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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

House Republicans celebrated the bill’s passage.

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

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

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

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

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

Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX) criticized plans for antisemitic streamer Hasan Piker to speak on the flagship campus of the University of Texas, becoming the first Democrat in Texas’ congressional delegation to do so.

Piker was invited by the school’s University Democrats student group for a speech set for Sept. 30.

“Hasan Piker’s scheduled appearance at the University of Texas is deeply concerning,” Cuellar wrote on X. “Free speech allows difficult and controversial views, but it does not require anyone to stay silent when someone has a history of hateful comments about Jewish Americans, 9/11, and Hamas terrorism.”

Cuellar, among the most moderate Democrats in the House, said that Jewish students at the school “should not be made to feel targeted or unsafe on their own campus. UT should be a place for debate, learning, and respect, not antisemitism or rhetoric that excuses terrorism.”

He stopped short of explicitly calling for the speech to be canceled.

Piker said on X that the comments were a “direct violation of the 1st amendment,” adding, “free speech must be protected. dems should push back against this attack!”

Adit Raha, a spokesperson for University Democrats, dismissed those criticizing the event.

“With less [than] fifty days until the election, some members of our party seem to be more focused on a twitch streamer rather than the issues that matter most to voters such as ending the cost of living crisis, passing medicare for all, and stopping the genocide of Palestinians all while we’ve been steadfast in organizing thousands of students on campus to get them out to vote come late October when early voting begins,” Raha said in a statement to Jewish Insider.

Democratic Majority for Israel thanked Cuellar for “speaking up on this important matter.”

“Piker is a dangerous figure who continues to peddle in dangerous conspiracy theories, antisemitism, and hateful bigotry. He should be provided no safe harbor in our party,” DMFI said.

Various Republicans including Gov. Greg Abbott, Texas Attorney General and Senate nominee  Ken Paxton and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) all previously condemned the planned speech. Rep. Marc Veasey (D-TX), who co-chairs the House Bipartisan Task Force for Combating Antisemitism, declined to comment last week when contacted by JI. 

Responding to Piker’s post about Cuellar, UT’s University Democrats stood firm and accused the university of failing to properly facilitate the event by providing a sufficiently large space.

“There are multiple 2,000+ seat venues on campus available for use and yet the [university] remains silent!” the group said on X. The group also suggested that political considerations are driving those difficulties.

The University of Texas did not respond to a request for comment.

Senators returning to Washington on Monday offered mixed responses to the recent Houthi offensive inside Yemen and Saudi Arabia, with some Republicans telling Jewish Insider that the Iran-backed terror group’s moves warranted a response, while some Democrats framed the Houthi attacks as further fallout from the U.S. war against Iran.

The Iran-backed Yemeni terrorist group seized control of key port cities along the Red Sea coast, near the vital Bab el-Mandeb Strait, as well as Perim Island inside the waterway and the Hanish archipelago to the north. Drones fired from Iraq also struck and disabled a critical Saudi oil pipeline that the country had been using to bypass the Strait of Hormuz. The U.S. has thus far declined to intervene.

Republicans who spoke to Jewish Insider said they had not been fully briefed on the situation since returning to Washington on Monday after being away for the Senate’s extended August recess. Still, they said a forceful response from the Saudis was warranted. 

“Everybody ought to work together to destroy the Houthis,” Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) said. “It’s not just the Trump administration, the Saudis have resources. They need to use all their resources to destroy them. You can’t play games here. You’ve got to destroy them.”

Asked if the U.S. should take action against the terror organization, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) said, “I think we need to do just what we’re doing right now. We need to crank the sanctions up as high as we can and continue the blockade. The Saudis can do something. They have an army. They have weapons.” 

“If I were the Saudis, I’d hit them back,” the Louisiana senator added. 

Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) told JI that he did not know “what the administration’s plans are” as far as how the U.S. will approach the Houthis after this latest series of attacks, though he emphasized that it was imperative to find a resolution that “contained” the Houthis as quickly as possible.

“Look, it’s a very dangerous neighborhood down there right now. The Houthis have been causing some real problems, not just for Saudi Arabia but for trade throughout the rest of the world,” Rounds said. “The sooner we get that resolved down there and get them contained once again, the better off we’re all going to be.”

“There needs to be a response to any adverse action that they take, in my view — and an amplified response,” Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-TN) told JI.

Democrats generally framed the Houthi offensive as an extension and expansion of the Iran war.

“This war is metastasizing out of control,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) said, referring to the conflict with Iran. “Whatever support for it there may have been when it was confined to a certain geographic area, it was done without a strategic plan, without realistic objectives, without a clear understanding of the enemy, and now it is metastasizing with the costs potentially looming larger than ever.”

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) suggested that the Houthis would likely de-escalate if the U.S. de-escalated, similar to how the group wound down attacks on Red Sea shipping during ceasefires in Gaza.

“It is a very predictable consequence of the Iran war, which we never should have gone into,” Kaine said. “The ties between the Iranians and the Houthis are very well-known. When the pace of U.S. activity in the region abates, the Houthis tend to abate. … They’ve been threatening to do this, and so the right thing to do is to find a ceasefire and stop the war in Iran.”

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) criticized Democrats in Texas for their muted reaction to far-left streamer Hasan Piker being invited by the University of Texas’ College Democrats chapter to speak on campus later this month — despite his record of antisemitic rhetoric. 

Cruz told Jewish Insider in a statement on Thursday that Piker’s upcoming appearance at UT Austin and the lack of condemnation from Democrats in the state was indicative of the broader state of the Democratic Party. 

“Hasan Piker is an America-hating Marxist who has said that America deserved 9/11 and celebrates political violence against Republicans,” Cruz told JI. “Americans are entitled to free speech, but it is incumbent upon good people to condemn Piker’s incitement.”

“Instead, some Democrats are bringing him to college campuses, while almost all other Democrats are conspicuously silent or worse. It says everything about the state of their party,” he continued.

Cruz has led the charge in urging the GOP to disavow antisemitic figures within the conservative movement such as commentators Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes and Candace Owens, and has criticized fellow Republicans who refuse to weigh in on the subject as “cowards.” 

Allies of the Texas senator launched a political organization in July to support his efforts to counter antisemitism in the Republican Party and prevent the GOP from mimicking what Cruz has repeatedly described as the Democratic Party’s anti-Israel turn. 

On the school’s Austin campus, the Piker event has sparked concern among Jewish students, faculty and parents, including several who have pushed to have the appearance canceled. Several Jewish University of Texas students told JI this week that Piker’s appearance could be a black eye for a school that they say has been one of the most welcoming in the country for Jewish students in the aftermath of the Oct. 7 terror attacks. 

Piker’s appearance is scheduled for Sept. 30, amid the final stretch of Texas’ high-profile Senate race between Republican Ken Paxton, the state’s attorney general, and Democrat James Talarico, a state representative. The state is also holding a competitive gubernatorial contest between GOP Gov. Greg Abbott and Democrat Gina Hinojosa.

Talarico’s campaign did not respond to multiple requests for comment from JI about Piker’s invitation to appear at the state’s flagship public university. A spokesperson for Hinojosa did not address Piker’s invitation in a statement to JI.   

Jewish Insider news reporter Haley Cohen contributed reporting.

A new poll of Jewish American voters commissioned by the nonpartisan Jewish Voters Resource Center found that Vice President JD Vance is viewed negatively by more than 80% of Jewish voters, including a sizable number of Jewish Republicans. 

The poll finds Vance’s favorability rating at only 14% among Jewish voters overall, with 82% viewing him unfavorably. Only 61% of Jewish Republicans view Vance favorably, compared to the 89% of those who view President Donald Trump favorably, and the 93% of Jewish Republicans who hold a favorable view of Secretary of State Marco Rubio. 

Overall, Trump’s approval rating among Jewish voters sits at 25%, with three-quarters disapproving of his job performance. Rubio’s overall favorability rating sits at 31%, with 64% viewing him unfavorably. 

