrimination. In fact, it does the exact opposite by blaming all foreigners for society’s ills.”

Rep. Drew Ferguson (R-GA), the lead sponsor, acknowledged that the bill alone will not solve campus antisemitism, but said, “I think it’s a matter of fairness to the American taxpayer and to American students.”

Seventy-four House lawmakers  wrote to the boards of Harvard, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Pennsylvania on Friday demanding that they immediately fire their presidents in response to widely criticized congressional testimony they delivered on antisemitism on their campuses earlier this week.

The presidents of the three schools have come under increasing scrutiny this week amid growing speculation that their jobs could be on the line following their refusal to say earlier this week that calls for Jewish genocide would violate their schools’ codes of conduct.

“Testimony provided by presidents of your institutions showed a complete absence of moral clarity and illuminated the problematic double standards and dehumanization of the Jewish communities that your university presidents enabled,” the letter reads. “Given this moment of crisis, we demand that your boards immediately remove each of these presidents from their positions and that you provide an actionable plan” to ensure the safety of the Jewish community on campus.

“Anything less,” than the steps they requested, the lawmakers continued, “will be seen as your endorsement… and an act of complicity in their antisemitic posture.”

The letter was led by Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), who questioned the presidents on the genocide issue, and Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL). Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) is the only other Democrat who signed the letter; the rest are Republicans.

The lawmakers said that the testimony makes it “hard to imagine” any Jewish or Israeli person feeling safe on their campuses when the presidents “could not say that calls for the genocide of Jews would have clear consequences on your campus.”

It adds that subsequent social media statements seeking to clarify or walk back those comments “offered little clarification on your campus’ true commitment to protecting vulnerable students in this moment of crisis,” describing them instead as “desperate attempts to try and save their jobs” and “too little too late.”

Shortly before the Stefanik-Moskowitz letter was released, a group of thirteen House Democrats wrote to the boards of the three schools urging them to re-examine their codes of conduct to make clear that calls for the genocide of Jews are not acceptable.

This second letter, led by Reps. Kathy Manning (D-NC), Jake Auchincloss (D-MA) and Susan Wild (D-PA), includes similar language to the bipartisan letter regarding the presidents’ testimony and how it would make Jewish campus members feel unsafe, but stops short of directly calling for the presidents to be fired.

The lawmakers wrote that they felt “compelled to ask” if the presidents’ responses “align with the values and policies of your respective institutions.”

“The presidents’ unwillingness to answer questions clearly or fully acknowledge appalling and unacceptable behavior — behavior that would not have been tolerated against other groups — illuminated the problematic double standards and dehumanization of the Jewish communities at your universities,” the letter continues. “The lack of moral clarity these presidents displayed is simply unacceptable.”

The lawmakers requested that the schools update their policies to “ensure that they protect students from hate” and describe their plans for protecting Jewish and Israeli community members.

“There is no context in which calls for the genocide of Jews is acceptable rhetoric,” the letter reads. “While Harvard and Penn subsequently issued clarifying statements which were appreciated, their failure to unequivocally condemn calls for the systematic murder of Jews during the public hearing is deeply alarming and stands in stark contrast to the principles we expect leaders of top academic institutions to uphold.”

The letter notes that federal civil rights law prohibits discrimination against Jews on campus, and that criminal law bans hate crimes, violence and incitement to violence.

“Students and faculty who threaten, harass, or incite violence towards Jews must be held accountable for their actions,” the lawmakers wrote. “If calls for genocide of the Jewish people are not in violation of your universities’ policies, then it is time for you to reexamine your policies and codes of conduct.”

Signatories to the Democratic letter include Manning, Wild, Auchincloss, Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), Lois Frankel (D-FL), Haley Stevens (D-MI), Greg Landsman (D-OH), Grace Meng (D-NY), Brad Schneider (D-IL), Dan Goldman (D-NY), Donald Norcross (D-NJ), Jerry Nadler (D-NY) and Elissa Slotkin (D-MI).

All of the signatories to the Democratic letter are either Jewish or deeply involved with Jewish community issues on the Hill. 

Earlier this week, a third letter by six House Republicans from Pennsylvania — Reps. Guy Reschenthaler (R-PA), alongside Congressmen John Joyce, M.D. (R-PA), Mike Kelly (R-PA), Lloyd Smucker (R-PA), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), and Dan Meuser (R-PA) — called for University of Pennsylvania President Liz Magill specifically to be fired.

Congressmen Brad Schneider (D-IL) and David Schweikert (R-AZ) have asked the Trump administration to explain why Israel has not been granted a waiver on new tariffs on steel and aluminum imports. 

In a letter sent to U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer on Wednesday and obtained by Jewish Insider, the two lawmakers — both members of the House Ways and Means Committee — noted that while the administration has granted exemptions to a number of key allies, including South Korea, Australia, Argentina, Brazil, Canada and Mexico, the tariffs remain on imports from Israel, an ally and reliable strategic partner. 

Last year, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly failed to secure an exemption from the 25% steel and 10% aluminum tariffs imposed by the Trump administration in 2017. 

“The United States and Israel have long enjoyed cooperation on a wide range of issues that enhance, not threaten, U.S. national security, such as development of the Iron Dome missile defense system and countering subterranean terrorist tunnels. This cooperation demonstrates the deep trust and mutual respect that encompasses this vital relationship,” the congressmen wrote. 

The letter concluded, “We do not believe imports of steel and aluminum from Israel are a threat to U.S. national security and are asking you to explain why Israel has not been granted an exemption.”