Nineteen Jewish House Democrats, writing under the auspices of the Congressional Jewish Caucus, sent a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Wednesday opposing a reported plan to merge the offices of the State Department’s special envoy for Holocaust issues (SEHI) and special envoy to monitor and combat antisemitism (SEAS).

Longtime Holocaust envoy Ellen Germain recently retired from her post, and antisemitism envoy Ambassador Yehuda Kaploun has been pushing to merge the two posts, a prospect that has received mixed reactions from Jewish communal organizations.

In their letter, the Jewish Democrats urged Rubio to “immediately appoint” a new Holocaust envoy and maintain the office “as a distinct, permanent office led by a dedicated career State Department official” and expressed concern about reports that the offices might be merged.

Reps. Brad Sherman (D-CA) and Seth Magaziner (D-RI) were the only two members of the caucus not to join the letter.

The lawmakers noted bipartisan support for SEHI and argued that its work on restitution issues is increasingly urgent as the number of living Holocaust survivors shrinks, and that survivors and their families need a “dedicated advocate within our government.”

“SEHI and SEAS have clearly distinct mandates and responsibilities,” they said, adding that the Holocaust envoy’s work has historically been aided by their status as an experienced career official, rather than a presidential appointee.

“Both are full-time responsibilities that require full-time principals with unique areas of focus and full-time staff with unique expertise,” the lawmakers continued. “Combining them would not streamline efficiency or eliminate any meaningful duplication; it would risk diminishing the focus, experience, and institutional capacity necessary for each.”

The letter suggests that the potential merger is being driven, at least in part, by “a desire to expand the influence of certain personnel within the State Department,” seemingly a reference to Kaploun.

The lawmakers warned that any delay in appointing a new envoy “risks losing opportunities for restitution, accountability, and historical preservation that may never return.”

Though under discussion for months, the merger efforts have not yet been formalized inside the department.

Jewish groups have come down on both sides of the issue. The American Jewish Committee, American Joint Distribution Committee, Agudath Israel of America, Anti-Defamation League, B’nai B’rith International, Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany, the National Coalition Supporting Eurasian Jewry, the World Jewish Restitution Organization and the USC Shoah Foundation called for Rubio to appoint a new full-time Holocaust envoy.

But others including the Combat Antisemitism Movement, American Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists, Chabad-Lubavitch World Headquarters, Coalition for Jewish Values, Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy, Orthodox Union, World Jewish Congress, Zionist Organization of America, Simon Wiesenthal Center, former U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman, former antisemitism envoy Elan Carr, former deputy antisemitism envoy Ellie Cohanim and former deputy antisemitism envoy Karen Paikin Barall wrote to Rubio urging him to merge the two positions.

Proponents of a merger said that Holocaust denial and revisionism is inextricably linked to rising antisemitism today, that the current division hampers U.S. efforts and that the shrinking number of Holocaust survivors makes Holocaust memory and antisemitism a more core part of the Holocaust envoy’s work, overlapping with the antisemitism envoy’s duties. They said that consolidating the responsibilities under an ambassador-rank official would elevate Holocaust issues.

Kaploun has claimed behind closed doors that, given his unique connections to the White House and world leaders, he would be able to resolve all remaining Holocaust restitution issues before the end of President Donald Trump’s time in office — a difficult task that requires reaching agreements with international partners that have resisted providing restitution for decades.

The members of the Congressional Jewish Caucus — every Jewish House Democrat — wrote to Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem on Wednesday urging her to rescind new conditions — presumably related to immigration enforcement and diversity programs — instituted earlier this year on recipients of Nonprofit Security Grant Program funding.

“We are writing to you today to express our strong 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 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 lawmakers charge that new conditions for the grant program promulgated in April “create onerous new compliance requirements for recipients that will divert limited funds and restrict the religious conscience of synagogues, schools, and other institutions pivotal to our community,” and call on Noem to issue new guidance waiving any terms “that do not directly relate to the grant’s purpose, which is to help qualified institutions improve their security against increasing threats.”

The letter does not directly spell out which conditions the lawmakers are addressing, but congressional Democrats and some in the Jewish community have previously raised concerns about new language in some grant materials indicating that grants may be contingent on cooperation with federal immigration enforcement and eliminating Diversity, Equity and Inclusion programs.

“[W]e reject any efforts to force Jewish and other houses of worship and institutions to choose between vital security funding and expression of their core religious freedoms, as well as their faith teachings and values,” the lawmakers wrote. “In this time of increased hate crimes against minorities, and in particular rising antisemitism, we believe it is crucial that NSGP remains a critical resource accessible to all communities in need and free from partisan politicization.”

The lawmakers also emphasized that members of Congress on both sides of the aisle have supported a “streamlined, effective program with minimal red tape and compliance requirements.”

The letter was signed by Reps. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) and Brad Schneider (D-IL), the co-chairs of the Jewish caucus, and Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), Becca Balint (D-VT), Dan Goldman (D-NY), Seth Magaziner (D-RI), Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), Jamie Raskin (D-MD), Steve Cohen (D-TN), Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR), Lois Frankel (D-FL), Jake Auchincloss (D-MA), Mike Levin (D-CA), Kim Schrier (D-WA), Laura Friedman (D-CA), Sara Jacobs (D-CA), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Greg Landsman (D-OH) and Jared Moskowitz (D-FL).

“The Nonprofit Security Grant Program has been a lifeline as we face rising antisemitism, hate, and extremism — but these politically-motivated grant requirements threaten to force our communities to choose between their safety and their core religious values,” Jewish Council for Public Affairs CEO  Amy Spitalnick said in a statement about the letter, which specifically referenced the immigration and DEI language. “The fact is that the NSGP is simply too important to be politicized to advance the administration’s agenda..”

JCPA has previously urged the administration directly to repeal the conditions.

A coalition of major Jewish communal and security organizations, including the Jewish Federations of North America, Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, Anti-Defamation League, Secure Community Network, Community Security Initiative and Community Security Service issued a joint statement in September urging institutions to apply for the grants in spite of any concerns that they may have about the new criteria.

The 21 members of the House Jewish Caucus — every Jewish Democrat in the chamber — wrote to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to express “extreme alarm and concern” about recent reporting that the Coast Guard would no longer classify the swastika as a hate symbol, and demanded answers about the policy.

Amid backlash, the policy was walked back, according to the Washington Post, and the swastika will remain a prohibited hate symbol rather than be classified as “potentially divisive.”

“While we are pleased that the Coast Guard quickly reversed course and reaffirmed that these are hate symbols, we remain deeply troubled that such a change was ever considered in the first place,” the lawmakers, led by Rep. Laura Friedman (D-CA), said. “This kind of reversal, only made after media attention and public outrage, raises urgent questions about how and why this policy was allowed to advance.”

They requested the administration provide, by Nov. 26, an explanation of how the policy was initiated including who authorized, discussed and approved it from DHS, the White House and the Pentagon.

The lawmakers said that “lowering America’s moral standards” will hurt both service members and recruiting efforts, as well as “sends a dangerous and unmistakable message that this administration is willing to tolerate, or worse, excuse, the display of symbols rooted in hate.”

The Jewish Caucus members said that the change and its intent in the leaked policy memo was clear, pushing back on claims from the administration that reporting on the policy had been misleading or inaccurate.

“Your department made an intentional change to downgrade these symbols from being classified as hate symbols to merely ‘potentially divisive,’” the letter reads.