The poll also finds that Jewish voters overall plan to vote heavily for Democrats for Congress in the midterm elections, despite the rise of far-left anti-Israel elements within the party. It found that 67% of Jewish voters plan to support a Democrat for Congress, compared to 26% who plan to support a Republican. But the poll, conducted by the Democratic pollster GBAO Strategies, did not test specific questions about the Democratic Party’s image.   

The survey was conducted between Aug. 26 and Sept. 1 and surveyed 800 self-identified Jewish voters. 

At the same time, antisemitism remains a significant concern across the community. 89% of Jewish voters reported being concerned about antisemitism in the United States, including 63% who said they are “very concerned.”

On Israel, 71% of Jewish voters said they remain emotionally attached to the country, demonstrating that a strong majority continues to support Israel’s existence as a safe and secure Jewish state. However, despite that connection, 65% of respondents disapproved of the current Israeli government’s policies regarding the West Bank and Gaza. 

The gap illustrates a clear distinction: Jewish voters broadly support Israel, but strongly oppose Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition. Only 27% of respondents held a favorable view of Netanyahu, compared to 67% who viewed him unfavorably.

Still, Israel was not the top issue driving Jewish voters. When asked to name their two highest priorities, 37% named the cost of living and affordability, followed closely by the future of democracy at 36% and antisemitism at 25%.

“As we head into the final two months of the election, Jewish voters are overwhelmingly supporting Democrats for Congress,” said Jim Gerstein, the Democratic pollster who conducted the survey.  

“Jews remain emotionally attached to Israel, but they oppose Netanyahu and his policies, and it is a lower-tier voting issue. Democracy, the cost of living, and a deep hostility toward Donald Trump are driving the Jewish vote. It’s particularly striking to see the vast majority expressing concern that Trump will not accept the outcome of the election. For Jewish voters, this is an election about stopping Trump.”

For Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), the Democratic caucus has become an increasingly lonely place for those who remain staunchly pro-Israel, with what he described as bullying, harassment and threats from the anti-Israel camp contributing to the shift away from Israel among Democratic lawmakers.

“What is it like to be in the caucus? It’s become lonely,” Moskowitz said during a wide-ranging interview with Jewish Insider in his Capitol Hill office last week. “None of my colleagues are mean to me, but it is an ostracizing feeling. There’s no doubt that the Democrats that are super pro-Israel, in general, feel somewhat ostracized, and how could you not?”

He said that the “mushy middle” of the party is being pushed left, explaining that he has had colleagues tell him that consultants have told them that, in order to win reelection, they’ll need to reject AIPAC or vote against pro-Israel legislation or express opposition to Israeli missile-defense systems.

“No one really loves family infighting,” he said. “For me, I’m fighting for what I believe in. For me, it’s not about the polling. I’ll go down on this issue. Ultimately, I’m not interested in moderating to try to win my election.”

He also attributed some of the shift to harassment and threats of violence targeting members, including Moskowitz being the target of an assassination attempt in 2024. Standing up for Israel, at this point, puts members’ families at risk, he said, and with that pressure coming exclusively from the anti-Israel side, it’s no surprise that some members are caving.

“I talk to members. They’re scared from all of this stuff. Not only are they scared, their spouses are scared, and do not underestimate the spouse in this congressional relationship,” he said. “The bullying is only happening one way. Members are getting bullied online. They’re getting bullied in the hallways. They come down the steps [from the House chamber], cameras get put in their face on this issue.”

Moskowitz said that, because he has refused to cave on this issue, he now needs armed security and police protecting him in his district — as do other outspoken members. He said that it’s important for members who have been outspoken, on both sides of the aisle, to be reelected.

“If you look at what’s happened to the Jewish community in two years, where are we in five? Where are we in five years? Are we going to lose an entire political party?” he asked. 

And Moskowitz warned that he sees similar issues on the horizon in the Republican Party. “The Tucker [Carlson] wing of the [Republican] Party is ready to pounce. The only thing that’s keeping them at bay is Trump. … The fight you’re seeing that we’re having now, they are going to have on the right.”

The Florida congressman, asked about the upcoming Israeli elections, said that he believes that some of his Democratic colleagues have “backed themselves into a corner” by focusing their criticism on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

“A lot of my colleagues, when they voted to cut off aid to Israel, both in the Senate and in the House, said, ‘Well, it was all about Netanyahu,’” he recounted. “My argument to them was, ‘At some point, he won’t be there. How are you going to go back to those voters who you’ve now courted because you cut off aid and go back to them saying, ‘Well I’m going to let the aid flow now because Netanyahu is gone?’”

As a result, he predicted that a loss for Netanyahu would do little to change Democratic discourse on Israel, noting that anti-Israel voices online have already begun to target other Israeli leaders as polling has suggested that Netanyahu may lose.

Moskowitz said that the recent outrage, from both progressive commentators and some of his colleagues, over his appointment as ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s Middle East and North Africa subcommittee has been disproportionate to the position itself, and tinged with “veiled antisemitism.”

At the same time, Moskowitz argued that the appointment shows that pro-Israel Jews remain part of the Democratic “big tent” — at least for Democratic House leaders. He also noted that anyone on the committee — which includes several vocal critics of Israel — could have objected to the appointment, but chose not to.

“For me, this isn’t game theory. This is real,” Moskowitz said, emphasizing that his relatives fled the Holocaust in Europe. “Tough economic times in a country, wealth inequality — the Jews. It’s not a new playbook that’s being run on the community.”

“Not only does the big tent include pro-Israel Jews but we’re going to give them leadership spots on that issue,” he said.

He said that he sees criticisms of “Zionists” and of Israel as barely disguised attacks on the Jewish people as a whole — with the vast majority of American Jews being Zionists — drawing on historic tropes and patterns.

“For me, this isn’t game theory. This is real,” Moskowitz said, emphasizing that his relatives fled the Holocaust in Europe. “Tough economic times in a country, wealth inequality — the Jews. It’s not a new playbook that’s being run on the community.”

“If we don’t fix the affordability issue, antisemitism is going to continue to get worse,” he added. “For me, it’s intricately linked. It’s not our fault, but we are being made the scapegoat for all of these things. Flock cameras? Jews. AI? Jews. Can’t afford your groceries? Jews. If we don’t start fixing problems here, we’re going to be on the short side of that stick.”

His children, he said, will grow up in a different and more hostile America than he did, after the Jewish community had believed it was assimilated and safe.

“We assimilated in Spain. We assimilated in Germany. Never thought what could happen could happen, and we were expelled and exterminated in both of those countries,” he said.

He credited much of the rise in antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment to malign foreign influence, particularly through coordinated bot campaigns on social media. He said that, if the Nazis had a tool like social media on their side during World War II, they likely would have won.

“Congrats to China and our foreign adversaries, who took an 80-20 issue and turned it into a 20-80 issue as an experiment in a petri dish that they can apply to Taiwan in the future,” Moskowitz said. “We’re just letting foreign adversaries decide how the American people are going to think on everything.”

He described social media platforms as deliberately blind to the problem — until similar tactics were applied to the issue of data centers, which could impact their bottom lines.

“When it comes to Israel, I want to see them treated like any other ally,” he continued. “If the idea is that the majority of our members want to cut off aid to Israel, then we’re going to have to look at all our other allies’ humanitarian records, and we’re going to have to treat them all the same. I look at that as calling balls and strikes, and getting into reality off of the internet.”

Moskowitz is favored to be chairman of the Middle East subcommittee next year if Democrats take the House, but he said he would still need to rally support on the committee to secure the seat. He said that ultimately House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and Foreign Affairs Committee Ranking Member Greg Meeks (D-NY) would set the agenda for Democrats, but that he sees opportunities to use the post to strengthen U.S. ties with the Gulf and Mideast allies.

He called the decision to allow a Saudi nuclear energy deal to proceed without Saudi Arabia joining the Abraham Accords a “missed opportunity” and said it’s important to ensure that Gulf allies don’t try to appease Iran “because the Iran war now has gone south.”

“When it comes to Israel, I want to see them treated like any other ally,” he continued. “If the idea is that the majority of our members want to cut off aid to Israel, then we’re going to have to look at all our other allies’ humanitarian records, and we’re going to have to treat them all the same. I look at that as calling balls and strikes, and getting into reality off of the internet.”

