The Michigan senator endorsed the pro-Israel congresswoman as Craig trails Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan
Kent Nishimura/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Senator Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) during a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee confirmation hearing in Washington, DC, on March 18, 2026.
Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) announced her endorsement on Thursday of Rep. Angie Craig (D-MN) in Minnesota’s Senate primary, calling the moderate congresswoman “a leader and a fighter” who has “stepped up” while serving in the House.
“The Democratic Party needs a new generation of leadership, and we need more of those leaders to be from the Midwest — Angie Craig is both,” Slotkin, a Jewish Democrat viewed as a potential 2028 presidential contender, said in a statement. “I hope to serve with her in the U.S. Senate.”
Craig, a pro-Israel Democrat, has also earned endorsements from Sens. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), Jacky Rosen (D-NV) and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), among other lawmakers.
Slotkin’s support comes as polls have shown Craig trailing her Democratic rival in the Aug. 11 primary, Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan, a progressive who has won endorsements from several leading Israel critics such as Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Chris Murphy (D-CT) and Chris Van Hollen (D-MD). Flanagan is also backed by Sen. Tina Smith (D-MN), who is retiring at the end of the year.
In the most recent poll, conducted for Flanagan’s campaign between May 31 and June 3, the lieutenant governor held a 17-point lead over Craig, with 55% of the vote share. Other surveys have similarly shown Flanagan with a commanding advantage in the race.
Last month, Craig announced that she would not seek support from the state Democratic Party at its convention, effectively ceding that endorsement to Flanagan, who was widely expected to win.
Earlier, Craig’s campaign had called on the state party to formally investigate a series of alleged instances of antisemitic activity among delegates ahead of the convention, which in recent years has been marked by mounting intraparty divisions over Israel.
The Pennsylvania senator heavily criticized the normalization of anti-Israel platforms and the validation of extreme views among Democratic voters
Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images
Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) talks with reporters after the Senate luncheons in the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday, March 11, 2025.
Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA), a stalwart ally of Israel and the Jewish community who has become increasingly isolated within a Democratic Party facing internal friction over its Middle East policy, warned on Wednesday that the outlook for Jewish voters within his party has become “bleak.”
“I’m not a member of the Jewish community, but if I was one, it would be bleak as a Jewish voter in the Democratic Party,” Fetterman said, speaking at a conference hosted by the Culture for Peace Institute, a nonprofit organization focused on advancing “sustainable peace” by bringing together political leaders and researchers, in Washington. “If [Democratic voters are] willing to support these kinds of candidates across the map — look in Michigan [Abdul El-Sayed], look at the one in Maine [Graham Platner], look at New York City [Mayor Zohran Mamdani], look across the map — these are defined by how much anti-Israel rhetoric you can cram into your platform.”
Fetterman expressed concern that the trajectory of the party will continue to “deteriorate,” noting that he “refuses to be part” of what he claims to have predicted would occur within the Democratic ranks. He added that he is “constantly disappointed but not surprised by the way things have drifted within the party.”
“I expect that it’s going to continue to deteriorate,” Fetterman said. “A lot of these extreme views were validated during the midterms. It’s stunning, astonishing to me, the kind of people with these views who [Democratic voters] will now choose to be their representatives. It’s heartbreaking to me, but unsurprising, and that’s what history would have predicted will happen.”
The Pennsylvania senator pointed specifically to Platner’s victory in the Maine Democratic Senate primary on Tuesday, calling it a “capstone” example of deterioration within the party, taking concern with the amount of people “defending” the scandal-plagued candidate.
“I think the capstone of that recently was where you have the kind of garbage candidate like Platner — like full-on Nazi ink on his body — and now you have people defending it,” Fetterman said. “I read an interview with a Maine voter where [a woman said] she would not vote or support someone if they have an Israeli flag tattoo, but it’s OK that [Platner has a Nazi tattoo] on his body. That’s how insidious it’s become within the party, and the calculus where it’s OK to have these views.”
Fetterman stated that the problem is most acute among the “young generation,” arguing that the environment on college campuses and behavior of certain Democratic candidates have contributed to the alarming shift.
“The young generation’s been lost, and that’s 100% on social media,” Fetterman said. “If the Democratic Party is convinced that Hamas or Hezbollah or Iran were the wronged party, that’s absurdity.”
“If you are angry, blame Iran — don’t blame America, or don’t blame Israel for demanding that they turn over their nuclear dust,” he continued. “Don’t keep hostages, don’t attack Israel, don’t fire thousands of rockets into northern Israel. This response was entirely appropriate.”
On the war in Iran, Fetterman discussed his decision to be the sole Senate Democrat to vote against multiple war powers resolutions, clarifying that it was a “pro-no-nuclear-weapons-for-Iran” vote rather than a pro-war stance. Despite his isolation in the caucus on that specific measure, Fetterman insisted he stood on the “right side” of history.
“Can’t we just agree that every single Democrat in the caucus would agree that we can never let Iran build a nuclear bomb?” Fetterman said. “When someone [the Trump administration] actually tries to make sure that doesn’t happen, why can’t you support that?”
Fetterman recalled that Democrats once stood firmly and unanimously against Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon. However, he argued that a policy position that used to be mainstream for Democrats has now “become a controversial one.”
Fetterman further asserted that support for Israeli military objectives has also become “controversial” within the Democratic Party. Nonetheless, he emphasized that he will continue to back Jerusalem’s operational goals regardless of the shifting political tides.
“This might be controversial for Democrats now, but I’ll say it again. I think it’s magnificent the way Israel continues to this day to eliminate people in Hamas and everyone that is tied to [the Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attacks],” Fetterman said. “Everyone should be held accountable and pick off the new leaders before the new business cards even come in.”
Ultimately, he warned that an Iranian nuclear breakout would carry severe consequences for the Middle East and economic fallout globally.
“I can’t imagine the circumstances in the Middle East if that happened,” Fetterman said. “If you think gas is too expensive today, let Iran become a nuclear power because they could do anything and charge any kind of toll once they’re nuclear. They would be truly untouchable, and this is why as a Democrat I’m willing to embrace perhaps the most toxic thing a Democrat can do right now.”
Sens. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) and Chris Murphy (D-CT), as well as Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), have been among the party’s most prominent critics of Israel on Capitol Hill amid a marked decline in Democratic support for the Jewish state
Celal Gunes/Anadolu via Getty Images
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) speaks during a rally around the National Mall in Washington, D.C., on September 19, 2025.
As the 2028 presidential campaign season nears, a handful of prospective candidates from the Democratic Party’s left flank are raising their profiles with efforts to shape a more critical approach to U.S. policy toward Israel.
Sens. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) and Chris Murphy (D-CT), as well as Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), all of whom are seen as potential presidential prospects, have been among the party’s most prominent critics of Israel on Capitol Hill amid a marked decline in Democratic support for the Jewish state.
Recent moves suggest they are each testing voter appetite for a possible White House campaign. Even as they are not considered top-tier contenders in what is likely to be a crowded primary field, history has shown they could be positioning themselves for a Cabinet role — particularly if they prove successful in driving the national conversation on the debate stage and other forums.
Murphy, for instance, released a book last month, Crisis of the Common Good: The Fight for Meaning and Connection in a Broken America, of the sort that typically presages a bid for higher office. The senator has otherwise continued to promote what he terms a “forward-looking foreign policy,” which has included an increasingly antagonistic assessment of Israel and its relationship with the United States.
Van Hollen, meanwhile, published a deeply disputed op-ed in The New York Times last week that argued for wholly jettisoning the Democratic Party’s “unconditional support to Israeli governments” that, he warned, has “increasingly undermined American interests and values.” He also proposed several steps that the next Democratic president should take with respect to Israel — such as recognizing a Palestinian state “subject to clear benchmarks” and ending U.S. “taxpayer-funded support to Israel,” which has also recently been championed by more moderate voices such as former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel.
In a noteworthy aside at the end of his essay, Van Hollen, who, like Murphy, sits on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, stated that voters “won’t trust any Democratic presidential candidate who does not have a record of moral and strategic clarity on these issues” — a possible advertisement for his own 2028 ambitions.
The senator also insisted that voters will not be open to a presidential “candidate who plans to re-enlist the senior Democratic decision makers who whitewashed the truth during the Biden administration and refuse to acknowledge their complicity.”
Left unmentioned was that Van Hollen’s dictates could reasonably be seen as planting the seeds for a possible post in a future administration, including secretary of state or another top foreign policy role.
Khanna, long seen as harboring presidential ambitions, has for his part moved swiftly to the far left on Israel policy in recent years, while giving his endorsement to a range of Israel critics running for House and Senate this cycle that have helped him to build a progressive imprint throughout the country.
None of the three lawmakers, however media-savvy, possesses the name recognition or national profile of other prominent Democrats who are more frequently cited as presidential prospects, such as Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro from the moderate wing of the Democratic Party and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) on the left.
But if they do choose to mount what would likely be long-shot presidential bids, each has the potential to become a more significant player in national politics, as previous presidential contests have demonstrated.
During the 2020 primary, for instance, Andrew Yang rose to prominence as a Democratic outsider thanks in part to his calls for unconventional policies such as universal basic income. And Pete Buttigieg channeled his short-lived primary surge from small-town mayor in Indiana to leading the Transportation Department under former President Joe Biden.
With intraparty conflict over Israel poised to inflect the 2028 presidential race, it would not be surprising if Khanna, Murphy or Van Hollen seized the national spotlight while championing Middle East policy positions that had once been considered off-limits for a viable campaign.
Kenneth Baer, a former Obama administration official who now leads a communications firm, voiced concerns about the possibility, albeit hypothetical, of a lawmaker like Van Hollen helming the State Department, say, in a future administration.