The congressman also blasted those who blame Israel alone for the war in Iran, explaining that in conversations with ambassadors from the Gulf countries, “they were all supportive of this — all of them,” but are now “upset about the marketing and the branding of the war” and hiding from responsibility.

Moskowitz supported the administration’s 2025 strikes on Iran’s nuclear program, and opposed war powers efforts to block a U.S. attack on Iran before the war began earlier this year. But he has supported war powers resolutions since the war started, arguing that Congress must preserve its constitutional role in making war.

“I think the president made a mistake in hindsight. Think about it this way: In an alternative reality, had he come to Congress in the very beginning, it probably would have passed,” he said, “and then we would have owned it with him. He owns it all on his own.”

He said the administration underestimated Iran’s willingness to take the Strait of Hormuz hostage and to expand the war to attack Gulf allies, and overestimated the fragility of the Iranian regime.

Moskowitz also said that the administration has shifted and scaled back its goals, noting that Trump no longer emphasizes the need to remove enriched nuclear material from Iran, now focusing primarily on the Strait of Hormuz.

“We didn’t succeed on the terms he told people of why we were going. And so I think it was a completely failed strategy on prosecuting the war,” Moskowitz said, even as he said he’s glad that former Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is dead, Iran’s navy has been destroyed and the Iranian nuclear program has been set back.

He said he does not want the war to become a long-term problem, but also said that he still does not want to see a deal that would provide Iran with substantial financial relief. “That has to be still the North Star. They cannot have a nuclear weapon. But mistakes that we have made to try to achieve that now could have long-term repercussions.”

Since beating Democratic Socialists of America member Oliver Larkin by nearly 30 points in his primary race, Moskowitz has gone on the offensive against the DSA and the surging socialist wing of the Democratic Party.

He said that he thinks mainstream Democrats need to recognize income inequality and other economic struggles that are driving young people toward the DSA, but also need to realize that the DSA is “awash in antisemitism” and a range of other unpopular and fringe ideas.

“There will be members here from the DSA, but they’ll be 5% of the caucus,” Moskowitz said. “What we can’t do is what the Republicans did with [former House Speaker] Kevin McCarthy. We can’t go make a deal with the DSA because then that deal will be held over the entire caucus for the next two years while we’re in power.”

He said that, despite being targeted with what he described as the “whole DSA apparatus” in his primary, he decided not to engage directly with his opponent, to not run negative ads and to try to keep the race local. 

“I was going to deny these viral moments for them,” he said, arguing that other Democrats had erred by getting in direct fights with DSA opponents. “It was my belief that the voters would reject it without me having to spend a ton of money explaining to them why it was bad, and that’s what happened.”

He said his polling showed that Larkin’s stances were turning off voters and argued that his strategies “blew up in their face,” alienating older voters, Jewish voters and Hispanic voters.

“This is not a place that the DSA can win in, and they shouldn’t have done it because it made them look stupid,” Moskowitz said.

Moskowitz noted that he now enters the general election with $2 million, a substantial cash advantage over his Republican opponent, former Boca Raton Mayor Scott Singer, who is also Jewish.

He argued that his brand of politics and his past ties to former Gov. Ron DeSantis will help him win over independent voters in the general election, and highlighted his appeal with Jewish voters, among whom he vastly outperformed former Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 election. He noted that he doesn’t have to calibrate stances on the U.S.-Israel relationship in his district, but can instead express his honest views in a way that other Democrats can’t.

“This election between me and [Singer], on [Israel and antisemitism] in particular, is the difference between a vote versus a voice,” Moskowitz continued. “He’ll be a vote on pro-Israel. I’m not going to deny that. He will be a vote, but he won’t be a voice.”

House Democrats overwhelmingly voted against a bill that would strip federal funding from colleges and universities engaged in boycotts of Israel, with just 33 Democrats supporting the measure.

The bill ultimately passed 237-169, with two Republicans voting against the measure along with the majority of House Democrats.

The Protect Economic and Academic Freedom Act, led by Reps. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) and Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), would make colleges that participate in a “nonexpressive commercial boycott” of Israel ineligible to receive federal student aid funding, requiring them to certify annually that they are not engaged in such boycotts and instructing the Department of Education to annually publish a list of schools that fail to submit such certifications.

The law would apply to boycotts of Israel as a country or to companies and other entities operating under Israeli law, which would include settlements in the West Bank.

The Democrats who supported the bill were Reps. Jake Auchincloss (D-MA), Kathy Castor (D-FL), Gil Cisneros (D-CA), Jim Costa (D-CA), Joe Courtney (D-CT), Henry Cuellar (D-TX), Don Davis (D-NC), Lois Frankel (D-FL), Laura Gillen (D-NY), Jared Golden (D-ME), Vicente Gonzalez (D-TX), Greg Landsman (D-OH), George Latimer (D-NY), Susie Lee (D-NV), John Mannion (D-NY), Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), Donald Norcross (D-NJ), Jimmy Panetta (D-CA), Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-WA), Josh Riley (D-NY), Brad Schneider (D-IL), Hillary Scholten (D-MI), Kim Schrier (D-WA), Brad Sherman (D-CA), Darren Soto (D-FL), Haley Stevens (D-MI), Tom Suozzi (D-NY), Shri Thanedar (D-MI), Dina Titus (D-NV), Ritchie Torres (D-NY), Juan Vargas (D-CA), Eugene Vindman (D-VA) and Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL).

Republican Reps. Warren Davidson (R-OH) and Thomas Massie (R-KY) opposed it.

“No student, no professor should be shut out of research, study abroad opportunities, or academic partnerships, or feel unwelcome in the classroom because of where they’re from or what religion they practice,” Gottheimer said in a statement ahead of the vote. “Yet that’s exactly what the boycott-divest-sanction movement seeks to do — targeting one country and one religion: Israel and Judaism.” 

He insisted the bill would not impact speech, protest or academic debate, but “simply says that if your university takes federal taxpayer dollars, it can’t discriminate against academic partnerships or investments with one country. That’s it. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this bipartisan bill.”

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) called the bill a “poorly-written Republican bill” that would not oppose the BDS movement but instead “provide Donald Trump with the power to punitively launch political attacks on our colleges and universities.”

He pledged that a Democratic majority would “advance unifying legislation” to combat antisemitism.

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), a co-chair of the House Jewish Caucus, said that he strongly opposes the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement and believes that it “can veer into antisemitism.”

“But no matter how strongly I oppose the BDS movement, I also believe that those who engage in BDS have a First Amendment right to do so,” Nadler continued, calling the bill a “direct and gross violation of the First Amendment.”

He said it also “treats the entire West Bank as part of Israel, erasing the Green Line and undermining efforts to promote a two-state solution.”

A memo from Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA), the ranking member of the House Education and Workforce Committee, also urged Democrats to oppose the bill, warning that it could “potentially” restrict schools’ First Amendment rights and that it does not address a currently existing problem. It also notes opposition from J Street and the American Federation of Teachers.

The Jewish Democratic Council of America also opposed the bill, which it said is “an infringement on free speech and undermines efforts toward peace.”

AIPAC and Jewish groups, including the Republican Jewish Coalition and the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, supported the bill.

AIPAC said in a statement, “This legislation helps protect pro-Israel students from discriminatory boycotts and efforts to deny them the ability to study in Israel or learn from Israeli professors, while fully protecting First Amendment rights.”

The RJC noted, “insisting that universities join the BDS lynch mob was the key demand campus protesters confronted university administrators with during the period of antisemitic violence and unrest that swept American campuses after October 7, 2023.”

The bill’s prospects of passing the Senate in the remaining months of the current congressional term are unclear. It has no companion legislation in the Senate and there had not been much public attention on the legislation prior to its passage today in the House.

Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA) joined the growing list of Democrats condemning far-left streamer Hasan Piker’s recent comments suggesting American Jews bear responsibility for inciting antisemitic attacks due to their support for Israel.

Piker had in March named Ossoff as his “dark-horse pick” for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination, alongside a series of further-left candidates. Ossoff, at the time, did not respond to questions from Jewish Insider about Piker.

An Ossoff spokesperson told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that the Georgia senator “unreservedly rejects reckless and dangerous rhetoric suggesting that policy advocacy invites violence against the Jewish community or any community” and that “American Jews and all Americans must have the freedom and security to speak out and petition their government without fear of reprisal.”

The statement as reported by the AJC, which did not explicitly mention Piker, came in response to a question about the streamer’s comments.

Meanwhile, Ossoff’s GOP opponent, Rep. Mike Collins (R-GA), is again facing criticism over the extremist activity of an associate, following a Washington Post report that a former staffer shared images of a swastika and of himself in a KKK robe.

“[Former Collins staffer] Preston Parra has no affiliation with Mike Collins’ office or campaign. The posts are vile, completely unhinged, and Mike Collins unequivocally condemns them,” Meyer Siegfried, a Collins campaign spokesperson said in a statement. “Rep. Collins believes the rise in antisemitism and hate among younger Americans and among Jon Ossoff’s allies like Hasan Piker and [Michigan Democratic Senate nominee] Abdul El-Sayed is equally abhorrent and, unlike Ossoff, has condemned it from all sources directly.”

In recent months, Collins’ son-in-law was revealed to be an antisemitic and white nationalist social media influencer and his former chief of staff was found to be a member of a group chat with prominent white nationalists where he discussed using congressional authority to free a Holocaust denier from prison.

Another former Collins staffer also went on an antisemitic tirade against Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) at a Washington, D.C. bar earlier this year, and Collins previously responded approvingly to an X account that attacked a reporter for her Jewish identity.

Jewish leaders in Michigan are circulating an open letter urging Jewish Democrats and independents in the battleground state to sign their names in support of former Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) as he faces Abdul El-Sayed, the far-left Democratic nominee for Senate whose hostile positions on Israel have alarmed many Jewish voters.

The letter, which was obtained by Jewish Insider on Wednesday and has not yet been publicized, is led by Eric Bronstein, a Detroit businessman, among others identifying as Democrats and independents.

It came to light after a fundraiser for Rogers on Tuesday night hosted by three prominent Jewish Democratic bundlers in Michigan who are likewise alarmed by El-Sayed’s candidacy. The growing efforts among Jewish Democrats to rally support for Rogers in the key Senate race illustrate the degree to which El-Sayed has alienated a sizable and politically active swing voting bloc in what is expected to be a close election.

“We know it is unusual for many Jewish voters to support a Republican candidate for senate and we understand the implications,” Bronstein wrote in a recent email courting Jewish signatories that was also reviewed by JI. “Our fellow Jewish voters need to see their friends and neighbors — including you — willing to take a stand in this specific, crucial race.”

Bronstein did not immediately return a request for comment on Wednesday.

The open letter, which the authors intend to share online once it has gained “a significant initial group of signers,” emphasizes that many signatories “have been fiercely supportive of Democratic candidates and principles.”

“All of us have felt threatened and alienated by the politics and allies embraced by Abdul El-Sayed,” the letter continues, “which has included demonization of Jews, equivocation on terrorism, exclusion of Jewish Americans from public life, and expression of implacable hatred of the world’s only Jewish nation.”

If El-Sayed were to claim victory in the general election, the authors say, “we fear the far-left and anti-Jewish elements in the Democratic party would become dominant, including in the imminent 2028 presidential race,” when Michigan will be among the early nominating states in the Democratic primaries. “We cannot allow him to become the Democratic standard-bearer or Michigan’s senator.”

While the letter calls Rogers “a friend to the Jewish community,” it clarifies the signatories’ endorsement “does not require that we agree with him on every issue or that we support” President Donald Trump. “There are other elections locally and nationally, with different candidates aligned with our values,” it says. “Here in Michigan this year and in this Senate race, our own well-being and our own voice are at stake.”

“This is a moment when each of us must speak out,” the letter states. “We’re voting for Mike Rogers. We ask other Michigan Jewish voters to join us.”

Following the primary early this month, Rogers has been working to fine-tune his outreach to disaffected Jewish voters — balancing private engagement with a key constituency alongside a more broadly calibrated public invitation for Democrats to join his coalition.

On Tuesday, Rogers posted a video testimonial to social media from a supporter in the heavily Jewish Detroit suburb of West Bloomfield who called herself a “lifelong Democrat” and said that she had chosen to cross party lines to support “candidates that actually share our values.”

The voter did not say she was Jewish but was wearing a necklace featuring a Star of David and another with the shape of the State of Israel.

Florida Democrats and Republicans fended off extreme challengers against pro-Israel incumbents in Tuesday night’s primaries, indicating that the state’s older, moderate and notably Jewish electorate was uniquely inhospitable towards the anti-Israel left and the antisemitic right.

Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) handily defeated socialist challenger Oliver Larkin by nearly a 2-to-1 margin (64-36%), while Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) easily prevailed in a newly drawn district against a crowded field of challengers. Elijah Manley — the candidate running against Wasserman Schultz on the Democratic Socialists of America, anti-Israel platform — lagged in third place, with just 13% of the vote.

Moskowitz will still be facing a competitive general election in a district that President Donald Trump carried. Former Boca Raton Mayor Scott Singer won the Republican nomination and, like Moskowitz, is an outspoken supporter of the U.S.-Israel relationship.

On the Republican side, Rep. Randy Fine (R-FL) dominated over a neo-Nazi podcaster who made hatred of Jews the central message of his campaign. Fine won renomination with 57% of the vote, while the antisemitic Dan Bilzerian tallied 17% of the GOP vote. And in the governor’s race, James Fishback, who used racist and antisemitic messages as part of his campaign, lagged well behind the Trump-endorsed winner, Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL), finishing in third place with just 10% of the vote.

Donalds will face former Rep. David Jolly (who served as a Republican in Congress before switching to the Democratic Party) in the general election.

In another victory for the GOP mainstream, former TV anchor Ryan Elijah ousted scandal-plagued (and also Trump-endorsed) Rep. Cory Mills (R-FL), who has been dogged by a series of investigations related to alleged domestic violence and harassment, financial misconduct, sexual misconduct, stolen valor and alleged use of his office for his own financial gain.

But the big surprise of the night came in the Democratic primary to determine a Democratic nominee against appointed Sen. Ashley Moody (R-FL), who was tapped to replace Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Alex Vindman, the star witness in the first impeachment hearing against Trump, lost badly to DSA-backed challenger Angie Nixon despite being supported by national party leaders.

Nixon, a Florida state legislator and community organizer, holds staunchly anti-Israel views, having repeatedly called Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza a “genocide” and campaigning with Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) in a preelection rally last weekend.

The outcome means that Moody will be heavily favored to win election in November, taking away any Democratic outside hopes of winning the seat with a more mainstream standard-bearer.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) suggested in an interview with The Washington Post published on Tuesday that he believes Democrats can still win the Senate even if far-left Michigan Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed, whom Schumer has endorsed, does not win in November.

El-Sayed’s progressive positioning and recent polling showing him narrowly trailing the Republican nominee, former Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), have raised concerns among Democrats that El-Sayed could lose what many in the party consider to be a must-win state. Some Democratic donors, particularly in the Jewish community, are also now backing Rogers after El-Sayed won the primary.

“A path to winning back the Senate clearly goes through Michigan, but we have a whole bunch of different paths,” Schumer told the Post.

Schumer acknowledged that his views on Israel differed from El-Sayed’s, but didn’t directly say whether he believed the Michigan nominee had said or done anything antisemitic.

“I think he makes an effort to fight antisemitism even though his views on Israel are much different than mine,” Schumer told the outlet.

El-Sayed has come under fire for his comments that appeared to justify an attempted attack on a synagogue and Jewish preschool in the Detroit suburbs earlier this year, his repeated refusal to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist and his alliance with Hasan Piker, the far-left antisemitic and anti-Israel streamer.

Reps. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) and Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), two Florida Jewish Democrats known as champions of Israel, are facing primary battles on Tuesday against Democratic Socialists of America-aligned candidates who have made criticism of the incumbents’ stances on Israel major planks of their campaigns.

Moskowitz, running in a heavily Jewish south Florida district, faces a challenge from DSA member Oliver Larkin.