“The only thing more menacing to a strong U.S.-Israel relationship than Van Hollen as SFRC chair is him as secretary of state,” Baer, a constituent of the senator, told Jewish Insider. “It’s a sad commentary about the state of our party that more than a few presidential hopefuls would seriously consider him for that role.”
His critics once saw him as an ally, but fear he’s pandered to extremists as he raises his national profile ahead of the 2028 presidential election
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) leaves the U.S. Capitol on March 13, 2024 in Washington.
Rep. Ro Khanna’s (D-CA) emergence as a leading Democratic party critic of Israel — while affiliating with and embracing individuals and groups that have been accused of antisemitism and support for terrorism — is creating divisions within the local Jewish community in his Silicon Valley-centered district.
While Khanna maintains unified support from Jewish elected officials in the district, other Jewish community leaders say they feel abandoned, ignored and even attacked by their congressman, whom they once saw as an ally, as he faces what could be his most credible primary challenge in years.
For some in the district, ties with the congressman have been strained for years, and were further inflamed by the March attack on two Israeli Americans in San Jose’s Santana Row shopping district.
Khanna strongly condemned the attack but some in the community said his words rang hollow after months of escalating anti-Israel rhetoric. Some Jewish leaders in the district say that they saw a direct connection between Khanna’s incendiary language condemning the Jewish state and attacks such as the one their community experienced.
Two days after the attack, Khanna posted about how he is “proud to stand” with Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner and New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani, as well as to join far-left streamer Hasan Piker’s show, all of whom have faced criticism from the Jewish community — comments that prompted condemnation by Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt.
Jewish leaders in the district who are now critical of the congressman said the community’s relationship with Khanna started out strong when he was first elected in 2016, but has significantly deteriorated over time, particularly in the past few years. Khanna’s Silicon Valley district includes substantial, concentrated Jewish and Israeli-American communities.
Tali Klima, a spokesperson for Bay Area Jewish Coalition Action, a local grassroots advocacy group, said that Khanna was “warmly welcomed” by the Jewish community when he was first elected and that many in the community had supported him.
Khanna traveled to Israel three times while in office, and has expressed support for the Abraham Accords, voted in 2019 to condemn the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, condemned calls to “globalize the intifada,” voted in early 2024 to condemn the slogan “from the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free” and introduced a Holocaust education resolution in 2024. Amid rising antisemitism in recent years, he has touted appointing a point of contact for addressing antisemitism in the district on his congressional team.
But, Klima and other critics said, they’ve seen the congressman’s posture change over time.
“He’s become more and more divisive and more extremist in his views, that we never heard when he was first elected, especially since Oct. 7. It’s been a massive shift in the way that he communicates about things that we care about,” Klima continued.
“At this point, the community has really lost trust in him,” Klima said. “Much of the community is afraid of him, and much of the community is also very angry and feels betrayed by him.”
“Having participated in local town halls with Representative Khanna and spoken with him about various community concerns, I am thankful for his commitment to open dialogue and remaining accessible even when we disagree,” Assemblymember Patrick Ahrens said. “His dedication to peace and justice for all people and support for a two-state solution is laudable. He has been a leader for accountability and transparency with the Trump Administration, particularly with the bipartisan push for the release of the Epstein files.”
Khanna has frequently and repeatedly accused Israel of genocide, was among the first lawmakers to endorse calls for cutting off U.S. support for Israel’s Iron Dome missile-defense system and led an effort for U.S. recognition of a Palestinian state, among a range of other stances and votes, and has repeatedly faced scrutiny for his affiliations with groups and individuals condemned by the Jewish community.
Later this week, he’s set to offer an amendment to strip a provision advancing U.S.-Israel cooperative programs out of the 2027 defense bill. Though one former Biden administration called the provision “quite unremarkable” and in keeping with existing programs, Khanna called it a “fusion” of the U.S. and Israeli militaries to prevent scrutiny and accountability for U.S. aid to Israel.
Jewish elected officials supporting Khanna, in statements shared with Jewish Insider, praised the congressman for his support for a two-state solution and for engaging with local Jewish communities.
“Having participated in local town halls with Representative Khanna and spoken with him about various community concerns, I am thankful for his commitment to open dialogue and remaining accessible even when we disagree,” Assemblymember Patrick Ahrens said. “His dedication to peace and justice for all people and support for a two-state solution is laudable. He has been a leader for accountability and transparency with the Trump Administration, particularly with the bipartisan push for the release of the Epstein files.”
State Sen. Josh Becker added, “While Congressman Khanna gets a lot of ink for his criticism of Israel he gets less for his vocal support of a two state solution and Israel as a safe democratic Jewish state.”
Others, such as San Jose City Councilmember David Cohen, more broadly praised him for his work on local issues.
“The fact that an elected official like Khanna defends [people like Hasan Piker and Zohran Mamdani] and their dangerous antisemitic views is not only shameful — but it also actively endangers the lives of Jewish people both in his district and around the country,” Oleg Ivanov, executive director of StandWithUs Northern California, said.
“Times are very difficult these days in Washington D.C., and Congressmember Khanna remains a steady advocate for our region and economy. We need people who understand the tech industry and also who bring money back to our community from the federal budget,” Cohen said. “He has shown courage and has been willing to face his constituents at monthly town hall meetings ever since he was elected. While I don’t agree with every position he takes, I admire his thoughtfulness and transparency.”
Cohen declined to speak further on Khanna’s foreign policy work or his relationship with the local Jewish community.
But others in the community feel that their concerns aren’t being heard or listened to by the congressman. Daniel Klein, CEO of Jewish Silicon Valley, a Jewish nonprofit which runs a local JCC and other community programs and resources, said he’s communicated to Khanna directly that he thinks the legislator is out of step with his constituents.
“The fact that an elected official like Khanna defends [people like Hasan Piker and Zohran Mamdani] and their dangerous antisemitic views is not only shameful — but it also actively endangers the lives of Jewish people both in his district and around the country,” Oleg Ivanov, executive director of StandWithUs Northern California, said.
Ivanov also accused Khanna of spreading a “blood libel” in accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza.
Oded Shekel, executive director of Bay Area Jewish Coalition Action, emphasized that members of the Jewish and Israeli community in Khanna’s district feel afraid, isolated and that they have to hide who they are, and don’t feel they’re getting the support they expect from their congressman.
Shekel said that he doesn’t necessarily think Khanna is personally or openly antisemitic, but that he is supporting and rationalizing extreme voices, to the point that has made many Jews like him feel that Khanna is the “strongest voice [that] hurts Jews in his district.”
Khanna joined a town hall in 2024 hosted by the Bay Area Jewish Coalition — a separate entity from Bay Area Jewish Coalition Action led by the same individuals — but the relationship has soured since then.
Sunnyvale Mayor Larry Klein, a Khanna supporter, said he’d attended the BAJC town hall, and met with Jewish community members alongside Khanna to discuss the challenges that Jewish high schoolers were facing from antisemitism in the district, and how the congressman could address them.
“Good to hear directly from High School Students and their parents on the district issues,” Mayor Klein said in a statement. “It was valuable to hear firsthand about the harassment that Jewish Students had endured.
Mayor Klein also praised Khanna’s “bipartisan approach to leadership” on issues including “working to halt reckless foreign intervention” and the release of the Epstein Files, saying that Khanna, “consistently puts principles over politics.” He also praised Khanna’s engagement with constituents more broadly and work on securing federal funding for the district.
Daniel Klein of Jewish Silicon Valley described Khanna’s stances and statements as hostile to the Jewish community. He said that the violent attack in Santana Row, and other similar incidents, are the “natural maturation” of the rhetoric Khanna has used and elevated.
“I appreciate the congressman being outraged” about the Santana Row attack, “but statements and what he normalizes and who he platforms before these incidents, and then who he chooses to stand with and platform and normalize after these incidents, makes the community feel unseen and unsupported by the congressman,” Klein said he told Khanna’s office in the wake of the attack.
Yet, Klein said, Khanna’s rhetoric does not appear to have shifted substantially since the March attack.
“I’m a big fan of Congressman Khanna,” Ben Linder, a J Street board member who lives just outside Khanna’s district, told JI. “The majority of the Jewish community is squarely behind him and very aligned with him,” Linder continued, emphasizing that he has seen Khanna speak on multiple occasions to busy synagogue audiences.
Klima echoed that, expressing frustration that Khanna’s condemnation of the attack was quickly followed by a return to his usual rhetoric and activity.
In addition to Jewish elected officials backing him, Khanna maintains support among segments of the local Jewish community. Ben Linder, a J Street board member who lives just outside Khanna’s district, told JI he continues to strongly support the congressman. J Street has endorsed Khanna, but Linder spoke to JI in a personal capacity, not on behalf of the progressive Israel advocacy group.
“I’m a big fan of Congressman Khanna,” Linder, who was born in Israel and moved to the U.S. in high school, said. “The majority of the Jewish community is squarely behind him and very aligned with him,” Linder continued, emphasizing that he has seen Khanna speak on multiple occasions to busy synagogue audiences.
He called critics “out of touch with the view of the majority of Jews right now” both in Khanna’s district and nationally, pointing to a Washington Post poll last year that found a majority of Jews are critical of the way the war in Gaza has been conducted.
He asserted that discontent with Khanna traces to a “vocal minority in the district, mainly led by right-wing Israeli expats that dislike Congressman Khanna” and are “out of touch with where our community is.”
“I consider Ro Khanna very pro-Israel. He is clearly anti-Netanyahu and anti- the policies of Israel’s right wing government, but so am I, and, I think, so are the majority of Jews in this district,” Linder said.
Critics of Khanna said that the congressman’s activity following the Santana Row attack matches a pattern they’ve observed repeatedly when Khanna is called out for conduct or statements they find offensive — Khanna will apologize, or offer targeted condemnations, but won’t substantially change his behavior, and ultimately continues doubling down.
They said this pattern ignores the way that Khanna’s own rhetoric is fueling antisemitism.
Klima emphasized that Khanna’s constituents have come to him on numerous occasions asking him to dial down his rhetoric. At this point, she said, his “symbolic condemnations” of antisemitism “ring very hollow.”
“He’s speaking out of both sides of his mouth, basically,” she said, adding that, as a longtime congressman, his comments “[legitimize] this rhetoric,” driving similar activity from other local officials as well.
Ivanov said it’s easy for Khanna to denounce antisemitic attacks or vandalism, “but as soon as he does that, he continues to spread the antisemitic conspiracy theories, to defend antisemitic speakers that are out there every day, fueling the antisemitism that leads to these actions.”
“We will not accept Khanna’s pro-forma denunciation of antisemitic incidents while he himself continues to fuel antisemitism and defend antisemites,” Ivanov said.
Linder, the Khanna supporter, argued that Khanna has made clear that he “will speak with anyone” and “dialogues with people he disagrees with, and I respect that.” Khanna has expressed similar sentiments to JI in the past.
Linder said he strongly disagreed with the notion that Khanna’s rhetoric is fueling violence, and emphasized that the Santana Row attack was not charged as a hate crime.
“I don’t believe there was sufficient evidence to show that it was hate-motivated,” Linder said. “The congressman came out very quickly and denounced that attack, denounced the violence, and I fundamentally am not a subscriber to the notion that criticizing Israel fuels antisemitism. I see a clear delineation between criticism of Israel and Jew hatred. I don’t believe the two are connected. As a matter of fact, I think some of the actions of Netanyahu and the Israeli government, the extreme right Israeli government foment antisemitism.”
Shekel, a Khanna critic, said that, during conversations with Khanna about antisemitism that community members are facing, Khanna has expressed sympathy while pivoting to emphasize his disputes with various Israeli government policies.
“We feel that he is fixated, obsessed with Israel,” Klima added.
“The organized Jewish community is telling you exactly where the majority of the Jewish community stands, and if you choose not to listen, it is not due to lack of knowing where your constituents are. It’s a choice,” Daniel Klein, CEO of Jewish Silicon Valley, said. “It’s a choice at that point, and then that begs the question of why the member of Congress is choosing to ignore the Jewish community while also at the same time saying he’s being responsive to the Jewish community. That’s a contradiction I don’t have the answer to.”
Klein said that some in the community see Khanna as not only ignoring their concerns but attacking the Jewish community for elevating those issues in the first place. He pointed to an incident in which Khanna shared on his X account a clip of Holocaust denying social media influencer Ian Carroll as one such instance.
Klein said he and representatives of the local Jewish Community Relations Council sat down in person with Khanna’s staff about the video — “not only the fact that this person was platformed, the person wasn’t taken down immediately, and instead of listening to the Jewish community’s concerns, at least publicly, he seemed to attack the Jewish community instead.”
Klein also characterized Khanna as deflecting the concerns of the local Jewish community in conversations, offering a variety of excuses, including pointing to national polling on Israel policy issues.
“The organized Jewish community is telling you exactly where the majority of the Jewish community stands, and if you choose not to listen, it is not due to lack of knowing where your constituents are. It’s a choice,” Klein said. “It’s a choice at that point, and then that begs the question of why the member of Congress is choosing to ignore the Jewish community while also at the same time saying he’s being responsive to the Jewish community. That’s a contradiction I don’t have the answer to.”
Critics in the district see a political motivation behind Khanna’s rhetoric and positioning.
Ivanov said that he first met Khanna several years ago, when Ivanov was working for the American Jewish Committee. The congressman at the time emphasized “the importance of maintaining progressive support for Israel in American society. That has obviously changed over the past few years, where he has embraced this tide of vilification of Israel as a way to appeal to the rising popularity of bashing Israel among certain voters,” Ivanov said.
Klima said that the “general sentiment” among members of the Jewish community is that Khanna’s stance is “opportunistic” and that he’s following anti-Israel trends for the sake of popularity, rather than any “deeply held view.”
“We feel like he’s throwing us, his constituents, under the bus for his political game, because he feels like this is a win for progressives,” she said.
The congressman is widely seen as preparing for a presidential campaign in 2028.
Khanna’s frequent commentary about the “Epstein Class” — he was one of the leading advocates in the House for releasing files related to sex offender Jeffrey Epstein — has also set off alarm bells for Khanna’s critics.
Klima said that many in the Jewish community read those references as code for the Jewish community writ large, “because of our history with him, our recent history with him.” She said that Khanna’s pattern of rhetoric and actions has sowed distrust of him and his motives.
Khanna has dismissed the notion that the phrase is antisemitic, pointing to Jewish elected officials who have also spoken about the “Epstein Class.”
Critics in the district say that Khanna has a lot of work to do to repair his relationships with the Jewish community — and that it will take more than the pro forma condemnations of antisemitism that they feel he’s been offering over the past few years.
Klein encouraged Khanna to “stop feeding the extreme left and the alt-right” on social media and called on him to apologize for “ignoring the Jewish community,” and “actually start listening to the organized Jewish community,” rather than the “fringes.”
Klima said that she is fed up with what she sees as “symbolic gestures” by the congressman.
“We feel like we’re just pawns in his political game, because the very next day, he’s back to the ‘genocide’ and his political obsession,” she said. “[He] is clearly hurting us and it needs to be something much deeper than just a statement.”
Renewed scrutiny of congressional hopefuls Graham Platner and Adam Hamawy highlight the potential for far-left candidates to complicate the party’s midterm ambitions
Sophie Park/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Graham Platner, Democratic Senate candidate for Maine, left, and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) during a Fighting Oligarchy event in Portland, Maine, on May 25, 2026.
The latest revelations that Graham Platner, the Democrats’ anti-establishment, far-left standard-bearer in the Maine Senate race, was sending sexually explicit texts to as many as a dozen women while he was married — an issue his wife raised to campaign staff as a potential liability — is another sign that the candidate’s extensive baggage may be too much for the party to handle. (As commentator Haviv Rettig Gur posted on X: “I’m starting to think that SS tattoo might have been a red flag.”)
Meanwhile, a New York Times interview, published over the weekend, with leading New Jersey Democratic congressional candidate Adam Hamawy about his past affiliations with Islamist extremists is going to raise more red flags for Democrats.
Asked about his travels with Omar Abdel Rahman, known as the “Blind Sheikh,” who was connected to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, Hamawy downplayed the spiritual leader’s jihadist sermons. “He wasn’t preaching death and destruction all the time,” Hamawy said. “He had certain views that he spoke in certain forums, but that’s not what he did every single day.”
With the calendar now approaching June, it’s yet another reminder that Democrats are on the verge of nominating some truly radical and damaged candidates for congressional office as a critical mass of primaries take place this month.
Many of the races are taking place in safely blue seats, so Democrats haven’t raised that much concern over candidates such as Hamawy, whose terror ties (including volunteer work for what was later revealed as an al-Qaida front group) at the very least, raise questions about suitability for public office.
But others, such as Platner, are running in battleground Senate seats where the stakes couldn’t be higher. In California and Montana, candidates are running in swing districts where the battle for the House majority will be fought.
If May was the month that tested President Donald Trump’s power over the Republican Party (lesson: he’s still firmly in control of GOP voters), June will be the month that determines whether the Democratic Party is going to abandon its moderate moorings and nominate a roster of radicals.
The stakes couldn’t be higher — especially for Jewish Democrats, who have been among the leading voices alarmed by the rise of these candidates, who, not surprisingly, often hold virulently anti-Israel views and don’t have a problem mainlining antisemitic rhetoric.
While Platner’s expected nomination and Hamawy’s potential one are generating the most attention, several under-the-radar races will have a direct bearing on the Democrats’ midterm prospects.
In California’s congressional races, the pro-Israel advocacy group Democratic Majority for Israel has been involved in two swing-district races where the group fears left-wing candidates could jeopardize the party’s chances of a pickup. In the seat held by Rep. David Valadao (R-CA), the group endorsed Assemblywoman Jasmeet Bains and has been airing ads on her behalf in the Central Valley-based district.
Bains is facing a Democratic challenge from school board trustee Randy Villegas, who has landed endorsements from many of the leading anti-Israel lawmakers in Congress and who many Democrats fear could cost the Democrats a seat if he’s the nominee against the battle-tested Valadao.
In the race to succeed retiring Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) in a San Diego-area district, the pro-Israel group has endorsed San Diego Councilwoman Marni von Wilpert, who is running against Ammar Campa-Najjar, who is of mixed Palestinian and Mexican American descent and has twice unsuccessfully run for Congress. The district was redrawn to elect a Democrat, but it still remains a competitive battleground.
In Iowa, Democrats will be choosing whether to nominate the party-favored state Rep. Josh Turek, the more moderate candidate, or go with a true-blue progressive in state Sen. Zach Wahls. The nominee is expected to face Rep. Ashley Hinson (R-IA) in a state that Democrats hope will become competitive, given the rough national environment for Republicans.
And in Montana’s 1st District, in the race to succeed retiring Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-MT), Jewish leaders are alarmed by several candidates in the Democratic primary field over their anti-Israel rhetoric and online antisemitic activity. Army veteran Matt Rains appears to be the most mainstream Democratic candidate of the four in the race, but lags behind in fundraising.