Wasserman Schultz is facing a slew of Democratic opponents after redistricting broke up her previous district. She decided to run instead in a plurality Black seat, a decision that has sparked controversy in both the state and on the Hill. Her most prominent challenger is Elijah Manley, a former DSA member who converted to Judaism as an adult.

Larkin and Manley — alongside progressive Senate candidate Angie Nixon, who faces Jewish Democrat Alex Vindman — rallied on Friday with Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), one of the most prominent critics of Israel in the House. The event was forced to relocate after the original business hosting the event, The Venue Fort Lauderdale, cancelled the reservation following backlash from Democratic state Rep. Michael Gottleib and others, including far-right commentator Laura Loomer.

“Once we became aware of the full scope and nature of the event and reviewed the publicly circulated promotional materials, we immediately began addressing the matter. Due to security concerns as well as the welfare of attendees and staff, the decision was then made that the event would not proceed at our property,” The Venue said in a statement. “The Venue Fort Lauderdale is Jewish-owned and operated and our values and commitment to the Jewish community are deeply important to us.”

Local media reported that a second venue also backed out of hosting the event before organizers were able to secure a third location, where the event went forward.

Larkin, Tlaib and Nixon also attended a Shabbat event organized by Jewish Voices for Peace. JVP did not identify any Jewish leaders attending the Shabbat event on the invitation.

In spite of the national attention toward the races, longtime Democratic insiders in the state are skeptical that far-left politics is a winning formula in Florida.

“I don’t think this entire state is great for that,” Steve Schale, a longtime Florida Democratic strategist said, pointing to the defeats of former gubernatorial candidate Andrew Gillum and Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) presidential campaign in the state.

Mitch Ceasar, a former chair of the Broward County Democratic Party and a former state Democratic chairman, agreed that far-left and anti-Israel positions aren’t likely to have much purchase in the Sunshine State. “I don’t think either one of those things plays in Florida like it would in New York or some other places.”

Neither Larkin nor Manley have picked up the prominent national endorsements of figures such as Sanders or Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) that have been a boon to other progressive congressional hopefuls. Manley, for his part, secured the endorsement of Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA).

But other far-left figures have been rallying in support of Larkin in particular, including antisemitic streamer Hasan Piker; far-left Democratic nominees Darializa Avila Chevalier, Claire Valdez and Melat Kiros; former Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY); childrens’ entertainer Ms. Rachel; former Ohio state Sen. Nina Turner; and anti-Israel activist Linda Sarsour.

Manley also appeared on Piker’s livestream show.

Moskowitz — despite an unrelenting barrage of attacks from Larkin’s campaign — has largely stuck to a positive message and declined to engage directly with Larkin. 

But Moskowitz has said he believes that he’s “being targeted simply because of my faith and being pro-Israel” and that Larkin has embraced supporters who have “repeatedly trafficked in antisemitic rhetoric and hostility toward the Jewish community.”

Moskowitz has raised nearly $3 million, but has reserved close to $2 million of that for the general election. Larkin raised $689,000 and would enter the general election with just $170,000 left on hand.

Ceasar said Larkin’s campaign has also brought in “a lot of very anti-Jewish overtones,” which have raised particular concerns in light of the public death threats and assassination attempts that Moskowitz has faced.

Schale said he’s been dubious of polling and other data the Larkin campaign has put out that has suggested Larkin is gaining ground on Moskowitz. He added that a Larkin victory would virtually guarantee that Democrats lose the seat in November.

“I remain skeptical that that race is actually going to be all that close,” Schale said, emphasizing that the district, geographically and demographically, is very different from most of the other districts where DSA candidates have had success, including being less urban, older and heavily Jewish.

A poll from Larkin’s campaign on Aug. 5 of 403 likely voters showed Moskowitz leading Larkin by two points, while a Moskowitz poll on July 22 showed Moskowitz leading by 36 points.

Ceasar agreed that Moskowitz should win reelection, noting his strong fundraising performance and that his new district shares about half of its territory with the previous one. “Jared’s a hard worker,” Ceasar said. 

He also emphasized that Moskowitz is a well-known quantity in the district since the beginning of his political career.

An individual close to Moskowitz’s campaign noted that half of the expected voters have already voted early, and that the district is generally older. The district is also 25% Jewish and 25% Hispanic — mostly of Cuban and Venezuelan ancestry, populations that are generally hostile to socialist policies. The source noted that the district is deeply purple — split around evenly among Democrats, Republicans and Independents.

All of those factors are likely to favor Moskowitz. There’s also been an effort among Republican-leaning Orthodox Jewish voters to re-register as Democrats to vote for Moskowitz in the primary.

Another source who requested anonymity to speak freely told Jewish Insider they expect Moskowitz to win, but said that his one potential vulnerability is that he’s been somewhat absent from local Democratic club meetings and other gatherings in the district. Moskowitz has also faced criticism, including from the Sun Sentinel — which declined to reendorse him — for failing to appear with or debate Larkin.

Moskowitz, who has young children, faced a credible assassination attempt in 2024 and repeated death threats and other harassment, largely tied to his Jewish identity.

The source said, however, that Moskowitz is very well-known and well-liked and has a long history in the district, and noted that his father was also a leader in the Broward County Democratic Party.

Schale said he was skeptical of a characterization of Moskowitz as disengaged. The lines of the district, Schale noted, changed around three months ago and around 40% of the district is new to him, so campaigning on the ground in much of the district would have been difficult before then as well. He said he’s found Moskowitz to be “incredibly in-touch with his constituents” and “responsive” to them throughout his career.

Caesar told JI that Wasserman Schultz remains the favorite in her race in part because her opponents failed to consolidate. Some Black community leaders had hoped to narrow the field to a head-to-head challenge against Wasserman Schultz, but ultimately the other candidates declined to do so.

Democrats have expressed frustrations with Republicans for creating the redistricting situation, accusing them of deliberately stoking racial tensions through their decisions in drawing the district boundaries in addition to carving up Democratic-held seats.

“I hate the situation all around,” Schale said.

“What the Republicans are doing is they’re going for what I would call a political [Buy One, Get One], and that is that they’re seeking to steal Democratic districts in Florida, while also creating racial disharmony,” Ceasar said.

Wasserman Schultz, Ceasar noted, maintains a substantial fundraising advantage over her opponents. She’s raised $3.3 million, far surpassing Manley’s $1 million, former Broward County Mayor Dale Holeness’ $394,000, former Rep. Sheila Cherfilus McCormick’s (D-FL) $389,000 and rapper and free speech activist Luther Campbell’s $163,000.

The seat has a plurality Black population but not necessarily a majority, and includes a diverse set of communities, Schale noted.

“I’ve talked to several people that think she probably is going to win,” Schale said. “She’s probably in the strongest position to win this thing, but assuming she wins, she’s going to have a very real challenge on Day 1 to build trust in the community with folks who feel like she shouldn’t have run there … and to deliver in a real way. The one thing about her that I know is she’s as tireless as any human being I’ve ever known and she’ll work her tail off.”

Though Manley’s campaign has gained the most national attention, as well as endorsements from some local newspapers, Schale said that Holness is likely to be a strong candidate as well. Cherfilus-McCormick, he said, likely still maintains a base of support in spite of the scandals that led to her resignation from Congress earlier this year, while Campbell has also been an interesting and unique candidate.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if Elijah finished second if he doesn’t win. I also wouldn’t be surprised if Dale was [second],” Schale said. “I don’t know that [Holness] is raising the kind of money and communicating in the same way, but he’s also got a substantially deeper relationship with the district than Elijah does.”

He said Manley’s path to victory would be if other candidates split the more moderate vote and he’s able to squeeze through to victory with around 30% of the vote. With significant Black, Caribbean, Cuban, Venezuelan and Colombian voting populations, “just demographically, the district isn’t set up well for a socialist. And also … a good chunk of them came there escaping socialism.”

A third pro-Israel Jewish Democrat, Rep. Lois Frankel (D-FL), is also facing a challenge that’s gone largely unreported at the national level. Rick Stark, the chair of the Florida Democratic Party’s Jewish Caucus, said that Frankel’s reelection race may be flying under the radar as a true contest.