The district has been solidly Republican since its creation, but in a Democratic wave, it’s competitive enough that it could flip. Given the extreme rhetoric of some of the Democratic candidates, however, that prospect would be less likely.
Also of note: Los Angeles voters will be determining which two candidates will square off in a runoff for mayor. Assuming embattled Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass finishes in the top two, her opponent will either be running further to her left (Los Angeles City Councilwoman Nithya Raman) or to her right (reality star Spencer Pratt). The matchup will determine whether the campaign focuses more on catering to progressive voters or moderates disenchanted with the direction of the city.
Meanwhile, Rep. Haley Stevens avoided a question about receiving support from pro-Israel donors, while Abdul El-Sayed blamed rising antisemitism on white supremacy
Jim West/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images
Mallory McMorrow, a candidate for U.S. Senate, campaigns at the Michigan Democratic Nominating Convention
State Sen. Mallory McMorrow offered a straightforward answer when asked at a debate on Thursday, alongside the other two Democrats vying for an open Senate seat in Michigan, whether there is an antisemitism problem in the Democratic Party.
“There is,” said McMorrow. She told the story of an attendee at last month’s Democratic Party convention in Detroit who yelled an antisemitic slur at her Jewish husband, in front of their young daughter.
“That is terrifying. We need to be able to state very clearly that what the Netanyahu government is doing is wrong, that the violence needs to end, that we need to bring about long-term peace and security for Palestinians and for Israelis, and that turning that into not an anti-Netanyahu, but an anti-American Jewish message is dangerous,” McMorrow said, earning applause from the room.
The other two candidates — Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI) and former public health official Abdul El-Sayed — did not directly address the question about Democrats.
Stevens condemned “rising political violence and extremism,” including the attack at Temple Israel in West Bloomfield, in her district, which she said was carried out by a “homegrown terrorist.” She described herself as a lawmaker who is “leading on combating antisemitism in a bipartisan way. That does not have to be a partisan thing.”
El-Sayed said he understands discrimination because he has faced it himself. He blamed antisemitism in the U.S. on white supremacy.
“I know that antisemitism and Islamophobia tend to go hand in hand, and the real issue when it comes to either of them is the scourge of white supremacy,” he said, while arguing that respecting American Jews does not require supporting Israel.
The Democratic primary for the open Senate seat in Michigan is one of the most contentious in the country, and antisemitism has become a major issue, alongside U.S. foreign policy and support for Israel. It is perhaps the most high-profile seat where debates about the role of AIPAC might actually have an impact on the outcome.
Stevens, a longtime ally of the pro-Israel group, was the early frontrunner in the race but has faced attacks from her opponents for not criticizing AIPAC.
Presented with an opportunity on Thursday in a primary debate to help voters understand why she continues to receive support from the pro-Israel advocacy group, Stevens chose not to speak about the group at all.
“You take money from AIPAC. Walk us through what that money means and what it buys, and maybe what it doesn’t,” one of the debate’s moderators asked Stevens, as part of a question about how much influence individual donors have over their decisions.
“Michiganders are frustrated because we have not done comprehensive campaign finance reform. Mike Rogers will not vote for comprehensive campaign finance reform like I have in the House of Representatives,” Stevens said, referring to former Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), the expected GOP nominee for Senate. “We squarely need to put people at the front of our agenda.”
She also said she is “deeply proud to have grassroots support coming from grocery clerk workers to retired teachers to factory workers and the like,” and named some of the politicians who have endorsed her, including former Rep. Brenda Lawrence (D-MI), former Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and former Gov. Jennifer Granholm.
When asked about her views on foreign policy, Stevens attacked President Donald Trump for the “harmful and ridiculous” steps he took to pare back U.S. humanitarian aid abroad, and pledged to focus on peace.
“We need to see the United States work with our allies to achieve lasting peace between Russia and Ukraine, between the people of Israel and Palestine and of course between China and Taiwan,” said Stevens. “But when you remove the tools from our tool kit, you fail this country and you fail us, to allow us to work alongside our allies.”
Both McMorrow and El-Sayed used Thursday’s debate to remind voters that they do not accept donations from AIPAC. (AIPAC has not made an endorsement in the Senate race, but it has encouraged its supporters to donate to Stevens’ campaign.)
“I have not taken a dime of corporate PAC donations. I have not taken a dime of AIPAC donations,” said McMorrow, who is endorsed by the progressive Israel advocacy group J Street.
El-Sayed, who regularly accuses Israel of genocide and has said he struggles with the question of whether Israel has the right to exist as a Jewish state, slammed Stevens for taking AIPAC supporters’ donations.
“Let me tell you what absolutely would not shape my perception [of foreign policy]: it’s AIPAC money,” said El-Sayed.
Two DSA-backed challengers have a credible shot at winning seats, while Rep. Dan Goldman is down in polls against Brad Lander
Erik McGregor/LightRocket via Getty Images
NY Assemblymember Claire Valdez
As an emboldened socialist wing of the Democratic Party gains traction across New York City in the aftermath of Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s victory, Jewish leaders and moderate officials are bracing for the possibility of multiple upsets in key House races that could reshape the ideological orientation of the state’s congressional delegation.
Three races have drawn heightened attention in recent weeks, including a marquee House contest playing out largely in progressive Brooklyn where Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) is seeking to fend off a serious challenge from former New York City Comptroller Brad Lander. Meanwhile, in upper Manhattan and the Bronx, Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-NY) is facing what looks like an increasingly credible challenge from an anti-Israel organizer. And in the race to replace retiring Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-NY), her favored primary candidate is struggling to compete against a democratic socialist endorsed by Mamdani.
“If you have two socialists and Brad Lander” who are elected, “that’s a real move to the left — and it’s a lot of people who are bringing down the seniority of the congressional delegation,” said Chris Coffey, a New York City Democratic strategist not involved in the races. “That is probably the biggest shift we’ve seen at the congressional level in generations,” he told Jewish Insider, adding that there are “a lot of ifs baked into that.”
A recent public poll showing Goldman trailing badly behind Lander underscored how an emboldened far left is asserting itself in a race that is hinging in large part on the candidates’ differences over Israel. The independent survey, released last week by Emerson College, strongly indicated that Goldman is in serious trouble in the closely watched June 23 primary, lagging badly behind Lander, who held a commanding 57% of the vote.
Goldman, a pro-Israel Democrat who gained prominence as an outspoken critic of President Donald Trump, touts a relatively progressive record on domestic issues like healthcare, climate policy and immigration. But as he seeks a third term, Goldman has faced backlash from left-wing activists over his continued support for U.S. funding to Israel, which Lander, notably endorsed by Mamdani, has vowed to end, even for missile defense.
In a rare convergence on Middle East-related issues, the candidates opposed a successful effort this week to implement a boycott of Israeli products at a high-profile local food cooperative in the Park Slope neighborhood of Brooklyn, which sits in the district. (In a sign of the times, the boycott vote passed by a 2-to-1 margin.) But they otherwise disagreed on whether the measure was antisemitic, as Goldman and other Jewish community activists, including an influential rabbi in the district, had described the divisive effort.
Both Goldman and Lander are slated to address Jewish community concerns on June 7 during off-the-record town hall events at Congregation Beth Elohim, a Reform synagogue in Park Slope that is led by that rabbi, Rachel Timoner, according to an email recently sent to members. They will answer questions from congregants independently in the back-to-back, hour-long forums.
Despite tensions over Israel, some strategists note that Lander’s dominance in the progressive district covering sections of Brownstone Brooklyn and Lower Manhattan can be attributed to his standing as a popular former councilman and citywide elected official who also ran for mayor last cycle — a level of name ID that marks him as a sort of de facto incumbent.

But other races have also sharply demonstrated how anti-Israel sentiment is fueling the rise of candidates endorsed by the Democratic Socialists America’s New York City chapter. The group, which has championed anti-Zionism as a core element of its platform, is now backing challengers in two high-profile congressional primaries as well as some down-ballot races for seats in the state Legislature.
The closest race, for an open House seat spanning parts of Brooklyn and Queens, pits Claire Valdez, a democratic socialist assemblymember who is known for her anti-Israel activism, against Antonio Reynoso, the progressive Brooklyn borough president boasting establishment support from the outgoing incumbent, Velazquez, and the state attorney general, Letitia James, among other elected officials and groups.
But even as Reynoso entered the race in a favorable position, well-known to voters for his reputation as a more traditional progressive, he has struggled in his campaign to gain traction, recently calling himself an underdog, thanks to Valdez’s support from Mamdani paired with the grassroots organizational muscle of a resurgent DSA. A recent poll showed Valdez narrowly leading Reynoso by two points, with 23% of the vote, even while she is comparatively new to the district as a first-term state lawmaker.
Valdez’s favorable position has come as she has made opposition to Israel a primary focus of her campaign, while facing some scrutiny over her decision to sit for a friendly discussion earlier this month with a Twitch streamer who was once suspended from the platform for calling Jews a “demonic ethnicity.” Her campaign did not respond to a request for comment concerning the interview.
In a separate House primary in upper Manhattan as well as parts of the Bronx, Jewish leaders have begun to raise alarms about an insurgent challenger to Espaillat, a veteran incumbent who, like Goldman, is backed by the pro-Israel group AIPAC. In the final weeks of the race, he is now facing what Democratic strategists say is an increasingly serious threat from Darializa Avila Chevalier, a DSA-endorsed organizer who helped lead campus anti-Israel demonstrations at Columbia University.
“Folks seem to be getting very nervous,” one Jewish leader following the race told JI, echoing others who relayed similar concerns about the contest as it enters its closing stretch.