Her main opponent, Victoria Doyle, who is running to Frankel’s left and has expressed hostility toward AIPAC, has loaned her own campaign $325,000. Frankel is in a much stronger position financially, having raised $2.2 million.

Stark, who lives in Frankel’s district, said he hasn’t seen much outreach from Doyle’s campaign, but noted that Democrats have been particularly hostile this cycle toward older and long-tenured Democratic leaders like Frankel.

“I do think [Frankel] pulls it off, [but] I think it’s going to be a lot closer than [people are] thinking,” Stark said. “A lot of the young folks are tired of us old folks.”

Schale said he hadn’t heard any indication that Frankel’s race would be competitive.

“Our campaign is directed at fighting Donald Trump‘s policies and not on attacking other Democrats. I’m laser-focused on building an affordable America, protecting our Social Security and Medicare, and fighting Trump’s threat to our democracy,” Frankel said in a statement to JI.

In the Senate race, Schale predicted victory for Vindman, a military veteran and National Security Council whistleblower, but said that Nixon is likely to put up a strong performance.

“Angie’s running a very energetic [campaign]. I think she’s created a bunch of buzz for herself,” Schale said. “I think Alex will win, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s not close-ish.”

He emphasized that many Florida voters will be unfamiliar with either candidate going into the polls — though Vindman has been able to communicate with more voters — but Nixon will have a base of voters in Jacksonville and Black voters statewide, beyond only progressive and DSA-aligned voters.

Stark said that Nixon had spoken at a Jewish Democratic Caucus Zoom event where she did not demonstrate a clear understanding of issues in the Middle East.

A quarter century ago, when the late Sen. Joe Lieberman was tapped by Al Gore, the Democratic nominee for president, to be his running mate on the 2000 ticket, the question around many a Shabbat table was, “Is he too Jewish to be in the White House?”

There’s a different question being asked, largely in Democratic circles, of today’s Jewish presidential candidates: “Is he the ‘right’ kind of Jewish candidate to be president?” — a question that is almost entirely centered around a candidate’s position on Israel and how openly he identifies with his religious faith. 

A long list of Jewish candidates are considering a presidential campaign or are being touted as credible contenders, ranging from moderates like Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) and former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel to progressives like Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and those who straddle the ideological divide, like Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA).

In both 2026 and 2028, the debate over Israel is on the ballot: Congressional primaries are pitting pro-Israel candidates against those who don’t acknowledge Israel’s right to exist as a
Jewish state, and already a clear divide is emerging in the prospective 2028 presidential field over the issues of the U.S.-Israel relationship and dealing with rising antisemitism. 

Even in races where Israel policy is not front-and-center, invoking AIPAC has become something of a catch-all slur for progressives attacking the role of outside money in Democratic primaries. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a likely 2028 hopeful, proudly proclaimed in February that he’d never taken AIPAC money — which of course he hasn’t, given that AIPAC and its affiliated super PAC historically focus on federal, not state, races.

Since soft-launching his presidential campaign last month (in Tel Aviv, no less), former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel has made the Jewish state — and its relationship with the U.S. — one of his top issues in speeches and interviews. Even when his views are well within the mainstream, his signaling that he’s talking tough against Israel is a sign he recognizes his long-standing pro-Israel record is a vulnerability in a Democratic presidential primary. 

A week after his Tel Aviv speech, Emanuel appeared on the Council on Foreign Relations’ “The Spillover” podcast in an episode titled “Rahm Emanuel Talks Israel, Midterm Elections, and the Democratic Party.” Two days later, The New Yorker’s “Radio Hour” podcast aired an interview with Emanuel in conversation with David Remnick titled, “Rahm Emanuel Says Israel’s Path Is ‘Not Sustainable Politically.’” Earlier this week, Emanuel appeared on the podcast of anti-Zionist Peter Beinart for a conversation largely focused on Israel.

The polling reality is that despite his lengthy and impressive resume — a former U.S. ambassador, congressman, Chicago mayor and White House chief of staff — Emanuel’s record is out of step with the ascendant progressivism that’s taken hold within the party. (He is currently polling at 0% in most 2028 Democratic primary polls.)

Emanuel could be using his skill as a straight-talking political operative to push his party to the center on antisemitism and Israel, akin to the way former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie used his anti-Trump bromides against the MAGA-aligned candidates during the 2024 presidential debates. But Emanuel’s candidacy has thus far been an opportunity to push the party leftward on Israel — in essence, kashering an increasingly unfriendly approach to the U.S.-Israel relationship — and throw jabs at Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, with whom Emanuel has a long and less-than-amicable history.

Both Emanuel and Newsom’s approaches reflect what they see as a political reality as the 2028 race comes into view: criticizing Israel might garner some support, while backing it is a losing argument.

Other leading Jewish Democrats who are considering 2028 bids are opting not to make Israel — and the future of its relationship with the U.S. — a cornerstone of their campaigns. Some, such as Shapiro, attempt to pivot when pressed on Israel questions, focusing instead on the domestic impact of the war with Iran or on U.S. national security. And when they do talk about Israel, criticism is largely focused on Israel’s government and not the country as a whole.

Shapiro, whose Israel stance was reportedly one reason former Vice President Kamala Harris opted against selecting him as her running mate in 2024, has frequently criticized Netanyahu while also legitimizing Israeli security concerns. 

“I don’t think that if you are critical of Benjamin Netanyahu, you’re an antisemite,” Shapiro said on the “Higher Learning” podcast earlier this year. “By the way, I’m critical of Benjamin Netanyahu. And I have been for years and years and years, even predating Oct. 7. I think his approach has made Israel less safe.”

Pritzker has similarly kept the message — largely — focused on Netanyahu. In an in-depth New York Times interview in March, Pritzker said he felt Israelis had erred in selecting Netanyahu, saying that his leadership has led the country into “additional wars” and caused excess death and destruction in Gaza. On AIPAC, the Illinois Democrat, who previously supported the group, explained to The Times that his efforts to distance himself from the group were because it had become increasingly partisan and “pro-Trump,” rather than because of Israeli policy itself.

And then there’s Ossoff , who has always held positions on Israel that fall to the left of the others. We wrote last month that many Peach State Jews find themselves in a political no-win situation as Ossoff, who has voted to block weapons shipments to Israel, defends his seat against Rep. Mike Collins (R-GA), who has a history of inflammatory right-wing rhetoric — and a son-in-law who openly espouses white nationalist, antisemitic propaganda. 

While all four have tacked left on Israel, they have done so to varying degrees — for example, Shapiro has expressed support for some aid to Israel to be conditioned, while Ossoff has voted to block weapons sales to Israel and Emanuel has called to immediately end all military aid to Israel.

2028 candidates rightfully sense that the party is shifting, not just on Israel but on a range of policies. When Lieberman was on the ticket a quarter century ago, the question was whether Americans were ready to elect a Jewish president (or vice president). Now, the question facing potential Jewish 2028 contenders is different: What do they have to say about Israel to persuade primary voters they are the “right” kind of Jew to become president?

Former GOP Rep. Mike Rogers starts off the Michigan Senate general election race with a narrow advantage over Democrat Abdul El-Sayed, according to a new Fox News poll, aided by an advantage with independents and making inroads with a small but significant number of Democrats willing to cross party lines.

Overall, Rogers leads El-Sayed among registered voters by four points, 51-47% — and is one of the only Republicans to hold a lead in the series of Fox News Senate battleground polls that have otherwise shown Democratic Senate candidates ahead of their GOP opponents.

The poll found Rogers’ advantage is sustained by holding onto more of his base than El-Sayed, while claiming a small edge with independents. Rogers wins 96% of Republican support, while El-Sayed support is at 91% among Democrats and is only polling at 69% with Democrats who don’t support the Democratic Socialists of America.

54% of Michigan voters surveyed said El-Sayed is too extreme for the state, while 51% of respondents said Rogers was too close to President Donald Trump. 

El-Sayed starts the general election with 54% of Michigan respondents viewing him unfavorably and a 41% minority viewing him favorably. That minus-13 net negative unfavorability is a notch worse than Rogers’ 45% favorable rating and 51% unfavorable rating (minus-6).