An internal campaign poll conducted in March, for instance, put Avila Chevalier at 28% among primary voters, with Espaillat at 42%, a poor showing for an incumbent who has held office for close to a decade. Political observers suggested the race could be closer as the primary nears and Avila Chevalier rides a wave of anti-establishment, leftist sentiment now shaping several races across the country where the DSA is involved.
In addition to backing an arms embargo on Israel and efforts to boycott the Jewish state, both Avila Chevalier and Valdez pledged to “refrain from any affiliation with the Israeli government and Zionist lobby groups, including but not limited to AIPAC, J Street, or DMFI,” according to DSA questionnaires reviewed by JI.
Justice Democrats, the far-left group that has frequently targeted incumbents, has also endorsed both candidates and is now spending to boost their campaigns. On Wednesday, it dropped $260,000 on ads to help boost Avila Chevalier — suggesting it sees the race as in play. The group also made its first foray into Valdez’s primary this week, according to filings, spending $11,000 on digital ads to prop up her bid.
Reynoso and Espaillat, meanwhile, can expect seven figures spent independently on their behalf in the coming weeks, a Democratic operative familiar with the matter told JI, but did not disclose the source of such funding.
The upcoming expenditures foreshadow what is shaping up to be a bitterly contested fight between the Democratic establishment and the far left now seeking to supplant it.
Still, there are signs that the far left is struggling to gain traction outside of deeply progressive districts. For example, Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY), a pro-Israel stalwart facing a challenge from former state lawmaker Michael Blake, who has made opposition to AIPAC a key part of his messaging, is expected to prevail. A recent poll showed Torres with a commanding 60% of the vote share, far outpacing Blake, who held just 15% in the Bronx-based district.
Torres’ position “shows that if you are actually working hard in your district and are there and present and delivering, then you should be OK,” Coffey, the Democratic strategist, told JI, noting that the congressman also developed a positive relationship with Mamdani, despite their disagreements on Middle East policy.
Hank Sheinkopf, a veteran Democratic strategist in New York City, characterized the DSA’s strategy as part of a “long-term plan” to “take over legislatures” across the country and influence foreign policy at the congressional level, as other far-left candidates have made inroads in key House races in Philadelphia and Denver. “New York is just the beginning,” he told JI.
Craig will be facing off against Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan in the state’s August Senate primary
Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images
Rep. Angie Craig (D-MN) arrives for a vote in the U.S. Capitol on Thursday, March 26, 2026.
Rep. Angie Craig (D-MN), a moderate Democrat running for Minnesota’s open Senate seat, said on Wednesday that she would not seek the support of the state Democratic Party at its convention being held this weekend — effectively ceding that endorsement to Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan, her left-wing opponent.
Craig, who will still run in the Aug. 11 primary, said “the DFL endorsement process just doesn’t reflect the full scope of the party that we are and the purple state that we have become,” referring to the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, Minnesota’s Democratic affiliate, which was already expected to back Flanagan.
“Most Minnesotans don’t have the luxury of choosing a sub-caucus over a Saturday soccer game with their kids. Most Minnesotans can’t choose a convention over a closing shift. And most Minnesotans can’t put a delegate vote over driving their dad to a doctor’s appointment,” she said in a press conference while criticizing the DFL’s endorsement process.
In a statement, a spokesperson for Flanagan’s campaign countered that “DFLers overwhelmingly consolidated behind” the lieutenant governor “because they’re hungry for a leader who will stand up to corporate power, not bend to Republicans, and fight unapologetically for working people.”
Last month, Craig’s campaign called on the DFL to launch a formal investigation into a series of alleged instances of antisemitic activity among delegates in advance of its state convention, which has navigated mounting intraparty divisions over Israel.
Shapiro, to Politico: ‘When you have people who are advocating for issues that they feel strongly about and they are having their voices silenced, I think that's a problem in our system’
Peter W. Stevenson/The Washington Post via Getty Images
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro sits for an interview at the Pennsylvania State Capitol on June 11, 2025.
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro warned of the dangers of efforts within the Democratic Party to single out AIPAC, telling Politico in a new interview that painting the pro-Israel group as “toxic” could be seen as silencing Jewish voices in the American political system.
“I think it’s been used cynically by some to try and silence certain voices, to try and say that certain people participating in politics shouldn’t count, or should be viewed in a toxic way,” Shapiro said in the interview, which was released on Tuesday.
Where some Democrats have recently distanced themselves from AIPAC, Shapiro declined to do so.
“Do I agree with every political decision they’ve made, every endorsement they made? Of course not,” said Shapiro. “I think what we have seen is a weaponization of that. And I think that is a danger for our system. When you have people who are advocating for issues that they feel strongly about and they are having their voices silenced, I think that’s a problem in our system.”
Shapiro, a potential 2028 presidential contender, declined to say whether he would accept support from AIPAC, which does not get involved in state or presidential races, nor did he address AIPAC’s tactics or its involvement in any particular race.
He cautioned that efforts to vilify the group have sometimes crossed a line into targeting American Jews’ political advocacy, noting that sometimes Jewish donors who currently or have in the past supported AIPAC are tarred just for being part of the political process.
“I think it does get blurred because now what you are seeing is not ‘AIPAC money,’” said Shapiro, “but you’re getting the Jews who give to that candidate who also support AIPAC. I think it’s very dangerous in our system, if you are trying to silence certain voices based on their race, based on their faith, based on their particular ideology.”
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro is warning about the dangers of efforts within the Democratic Party to single out AIPAC.
— Jewish Insider (@jewishinsider) May 26, 2026
“I think it’s been used cynically by some to try and silence certain voices, to try and say that certain people participating in politics shouldn’t count, or… pic.twitter.com/uighmwoMgu
Shapiro, who is one of the most prominent Jewish politicians in the U.S., described a “dramatic spike in antisemitism across this country.” He condemned the Islamophobic attack on a mosque in San Diego last week in which three people were killed while also pointing out that, overall, antisemitism is a much larger problem than other forms of hate.
“There is rising hatred and bigotry targeting people across the board, but it is also undeniable, and no one’s pain is greater or more important than others, but from a data perspective, there has been a dramatic spike in antisemitism that is unmatched elsewhere, and that’s a problem,” said Shapiro.
Asked whether he plans to run for president, Shapiro declined to answer. But he said his family had to consider whether he should run for reelection this year in Pennsylvania after an arson attack on the governor’s mansion last year on the first night of Passover.
“My family and I spent a bunch of time thinking about running for reelection. It is hard for me as a dad to know that doing this job I love, this job I find great purpose in where I get to help people, puts my kids’ lives at risk,” said Shapiro. “I’m not going to cower. I’m not going to be fearful.”
Republican nominees Lena Epstein and Michael Schostak, who both identify as Jewish, told JI they’re campaigning on fighting antisemitism at the school
Campaign website
Lena Epstein and Michael Schostak
Michigan’s statewide election for two seats on the University of Michigan Board of Regents — the body that governs the state’s flagship university — has become a surprisingly contentious race in a swing state full of high-profile match-ups.
After Amir Makled, a trial attorney with a history of antisemitic and pro-Hezbollah social media posts, unseated incumbent Regent Jordan Acker at the Democratic Party nominating convention last month, the two Republican candidates running for the board see an opening to pitch themselves to Democrats and Independents.
Acker, who is Jewish, had spoken out against efforts to divest Michigan’s endowment from Israeli companies, and faced antisemitic harassment from pro-Palestinian campus activists, while Makled has promoted efforts to boycott Israel. (Acker and Brown campaigned together during the primary, but Acker did not respond to a request for comment about who he’s backing in the general election.)
Lena Epstein, an oil executive who chaired President Donald Trump’s campaign in Michigan in 2016 before running for regent, told Jewish Insider in a recent interview that reaching disaffected Democrats who are upset about Makled’s place on the ticket is a priority for her.
“There are the individuals that believe that I’ll be a fabulous regent and really great at the job and able to effect positive change over these next eight years, and for the long term,” said Epstein, who also ran for the board in 2022 and narrowly lost. “Then there’s the other folks that simply don’t want the other gentleman who is nominated to win, and we accept support from Democrats, independents and Republicans.”
Epstein has an MBA from Michigan, as does the other Republican on the ticket, Michael Schostak, the treasurer of Bloomfield Township, a Detroit suburb. Schostak told JI in an interview that since Makled’s nomination, Michigan alumni around the country who are now closely following the race have been calling him.
“They care about their alma mater and they want to make sure that it stays in good hands, and they’re very concerned about what they’ve seen from Amir Makled,” Schostak said. “I’m not running to be the Jewish candidate. I am Jewish, but that’s not why I’m running. I got into this race eight months ago because I cared about affordability of tuition and college costs.”
The two regents who are elected this November to serve on the eight-person board will join an ongoing search for a new university president following a tumultuous few years for Michigan, one of the top public universities in the country — and the school with the fifth-largest Jewish student population, according to Hillel International.
Both Schostak and Epstein identify as Jewish, though Epstein has at times described herself as a messianic Jew, meaning she believes in the divinity of Jesus. For that reason, the mainstream Jewish community considers messianic Jews to be Christian. She recently told the Forward that she is “100% Jewish,” and that her family belongs to a Reform synagogue in Bloomfield Hills.
Both Republicans say fighting antisemitism is a priority for them if elected to the board of regents.
“Antisemitism should never be minimized, normalized or explained away. Jewish students deserve the same protection and dignity as every other student on campus,” Epstein said. “One of the most troubling failures that we’ve seen at the University of Michigan is the hesitation to call antisemitism what it is.”
Schostak recalled conversations with Jewish students who were afraid to wear Star of David necklaces on campus or scared to walk to class during the anti-Israel encampments two years ago.