The pollsters also found that El-Sayed is underperforming with Black voters, women and suburbanites — all key constituencies in a midterm election. Rogers, however, is lagging among younger voters under 30 and independents compared to Trump’s 2024 showing in the state.

The poll surveyed 1,006 registered Michigan voters between Aug. 6-10, and has a 3% margin of error.

Addressing Michigan Democrats in a videotaped message, Republican Senate nominee Mike Rogers said that the “vast majority of people” rejecting Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed — whose bid he framed as a “campaign filled with anger, divisiveness, calls for violence and the views that are out of touch with your values”— have “a home with us.” 

“If you’re among the majority of Democratic voters that woke up on Wednesday feeling hopeless because the person who won does not represent your values, well, just know there is still hope,” Rogers said seated next to his wife, in a 90-second video message released on Friday.

“Michigan deserves a senator who is ready to sit with you, hear from you and represent you.

The parents across Michigan who want an education system that sets up their kids for success have a home with us. Grandparents across Michigan who are heartbroken from watching their kids and grandkids leave the state, you have a home with us,” he continued. 

“To young people who are looking for real solutions to our housing affordability crisis, you have a home with us. To families who don’t want higher taxes and lower paychecks, you have a home with us. The fight is far greater than just left versus right. The fight is for the very soul of our nation. Over the next 90 days, I’m going to work hard to earn your trust, to earn your support and earn your vote.” 

Most Democrats quickly coalesced behind El-Sayed after he narrowly clinched victory in Michigan’s Democratic primary on Wednesday morning, while Republicans quickly attacked El-Sayed’s extremist history and ties. 

Just before he was declared winner, El-Sayed doubled down on his criticism of Israel on MS NOW’s “Morning Joe,” calling the Jewish state “bloodthirsty” and saying his critiques go beyond the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Democrats are quickly coalescing behind Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed after the far-left candidate narrowly clinched victory in Michigan’s Democratic primary on Wednesday morning, while Republicans quickly pounced on El-Sayed’s extremist history and ties.

Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI), who came within a percentage point of defeating El-Sayed, promptly congratulated him on his victory and offered her support.

“I want to congratulate Abdul El-Sayed on winning the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate. He is a doctor, a community health official, a Rhodes Scholar, and a dedicated Michigander. I am proud to offer my support as he takes on Mike Rogers in the general election,” Stevens said. “This was a thorough and rigorous campaign that brought out the full span of views within the Democratic Party — and that is why we have primaries.”

She emphasized the need for Democrats to come together in support of El-Sayed, saying, “We must elect Democrats up and down the ballot. We need to flip some important House seats. We need to re-elect my friends Hillary Scholten and Kristen McDonald Rivet. We need to win this Senate seat, because Elissa Slotkin deserves a partner like Abdul in the U.S. Senate.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chair Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) also offered support for El-Sayed in a statement.

“Abdul El-Sayed has run an energetic campaign that inspired thousands of Michiganders across the state, with a clear focus on lowering costs and standing up for working families,” the pair said. “Democrats are united by a common purpose: putting a check on Donald Trump by defeating his Republican enablers and taking back the Senate. We look forward to working with Abdul and Democrats across Michigan to win this seat in November.”

Retiring Sen. Gary Peters (D-MI), who had initially planned to stay out of the race but ultimately endorsed Stevens, said that the party must come together behind El-Sayed to block Rogers.

“Both candidates ran strong campaigns focused on improving the lives of all Michiganders. But now it’s time to come together as a party and rally around our nominee, Abdul El-Sayed, to make sure Mike Rogers never sees the floor of the U.S. Senate,” Peters said. “I’ve repeatedly said that I will support our nominee because the most important election is in November.”

Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), who declined to endorse El-Sayed in the primary, offered her support while also saying little about El-Sayed personally and focusing on the need to keep the seat in Democratic hands.

“Congratulations to @AbdulElSayed for winning the Democratic nomination for Senate. It’s been a long primary, but now it’s time to gear up to beat Mike Rogers (again) and win up and down the ticket,” Slotkin said. “There is nothing more important than the mission of the next 90 days: uniting, keeping this seat blue, flipping the House and Senate, and providing a real check on President Trump.”

Meanwhile, Republicans have quickly pounced on El-Sayed, highlighting his extreme history.

“Abdul isn’t just another liberal. He’s an extremist. He wants to empty prisons and put murderers and sex offenders back on our streets. He pledged his support to the Muslim Brotherhood and campaigns with people who refuse to condemn terrorism,” Republican nominee former Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) said. “I spent years hunting terrorists and bringing Osama bin Laden to justice. Never in a million years did I think that I would be running against someone who believes America deserved 9/11.” His comment was apparently a reference to El-Sayed’s ties to far-left streamer Hasan Piker, who championed El-Sayed in the primary.

Matt Brooks, CEO of the Republican Jewish Coalition, declared in a statement that El-Sayed is the “most antisemitic U.S. Senate candidate in America” and called on Jewish Democrats, who he said could prove “decisive” in the November general election, to back Rogers.

“Abdul El-Sayed is a direct threat to Michigan’s Jewish community,” Brooks said. “El-Sayed has called the government of the Jewish state as ‘evil’ as Hamas, ‘struggled’ to say that Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state, and empathized with a terrorist who tried to murder Jewish schoolchildren at Temple Israel in the Detroit suburbs — and yet, Michigan Democrats just picked him as their nominee for the United States Senate.”

The Senate Leadership Fund, a super PAC aligned with Senate GOP leadership, announced a six-figure digital ad campaign describing El-Sayed as “dangerous.”

Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Federal Courts subcommittee said on Tuesday that they plan to boycott a subcommittee hearing on Wednesday set to examine Muslim Brotherhood networks in the United States.

The Democrats — Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Alex Padilla (D-CA) and Peter Welch (D-VT) — dismissed the hearing as an effort to attack Muslims broadly.

“Scapegoating Muslims may be a Texas Republican strategist’s idea of ‘solid gold’ to whip up their voters, but Democrats have no intention of indulging this political creepshow, particularly after the recent violence targeting places of faith,” the lawmakers said in a statement. “Our focus is the costs families face thanks to rampant, non-stop Trump corruption.”

The hearing, organized by subcommittee chairman Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), is titled, “Hidden in Plain Sight: Confronting the Muslim Brotherhood Network in America,” and follows efforts by state-level and national Republicans focused on the group, including an executive order targeting Muslim Brotherhood branches as terrorist groups.

“Of course they are,” a Cruz spokesperson told Jewish Insider, when asked about the Democratic boycott.

Scheduled witnesses include Lara Burns, a former FBI special agent and senior research fellow at The George Washington University’s Program on Extremism; Arielle Klepach, senior counsel at the National Jewish Advocacy Center; and Kyle Shideler, a senior analyst for homeland security and counterterrorism at the Center for Security Policy.

Democrats on Monday slammed President Donald Trump’s resumption of hostilities against Iran, as well as the notion, implicit in Trump’s notification, that the operations mark a new conflict and therefore reset the 60-day window for military operations launched by the executive branch without congressional approval.

In a letter to congressional leaders on Friday notifying them that the war had resumed, Trump said that Iran repeatedly violated the memorandum of understanding by attacking commercial vessels on July 6 and 7, and that the U.S. had, as of July 7, commenced “defensive strikes against targets within Iran including missile launch sites, air defenses, military maritime assets, military support infrastructure, and command and control capabilities.”

Trump said that ground forces are not involved in the operations and are focused on protecting the U.S., but American forces “remain postured to take further action.” He added that he was notifying Congress pursuant to his obligation under the War Powers Act, the statute that lays out the 60-day timeline.

Critics of the war have argued consistently that the operations that began in February never actually concluded during the since-terminated ceasefire, despite the administration’s assertions otherwise.

“Trump’s rinse and repeat approach to the Iran war isn’t a strategy, it’s a recipe for utter disaster,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said Monday. “It’s incredible what a fiasco this war is. Trump’s so-called understanding — lot of bull — with Iran fell apart faster than the ink could dry.”

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA), who has led war powers efforts in the Senate to end the conflict, said the U.S. has been at war, and argued that the administration is obligated to withdraw U.S. forces in response to the war powers resolution that Congress passed last month.

“The notion that [the 60-day clock] was paused before, I think, was sort of laughed out of the room. This has been an ongoing conflict, even during the midst of a ceasefire,” Kaine said. “There were still hostilities underway. So this is not a war that paused and restarted.”

He said he will continue to support war powers efforts but believes that Congress has already definitively declared the war illegal. The resolution that Congress passed came in the form of a concurrent resolution, which is not presented to the president, and its legal force is disputed.

Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) filed a new war powers resolution on Monday to oppose the war, which likewise argues that combat operations never ceased. 

“We were promised the war would be over for months. And now in a matter of days we’ve gone from a bad U.S.-Iran deal to more strikes, another blockade, and added turmoil that will only drive prices higher,” Schiff said in a statement. “Any assertion by the Trump administration that he gets 60 more days to act without Congress has no foundation in law.”

Kaine and Sens. Andy Kim (D-NJ), Jeff Merkley (D-OR) and Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) cosponsored the resolution.

Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), the ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, “wholeheartedly condemn[ed]” Trump’s plans to take control of the Strait of Hormuz, arguing that it is impossible without significant escalation and would be “frankly, just wrong.”

“Iran has gained greater leverage, continues to destabilize the region, and has a younger and more hardline leadership than when this war started,” Smith said. “It is past time for [Republicans] to work with us to ensure the president finds a diplomatic solution to ending a war he never should have started and that threatens our national security and defense as well as that of our partners.”

Even some Republicans have expressed skepticism of the administration’s strategy, including over Trump’s plan to impose a toll on the Strait of Hormuz.

“I recall Secretary [of State Marco] Rubio saying that would not be proper for any country. … Am I wrong?” Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) told reporters.

Additionally, given the recent sudden death of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and the extended medical absence of Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Democrats may be able to more consistently pass war powers resolutions to oppose the war in Iran.

Many Democrats also say they plan to oppose a procedural vote this week to advance the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act in protest of the continued operations against Iran.

William Lawrence, a virulent Israel critic gaining momentum among progressives in Michigan’s battleground 7th Congressional District, is facing a wave of criticism over past comments denigrating Black political leadership, attacking former Vice President Kamala Harris.

As a result, Lawrence is now facing the opposition of an outside group aiming to block  him from winning the Democratic nomination.

The swing district, currently held by Rep. Tom Barrett (R-MI),  is a critical pick-up opportunity for Democrats in order to take back the House. It was previously held by Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), and is currently rated by the Cook Political Report as a toss-up.

On the campaign trail, Lawrence has called for an end to U.S. aid to Israel and accused the country of genocide, something that the other Democratic candidates, former Navy SEAL Matt Maasdam and former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Bridget Brink, have declined to do.

During a candidate forum, Lawrence said that Israel “has refused every other form of accountability and we continue to arm them.”

“I don’t know how we can call ourselves a just nation, and my heart is pounding becasue it is dispiriting in our politics to see how many people still refuse” to call Israel’s war in Gaza a genocide, he said in response to the other candidates. “I support a lasting peace for all Palestinians and Israelis. Everybody deserves to live with security and in comfort. We got a lot of work to do with them.”

He said in September 2025 that the war in Gaza involved “war crimes on an historic scale,” adding that it’s a “moral necessity” to stop arming Israel, which is also “the best leverage the U.S. has to end the genocide in Gaza, apartheid conditions in the West Bank, ensure the hostages are finally freed, and move towards a lasting peace for Palestinians and Israelis.”

Asked on the campaign trail whether he views the Iranian regime as “evil,” Lawrence said he did not. “I do not believe any regime in the world is wholly good or wholly evil,” Lawrence said.

He has also called Israel’s operations in Lebanon “a war of aggression and territorial expansion” and said that the situation in Gaza constitutes an “ongoing genocidal siege,” despite the ceasefire and provision of humanitarian aid.

As early as Oct. 9, 2023, Lawrence condemned a public statement by American and European leaders denouncing the Hamas attacks and supporting Israel’s efforts to defend itself.

“This looks like a green light for Israel to bombard Gaza with impunity, regardless of the civilian toll or risk of a regional war. Scary hours. I fear for where this will end up,” Lawrence said.

Maasdam and Brink are preferred by moderate Democrats to face off against Barrett.

Lawrence is a co-founder of the Sunrise Movement, the far-left climate movement that has since refocused significantly on anti-Israel activism. He has also made opposition to data center construction a key feature of his campaign.

Lawrence has recently landed in hot water and faced condemnation from leaders and groups including the Congressional Black Caucus PAC over past comments in which he described Black political leaders as a “pillar” of the “establishment, capitalist, imperialist American power” who “[defang] the white left.” The CBC PAC called Lawrence a “national disgrace” and demanded that Lawrence’s supporters withdraw their backing.

The progressive candidate said that his comments had been “taken out of context” but the “way I made this point was clumsy, and I regret my choice of words.” He said that his comments were in response to “Black elected leaders in D.C. [who] have been among those supporting unnecessary U.S. wars and foreign intervention” and “my horror at the genocide in Gaza.”

He also described former Vice President Harris, Slotkin and Michigan Democratic Party chair Curtis Hertel, who ran for the seat in 2024, as “warmongers.” He said voting for Harris made him “sick” and was the “second or third circle of hell,” also calling her “despicable” and her campaign “cowardly.”

The 35-year-old progressive has gained attention in the past few weeks, picking up the backing of leaders including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), far-left Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed and left-wing Reps. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), Ro Khanna (D-CA), Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), Delia Ramirez (D-IL) and Maxwell Frost (D-FL), as well as former Rep. Andy Levin (D-MI) and Pennsylvania state Rep. Chris Rabb, the Democratic nominee for a Philadelphia House seat.

Lawrence is also backed by the anti-Israel group TrackAIPAC, which has been accused of antisemitism; the Working Families Party; the Congressional Progressive Caucus; Sunrise Movement; and the Sanders-linked Our Revolution.

In a sign of concern from opponents about his momentum, Lawrence is now the target of a more than $500,000 ad buy from Crush MAGA PAC, which seeks to paint Lawrence as corrupt and unreliable.

The ad cites his support for the Uncommitted movement opposing former President Joe Biden in the 2024 primaries, work with Sunrise Movement (which the ad describes as a dark money group) and his holdings in a mutual fund (which the ad describes as investments in “Wall Street, big oil, and data centers”).

Lawrence asserted that AIPAC and Democratic Party insiders were responsible for the ad, something a United Democracy Project spokesperson denied, further suggesting that Lawrence’s comments were motivated by prejudice.

“We have absolutely no involvement in any way in running ads against William Lawrence in MI-07. It’s pure fiction and dishonest,” Patrick Dorton, spokesperson for UDP, the AIPAC-linked super PAC, said. “This assertion raises the question of whether Lawrence is trying to stir up some base prejudice in the Democratic primary against Democrats who support Israel. It’s immoral and shameful.”

The influx of outside cash will further compound Lawrence’s fundraising struggles. As of the end of April, Brink led the field with $2.3 million raised and $1.3 million on hand, followed by Maasdam with $1.7 million raised and $937,000 on hand and Lawrence with $572,000 raised and $351,000 on hand.

“Lawrence has the progressive lane to himself, the open question is how valuable that lane actually is outside of Lansing/East Lansing,” Michigan Democratic strategist Adrian Hemond told Jewish Insider. “[Michigan State University] students don’t come back until after the primary, so he’s reliant on high youth turnout to overcome his disadvantages with Black voters and seniors, but a sizable portion of the potential youth vote is home for summer break, i.e. not in East Lansing.”

But he also acknowledged that Brink and Maasdam risk splitting the more moderate lane.

In a potential acknowledgement of the political unpopularity of the war in Iran, Barrett has been one of the few House Republicans who has broken ranks with his party on Iran war powers votes, siding with Democrats to advance such measures.

Barrett also introduced legislation that would provide a limited authorization for military operations against Iran, limited in time and scope.