“I felt terrible, just sick to my stomach for the Jewish students on campus who had to live through that, and the pro-Israel students. There are a lot of pro-Israel students who are not Jewish,” said Schostak. “We’ve got to acknowledge them, who felt like they couldn’t express themselves because they were going to be harassed or followed or shouted at, or whatever, and the fact that all this was going on, the encampments, and people felt like it wasn’t safe.”
Both candidates said the university did a poor job of handling the firestorm of campus events in the 2023-2024 school year after Hamas’ Oct. 7 attacks and called for more clarity about rules surrounding campus protests.
“When it comes to protests on campus at U of M, peaceful protest has been a very long-standing tradition at this fine university,” said Epstein. “Students have every right to speak out. Students do not have the right to make other students feel unsafe walking to class. A university simply can’t function if rules are enforced selectively, depending on politics.”
Schostak and Epstein said they will emphasize support for free speech across all viewpoints at a school where they think intellectual diversity is lacking. But the response to anti-Israel protests, even hateful ones, cannot be shutting all protests down, according to Shostak.
“Free speech to me is very important, and they have the right to protest and make noise, as long as they don’t disrupt the university’s business,” said Schostak. “What I would tell the Jewish and pro-Israel students is, ‘Look, you need to be just as vocal in your beliefs and standing up for Israel and standing up for the Jewish people as they are standing up for the Palestinian people.’”
After a Michigan professor delivered an anti-Israel speech at commencement this month, Epstein and Schostak released a joint statement questioning the choice of the professor, Derek Peterson, as a speaker and criticizing his rhetoric. “There is a time and a place for emotionally charged debate. A commencement ceremony is not it,” they wrote.
Makled and Paul Brown, the other Democratic nominee who was first elected to the board of regents in 2018, have both criticized President Donald Trump’s approach to higher education, and pledged to push back on funding cuts where possible. Schostak expressed concern about the cuts as well, while noting that the regents should encourage the university to work to not get additional funding cut off.
“I am concerned,” Schostak said. “The university is going to have to tap dance around that to make sure that they abide by all the rules to make sure that our research funding isn’t cut off or any of our other funding isn’t cut off.”
Epstein has declined to say much on the issue. When asked about Trump’s adversarial approach to universities, she pointed out that Michigan is a public institution.
“We do accept public funds, and we do work in concert with the government based on those financial dynamics,” she said. “With that said, I believe that the University of Michigan should be an autonomous organization.”
Both candidates understand that to the extent to which Michigan voters are even paying attention to the race, most will not make a decision based on issues related to Israel or campus protests. So their focus remains on issues like college affordability and job opportunities.
“[Voters] care about sending their kids to college, being able to afford to pay for it, having their kids stay here when they graduate, so that we can provide an environment where they can thrive,” said Schostak. “That’s what they care about, and those are the issues that I’m going to be speaking to.”
DNC Chair Ken Martin added his condemnation of Galindo: ‘This kind of vile, antisemitic rhetoric has no place in the Democratic Party’
U.S. House of Representatives
Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) and Jared Moskowitz (D-FL)
Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) and Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) said on Wednesday that they would seek to expel Maureen Galindo, a Democrat running for Congress in Texas who has expressed extreme antisemitic views, if she is elected.
Their comments mark an escalation among Democrats condemning Galindo since comments by the House candidate, in which she called for the interment and castration of Zionists, gained widespread attention.
“If for some reason, Maureen Galindo wins the Congressional election in TX-35, as soon as she is sworn in, we will force a vote to expel her every single day we are here,” Gottheimer and Moskowitz said in a joint statement. “Maureen’s insane, antisemitic views — including putting Americans in concentration camps — have no place in our Party or country.”
Moskowitz added in a post on X about Galindo, “My grandmother was part of the Kindertransport out of Berlin. Her parents were killed in Auschwitz. My kids are never going to ‘the camps.’”
He made a similar comment, and expounded on the situation, during a House hearing earlier in the day, describing Galindo’s comments as a logical escalation of attacks on Jewish and pro-Israel Americans and U.S. support for Israel, which have become increasingly common in Democratic politics.
“We’ve gone from, ‘Oh there’s Americans who donate to elected officials that are AIPAC,’ and then it’s ‘ok, Netanyahu,’ and then it’s ‘ok, maybe we shouldn’t support foreign money,’ and ‘ok, now we’re going to call all these people Zionists.’ And now we’re at concentration camps,” Moskowitz said. “By the way, we got to concentration camps much faster than I thought we would, but here we are. And it’s real scary.”
“People are scared. People don’t want to show their Jewish stars anymore, they’re moving into neighborhoods just to be around other Jews because they’re concerned,” he continued.
Galindo came in first place in the March 3 primary race, leading sheriff’s deputy Johnny Garcia, despite Garcia being the party-backed candidate. Since the primary, a host of national Democratic groups, including the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and Democratic Majority for Israel, have been boosting Garcia ahead of a runoff race.
But Lead Left PAC, a secretive GOP-linked super PAC, has been airing ads backing Galindo with close to $1 million in outside spending ahead of next week’s runoff.
Galindo had previously made numerous antisemitic comments, including claiming that Jews “own Hollywood” and “worship at the synagogue of Satan,” but her comments about placing Zionists into concentration camps gained greater attention.
All Jewish Democratic House lawmakers joined in another joint statement on Wednesday to condemn the “vile, bigoted, and antisemitic views spewed by the desperate and unhinged Maureen Galindo,” which they said “[merit] no safe harbor anywhere in American politics, and for sure not in the Democratic Party.” In a first, the group expressed their joint support for Garcia.
They also said they were “appalled” by reports of a GOP-linked super PAC supporting Galindo, “shamefully embracing and elevating her disgusting antisemitic views and ideas.”
Democratic National Committee Chairman Ken Martin also condemned Galindo.
“This kind of vile, antisemitic rhetoric has no place in the Democratic Party,” Martin said. “No matter someone’s political party, we must confront and stand up to hate wherever and whenever it appears.”
A group of Texas Democratic Party leaders, including the state party chair, also condemned Galindo on Wednesday.
“Antisemitism and hateful rhetoric have no place in the Democratic Party or in our communities. Maureen Galindo’s comments do not reflect our values as Democrats or Texans,” their statement reads. “The Texas Democratic Party and its county parties remain committed to standing against antisemitism in all its forms.”
The Center for American Progress hosted leading Democratic officials and featured several panels on foreign policy. Israel was barely discussed
Screenshot
Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) speaks at the Center for American Progress’ IDEAS Conference, May 19, 2026
On Tuesday, a gilded ballroom inside a Washington hotel served as a soapbox for more than a dozen Democrats — many with national ambitions — to pitch their vision for America to a room full of liberal donors, staffers and funders.
The setting was the Center for American Progress’ IDEAS Conference, a convening put on by the Democratic think tank that pledged to bring together “the broad center-left’s leading thinkers and doers” to offer ideas on a range of policy topics.
American foreign policy was, naturally, one of those topics. In the two sessions on national security, each of which devoted significant discussion to the Middle East, one topic was notably absent: Israel.
Democratic support for Israel has shifted dramatically since the Oct. 7 attacks and the resulting war in Gaza. Over the last few months, particularly since the war in Iran began, that policy shift has quickly solidified. Forty out of 47 Senate Democrats voted last month to block some arms sales to Israel, and the progressive Israel advocacy group J Street has urged Democrats to move toward ending all U.S. aid to Israel.
Democrats’ attitude toward the U.S.-Israel relationship is in flux, and is almost certain to be a major point of contention in the 2028 primary campaign. But if CAP’s conference is any indication, many mainstream Democrats — the ones who are not pushing firebrand far-left views on Israel — would rather avoid the topic if they are not forced to discuss it.
Certainly, it made clear that they no longer see Israel as the kind of ally that will earn applause in the same way that Taiwan and Ukraine garner cheers from rank-and-file Democrats.
Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) kicked off the gathering with an address billed as “National Security Ideas for the Future.” He cited his own experiences as a member of the Marine Corps who served in Iraq, arguing that the war in Iran is misguided and harming Americans.
”I’m here today because right now our country is in danger. Will this president continue to drag America into another endless Middle East war?” Gallego said. “This is a war that wasn’t planned, wasn’t authorized and is not making us safer. [Donald] Trump got his war, and working families got stuck with the bill every day.”
Gallego made clear that his opposition to the Iran war does not mean he thinks America should step off the world stage. The U.S., he argued, should still come to the defense of Taiwan and Ukraine.
“I see on Twitter all the time, ‘Well, if you’re against the war in Iran, why do you support the war in Ukraine?’” Gallego said. “Let me be clear: The Ukrainian people are fighting for their independence, and it’s in our strategic interest to make sure that they win, that Europe wins and that we all win and defeat Russia.”
He extended the argument to Taiwan, calling for Washington to continue arms sales to the country and to help it grow its self-defense capabilities.
“We have allies that have fought with us and will continue to fight with us, but not if we abandon Taiwan, Ukraine and NATO,” said Gallego. He did not mention Israel in his speech.
Later in the day, a conversation on the future of American policy featured Sen. Andy Kim (D-NJ), former Secretary of State Tony Blinken and former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield. Like Gallego, they slammed Trump’s campaign against Iran as illegal.
“This is not a situation where we should normalize the idea that a president can start a war on their own, and then it’s up to Congress later to disapprove of it, right?” said Kim. “Just from the outset, this is wrong. This is an illegal, unconstitutional war.”
The only mention of Israel in their 30-minute conversation was a brief aside from Blinken, as part of a broader point he was making about Iranian missile attacks on the United Arab Emirates. All three speakers doubled down on U.S. support for Ukraine and for Taiwan, particularly in the face of Trump’s meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping last week.
At the end of the day, CAP President Neera Tanden said she hopes attendees walk away with a sense of where the Democratic Party is going. “To win the future we have to tell people where to go, what the path is, what the path is forward,” Tanden said.
Other speakers included California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA).
There hasn’t been much incentive for party groups to set red lines against radicals looking to disrupt the party in lower-profile races
Spencer Platt/Getty Images
Members of the Democratic Socialists of America May 01, 2019 in New York City.
As the Democratic Party lurches left in the run-up to the midterms — and amid the rise of high-profile, far-left Senate candidates such as Graham Platner in Maine and Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan — candidates affiliated with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) have gradually been making inroads and positioning themselves to win nominations in several key House races.
This has happened without much protest or opposition from Democratic Party leadership. And given that the urban districts where the DSA-endorsed candidates have the most support are so heavily Democratic, there hasn’t been much incentive for party groups to set red lines against radicals looking to disrupt the party in these lower-profile races.
One of the most insidious aspects of the advocacy of many DSA chapters is the demand that its endorsees cut ties with any Jewish group that recognizes the State of Israel. Some chapters celebrated or justified Hamas’ Oct. 7 terror attacks against Israel.
“They are trying to do in America what [the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement] seems to do internationally, which is to make being Jewish unacceptable in polite society,” Ron Halber, the CEO of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington, recently said on a webinar of D.C-area Jewish leaders.
But despite the group’s radical views, DSA-endorsed candidates have a real shot at prevailing in several upcoming Democratic primaries in major cities.
Pennsylvania state Rep. Chris Rabb, one of several Democrats looking to succeed retiring Rep. Dwight Evans (D-PA) in his Philadelphia district, has the notoriety of recirculating an Instagram post blaming the Bondi Beach terrorist attack that killed 14 Jewish Australians on “Zionists,” insinuating the terror attack was a false flag. (His campaign later blamed a former staffer for reposting the item.)
Rabb, who has been endorsed by many of the leading anti-Israel progressives in Congress, also recently campaigned with antisemitic streamer Hasan Piker. His far-left views and virulent criticism of Israel has alarmed Gov. Josh Shapiro, according to Axios, and the popular Pennsylvania governor has worked behind the scenes to oppose his campaign.
Democratic sources familiar with the primary, however, suggest that any behind-the-scenes efforts aren’t having much effect in derailing the DSA candidate’s campaign. Rabb’s two leading opponents — surgeon Ala Stanford and state Sen. Sharif Street — are both mainstream Democrats and may potentially split the more-moderate vote. The primary is on Tuesday.
Next month, a similar clash between the Democratic mainstream and socialist wing of the party is taking place in New York City, where state Assemblymember Claire Valdez, who is backed by Mayor Zohran Mamdani and New York’s DSA chapter, is squaring off against Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso, the progressive establishment’s favorite.
The race, in one of the most left-wing districts in the city, which covers part of Brooklyn and Queens, will mark a major test of Mamdani’s political capital — and whether the DSA brand is more compelling to progressives than the endorsement of Reynoso by retiring liberal stalwart Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-NY).
Reynoso, in an interview with The New York Editorial Board, proclaimed himself the underdog in the race despite boasting endorsements from organized labor, the outgoing congresswoman, state Attorney General Letitia James and the left-wing Working Families Party line. “Zohran Mamdani is a celebrity-status, inspiring figure at the levels of AOC and Bernie Sanders. He is a movement and is deeply important,” Reynoso said.
Meanwhile, in Denver, another DSA hotbed, Rep. Diane DeGette (D-CO) faces a primary threat from DSA-backed challenger Melat Kiros, a 28-year-old attorney. Kiros has made criticism of Israel a centerpiece of her campaign, accusing Israel of genocide, and she supports an arms embargo against the Jewish state. Kiros dominated DeGette at a districtwide party convention filled with activists in March, and the congresswoman has been airing ads touting her progressive record, in anticipation of a competitive June primary.
And in St. Louis, the local DSA chapter is again backing former Rep. Cori Bush (D-MO), who was one of the most extreme anti-Israel lawmakers when serving in Congress, in her attempt at a comeback against Rep. Wesley Bell (D-MO).
(The other major contest featuring a DSA-endorsed contender is next month’s D.C. mayoral primary, where Jewish groups have been alarmed by Janeese Lewis George’s rhetoric around Israel and antisemitism.)
All told, there could be at least four Democratic Socialists of America-endorsed lawmakers in the next Congress, with limited party efforts to marginalize the extremists from within. It underscores how fast the Democratic Party is evolving, and how quickly the guardrails that kept the party centered — and largely free of antisemitism — are falling out of place.
JDCA’s top activists made clear this week that a major concern is making sure pro-Israel Jews continue to be welcome in the party
MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images
Jewish Democratic Council of America CEO Halie Soifer in Washington on May 24, 2023.
When a group of Jewish Democratic activists and donors convened in Washington this week for the annual leadership summit of the Jewish Democratic Council of America, the message seemed to be one of defiance: defiance against President Donald Trump, to be sure, but also a defiant attitude pushing back against some of the recent shifts within the party.
JDCA’s primary objective is to elect Democrats. But as more Democrats have taken positions critical of or outright hostile to Israel, JDCA’s top activists made clear this week that another major concern is making sure pro-Israel Jews continue to be welcome in the party.
“We are fighting to ensure that the views and values of Jewish Americans continue to find their political home in the Democratic Party in Michigan and beyond, and we have work to do,” Halie Soifer, the group’s CEO, said on Tuesday night. She noted that the JDCA hopes to help defeat Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, a far-left candidate who appears to be rising in the polls.
“It’s clear there’s one candidate whose views are antithetical to ours, and we want to ensure he’s defeated,” said Soifer, though she did not name El-Sayed directly. JDCA has not endorsed either of his opponents, state Sen. Mallory McMorrow or Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI).
“We at JDCA only support Democrats, but we do not support them all,” Soifer told the summit. “We understand it’s not just about electing Democrats. It’s about electing Democrats who align with us, and this includes efforts to ensure that candidates who have espoused anti-Israel and/or antisemitic views are defeated before November.”
Over the two-day gathering, a parade of high-profile speakers from Democratic leadership — Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), along with Reps. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Steny Hoyer (D-MD), respectively the former House speaker and majority leader — addressed the convening. Their appearances seemed designed to affirm that Democrats remain pro-Israel and committed to fighting antisemitism.
“We have to decisively confront antisemitism from wherever it comes from,” said Jeffries. “I will always hold firm in my support for the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state and eternal homeland for the Jewish people.”
Schumer did not specifically discuss Israel but raised concerns about the increasing use of the word “Zionist” as a slur.
“I’ve long said we must fight antisemitism wherever and whenever it appears, even if it’s in our own party. I’ll continue to do so,” said Schumer. “Today, antisemitism takes all different forms: Holocaust denialism, conspiratorial delusions of Jewish or Zionist control of the world, replacing the word ‘Jewish’ with the word ‘Zionist’ to demonize Jewish communities.”
The outgoing Democratic leaders were not as sanguine, instead offering a note of caution about how the dynamic towards Israel has shifted within the Democratic Party.
“Always, but right now, we really have to work together to make sure that support for Israel is, without question, bipartisan,” Pelosi said. “It doesn’t mean we don’t have our differences of opinion … but it should not weaken the fact that we have bipartisan support. That has always been the tradition, and we must make sure we get through this place where we are, where there may be some doubt in people’s minds as to whether that is a value.”
Pelosi is retiring at the end of this year, as is Hoyer, who was even more blunt: “How many of you have been anxious yourselves about rhetoric heard from some Democratic officials and candidates? We ought to be,” he said.
Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) said he hoped to prove that Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) does not speak for the party on matters related to Israel, though he noted with worry that Sanders’ attitude — one that is deeply critical of Israel — appears to be on the rise.
“It’s clearer and clearer to me that there is real alarm about a fundamental break between Democrats as a party and Israel as a nation, and I’m going to do everything I can to resist and oppose that break, while criticizing [Benjamin] Netanyahu and his values and decisions,” said Coons. “I’m trying to be an effective and engaged voice with a perspective that you just heard and not have Bernie Sanders be the only senator whose perspective and attitude is heard across the country.”
Forty Senate Democrats voted last month for a Sanders-authored resolution attempting to block some arms sales to Israel, a record high. Coons said he knows those senators still support Israel’s right to exist, but cautioned that being too critical of Netanyahu can give cover to people who are actually anti-Israel.
“I strongly support Israel’s right to exist, its right to be a Jewish homeland and a democracy, and its value to the American people as a partner and ally,” said Coons. “I think we are at risk of some of my colleagues, in trying to send a message to Netanyahu or in opposition to his policies and stances, to be misunderstood as abandoning that commitment.”
Coons said that on the campaign trail, and on recent trips around the country, he hears “profound concern about where’s the Democratic Party going on Israel.” Some Jewish politicians who addressed the JDCA summit expressed a deeper sense of unease and discomfort about their Jewish identity, against the backdrop of rising antisemitism.
Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), who spoke at a cocktail reception Tuesday evening, talked about how challenging it is to be a Jewish elected official in the current environment.
“It has become deeply, deeply complicated to be a Jew in America,” said Slotkin. “There’s not a single day that goes by for myself representing the state of Michigan that I am not feeling torn.”
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey delivered a jolt of energy to the room with an impassioned speech about his community’s support for immigrants in the face of ICE enforcement activity, which resulted in the killing of two American citizens by ICE agents in his city in January. When a JDCA member asked him for advice on how to respond to others in the Democratic Party who have made anti-Zionism a political litmus test, he expressed concern.
“It has been deeply concerning for me personally, as a proud Jew,” Frey said. “I am a great supporter of the endurance of our American Republic, a big believer that America should continue to exist, and an adamant opponent of Donald Trump. The same thing can apply to Israel.”
Ultimately, though, the gathering was a political pep rally — a chance for Democratic activists and donors to hear from politicians at all levels of government and gin up excitement ahead of this year’s midterm elections. Everyone who addressed the gathering all but guaranteed that Democrats would take back control of the House and Senate.
The conversations seemed meant to ressure Jewish Democrats about both the party’s fortunes for November and its treatment of pro-Israel Jews. One JDCA activist described the group’s work as “grasstops,” which was demonstrated by the appearances from top party leaders.
But the anti-Israel sentiment that has steadily grown within the party over the past three years is not coming from party leaders; it is driven by far-left activists. Whether JDCA has a plan to counter that grassroots energy remains to be seen — and the answer will only come at the ballot box later this year.
The former House majority leader urged American Jews not to abandon the Democratic Party, despite acknowledging many now feel unwelcome
JDCA
Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) at the Jewish Democratic Council of America’s annual leadership summit, May 12, 2026
Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), a pro-Israel stalwart and a former House majority leader, said on Tuesday that Jewish Democrats “ought to be” concerned about the critical way that some of their Democratic colleagues talk about Israel.
“How many of you here tonight have been trying to convince a family member, a friend, a neighbor not to abandon the party that has long been their political home?” Hoyer said in remarks at the Jewish Democratic Council of America’s annual leadership summit, where he was honored with an award marking his upcoming retirement, after 45 years in Congress.
He was introduced by three of his current and former Jewish senior staffers, including Brian Romick, the CEO of Democratic Majority for Israel.
“How many of you have been anxious yourselves about rhetoric heard from some Democratic officials and candidates? We ought to be,” said Hoyer. “I will stand up and say, ‘I do not agree with that.’”
Hoyer, a longtime champion of pro-Israel legislation, used the speech to reiterate his commitment to the Jewish state and explain why he thinks Democrats should support Israel. But even as he acknowledged issues of antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment in the party, he also pitched American Jews to maintain their historic support for Democrats and urged those who are unhappy with the party’s leftward shift on Israel to allow room for nuance, and to work to reverse it.
He said he disagreed with the 40 Senate Democrats who voted in April against certain arms sales to Israel, but added that he still believed those lawmakers would support the Jewish community. He encouraged JDCA activists to keep calling those senators to push them to change their minds.
“Those same 40 senators will stand up for you all the time. I disagree with them, but the fact of the matter is, keep in mind, it is not day to day. It is long-term commitment that counts. They need to keep hearing from you,” said Hoyer. “They need to keep seeing us fight to keep our party strong and pro-Israel, and consistent with its values. And they need to see our passion and our resolve.”
Reflecting on his 22 visits to Israel over the last five decades, Hoyer called the trips particularly meaningful due to his Baptist faith. Still, he said he could not distill into words the reason for his deep-rooted affection for Israel.
“I really can’t put my finger on why, but I know that’s what I feel. I know that I feel that the Jewish community … for millennia has been the object of scorn, derision, prejudice, hate and violence,” said Hoyer. “At a very early age, I thought that was wrong, and I am so proud that I had the opportunity to not only say it was wrong, but to try and make it right.”
Hoyer described himself as “a champion for Israel,” a title he said made him proud. He insisted he is not alone in that category among Democrats.
“The majority of Democrats still stand, in my view, and will continue to stand with Israel and with the Jewish people,” said Hoyer. “I’m confident we will be able to overcome this moment and defeat Trumpism at the ballot box, while defeating antisemitism and anti-Zionism in our politics.”
In the speech, Hoyer praised American Jews for the leading role they have played in Democratic politics. He insisted that he will make sure they are still welcome even as he leaves office.
“The Democratic Party has long stood for the same values that Jewish tradition teaches: caring for the sick and hungry, ensuring equal opportunity for all, freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, freedom of choice, freedom for workers to organize and justice for all under the rule of law,” said Hoyer.
“For as long as I am in office, and even in retirement,” he continued, “I will stand with you in strong support, strong foundation for our party as the warm and welcoming home for pro-Israel Jewish voters who care deeply about equal rights, justice and opportunity for all Americans.”
Plus, the race to replace Pelosi
Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images
U.S. President Donald Trump waves to the media after walking off of Air Force One at Miami International Airport on April 11, 2026 in Miami, Florida.
Good Tuesday morning.
In today’s Daily Kickoff, we do a deep dive into the race to succeed Rep. Nancy Pelosi, in what has become something of a proxy battle in the war for the identity of the Democratic Party, and report on an effort by Democratic Majority for Israel to boost a Texas congressional candidate whose far-left opponent has trafficked in antisemitic tropes. We talk to Senate Republicans about the possibility of resuming military operations against Iran, and have the scoop on Gerald Steinberg’s decision to step down from the helm of NGO Monitor early next year, and the first interview with his successor, Olga Deutsch. Also in today’s Daily Kickoff: Daniel Septimus, Rom Braslavski and Ben Shapiro.
Today’s Daily Kickoff was curated by JI Executive Editor Melissa Weiss and Israel Editor Tamara Zieve, with assists from Danielle Cohen-Kanik and Marc Rod. Have a tip? Email us here.
What We’re Watching
- Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine are both slated to testify this morning at back-to-back House and Senate Appropriations Committee budget hearings. In the afternoon, FBI Director Kash Patel will testify before Senate Appropriations.
- The Anti-Defamation League is holding a Jewish American Heritage Month reception this evening on Capitol Hill.
- Elsewhere in Washington, the Jewish Democratic Council of America is kicking off its annual summit tonight with a reception at the Watergate Hotel. The group will honor Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) and Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), and will hear from Sens. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) and Mark Kelly (D-AZ) and Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), Jason Crow (D-CO), Chris Deluzio (D-PA), Maggie Goodlander (D-NH) and Chrissy Houlahan (D-PA).
- The funeral for former Anti-Defamation League head Abe Foxman, who died on Sunday, will take place this morning at Park Avenue Synagogue.
- In New York City tonight, three of the top candidates in the open congressional race in NY-12 — George Conway and Assemblymembers Alex Bores and Micah Lasher — will participate in a forum at the West Side Institutional Synagogue moderated by Jewish Insider Editor-in-Chief Josh Kraushaar.
- Elsewhere in New York, the American Jewish Committee will present Cardinal Timothy Dolan with the group’s Nostra Aetate at Sixty Award, honoring Dolan’s interfaith efforts on the 60th anniversary of the groundbreaking Vatican declaration.
- Across the Hudson, the New Jersey Globe is hosting a primary debate for the Democrats running in New Jersey’s 7th Congressional District. ER physician and former government official Tina Shah, former Navy pilot Rebecca Bennett and businessmen Brian Varela and Michael Roth will participate in tonight’s debate, which starts at 7 p.m. ET.
- Israeli Eurovision entrant Noam Battan will perform tonight when the contest’s semifinals kick off in Vienna.
What You Should Know
A QUICK WORD WITH JI’S GABBY DEUTCH
Over the last two years, the second semester of the academic year at American universities coincided with crisis and chaos. In 2024, it was anti-Israel encampments overtaking campus quads across the country; last year, it was threats from the Trump administration to slash hundreds of millions of dollars in funding and ban foreign students.
By comparison, the spring of 2026 has been relatively smooth sailing for research universities, even with a bit of hubbub over graduation speakers scrutinized for their stance on Israel and Gaza at a few schools, including the University of Michigan and Georgetown Law.
But it’s not that things have gone back to the pre-Oct. 7, pre-Donald Trump normal. University administrators have just gotten better at managing an ambient sense of friction: Conflict between university leaders and activist faculty and students is still bubbling under the surface, and the threat of funding cuts at the federal level lingers.
According to several university presidents who gathered last week at the Milken Institute Global Conference in Los Angeles, the task before universities is to win back the trust of skeptical Americans.
“The world of higher education, I think, is still in turmoil,” Vanderbilt University Chancellor Daniel Diermeier told Jewish Insider in an interview at the Milken confab. “I think the time when a university does say that’s all overblown and everything is great, that’s over. At least the vast majority of university presidents know that there are challenges, and they want to take them on.”
democratic fault lines
Race to replace Pelosi offers early test of whether progressive Jews welcomed on the left

The race to fill the seat of Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) in California’s 11th Congressional District has become somewhat of a proxy battle in the war for the identity of the Democratic Party, where describing Israel’s war in Gaza as a genocide, supporting arms embargoes to Israel and attacking Zionism as a racist ideology have become much more common since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas terrorist attacks and the subsequent war in Gaza, Gabe Stutman reports for Jewish Insider. The outcome of the race will help answer an important question: Can a progressive candidate still win in a deep-blue district like San Francisco without fully embracing the politics of the anti-Zionist left?
State of play: The race is by most accounts a three-way contest between state Sen. Scott Wiener, Connie Chan, a progressive member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors who has the backing of major labor organizations but has struggled to compete in fundraising, and Saikat Chakrabarti, a wealthy tech entrepreneur who entered progressive politics working for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) during his 2016 presidential bid and later served as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (D-NY) chief of staff.
































































































































Continue with Google
Continue with Apple