The debate over Israel within the Democratic Party has long been a particularly acute source of tension, in the wake of a protracted war in Gaza that deepened internal divisions over  America’s increasingly contested relationship with one of its closest allies.

Recently, however, many Jewish and pro-Israel Democrats say they have observed a distinct and troubling new shift in that debate, as the range of politically acceptable opinions on Israel has strayed far outside the mainstream, with little pushback from party leaders.

Amid growing claims of Israel committing genocide as settled fact, openly pro-Hamas demonstrations, ongoing efforts to demonize pro-Israel engagement in Democratic primaries and rejections of Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, the political atmosphere is raising questions about whether the party is willing to collectively draw red lines around creeping extremism or if it is now accommodating anti-Israel sentiment that until not long ago had been more commonly viewed as off-limits.

While hostility toward Israel has been building for some time over its military assault in Gaza sparked by Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks, Jewish Democrats warn that the party’s acquiescence to its anti-Israel wing risks alienating a core constituency that could have negative consequences in the midterms as well as the upcoming 2028 presidential election.

Their worries have dovetailed with a sharp rise in anti-Israel and antisemitic invective from the right that some Jewish Democrats contend is inseparable from a deeper antipathy that transcends traditional party lines.

“For those of us who care about a strong U.S-Israel relationship, there is reason to be concerned,” said Howard Wolfson, a longtime advisor to former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. “The challenge is profound.”

Even as he said that challenge also extends to the right, Wolfson voiced apprehension that in his own party, “there are Democrats thinking of running for president who have said that they won’t take money from pro-Israel” political donors “and have thrown around the word genocide” while describing Israel’s conduct in Gaza. The Jewish community “has a real problem,” he lamented to Jewish Insider in a recent interview. “It is a subject of considerable angst and debate.”

Sara Forman, the former executive director of the New York Solidarity Network, an advocacy group that backs pro-Israel Democrats for state and local office, said, “The willingness to accommodate absurd assertions about Israel is a cancer that is spreading unchecked” within “the left ranks of the Democratic coalition” in addition to “factions of the Republican right wing,” a dynamic she and others attributed, in part, to the polarizing influence of online algorithms that frequently reward incendiary content.

“Right now,” she added, “I hate to say we are in an extremely frustrating situation where the identity of the Democratic Party is being redefined, and where a majority of center-left traditional liberal Jews are left somewhere in the wilderness.”

“To me,” she concluded, “it’s depressing.”

“It is very troubling for American Jews that we are even having to have this conversation,” Jon Reinish, a Democratic strategist often involved in Jewish and pro-Israel causes, told JI. “Putting aside what one thinks” about Israel, he added, “to see it become a flashpoint in politics feels pretty shitty, to be sure.”

The Jewish state, he told JI last week, “is something that transcends language in a political primary and goes back to something deep within us emotionally, in terms of our family and how we think of our own history.”

“In the last presidential election we saw Jews, especially in the suburbs, swing more toward the Republican candidate than they had since” Ronald Reagan in 1980, Reinish noted. “If I’m Democratic leadership, I would be looking very closely at that.”

Over just the past few weeks, the scope of tolerable views on Israel has slid into markedly antagonistic territory, according to interviews with more than a dozen Jewish and pro-Isrsel Democrats who voiced a growing sense of alarm over the party’s direction.

Earlier this month, for instance, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) used her first appearance at the Munich Security Conference to not only repeat calls for conditioning U.S. aid to Israel but also to suggest that such support had enabled a genocide in Gaza. Though her comments were not new, that she had made them on one of the world’s most high-profile foreign policy stages underscored how her positions are continuing to gain greater currency in the party. 

Some observers were also unnerved by Ocasio-Cortez’s decision to level an accusation toward Israel of genocide while in Germany, seen as insensitive to the history of the Holocaust.

Jewish Democrats say they have been unsettled by the growing ease with which anti-Israel critics have invoked charged claims of genocide without understanding its meaning or historical significance. “The genocide conversation,” according to Steve Fulop, the former mayor of Jersey City who now leads the Partnership for New York City, an influential business advocacy group, “has unfortunately monopolized the left and has become more commonplace and accepted.”

Fulop, a grandson of Holocaust survivors, said the issue was not a major focus of conversation when he ran an unsuccessful primary campaign for governor of New Jersey last year. “In the last six months,” he told JI last week, “it has become more prevalent and more of a talking point.”

This month, the subject emerged in a special election for a House seat in a wealthy northern New Jersey suburb, where a far-left candidate, Analilia Mejia, clinched the Democratic nomination — beating a former congressman, Tom Malinowski, who had faced outside spending from AIPAC due to his support for conditioning aid to Israel.

While AIPAC drew widespread backlash for its role seen as unwittingly helping to elevate a harsher critic of Israel to the House in Mejia, many pro-Israel Democratic elected officials in the state have since coalesced behind the nominee, suggesting her staunchly anti-Israel views are little impediment to winning the party’s broad support. In addition to accusing Israel of genocide, the only candidate in the primary to do so, Mejia, a progressive activist, denounced Israel after the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks without mentioning Hamas and expressed “incredible discomfort” with Israel’s existence as a Jewish state. 

Even as Malinowski, for his part, disagreed with Mejia’s anti-Zionist sentiments, he echoed other Democrats who chose to endorse Mejia in the April special general election because, he wrote last week, he “strongly” believes that the “seat must remain in Democratic hands.”

Speaking broadly about anti-Israel currents now shaping the party, one Jewish Democratic member of the House said they have been unnerved by what they called an “obsession” with Israel among many far-left activists and candidates that reflects “litmus tests” not evenly applied to other key foreign policy issues.

“The line of what’s acceptable has shifted massively, especially since Oct. 7,” the House member, granted anonymity to speak candidly about the party, told JI last week. 

“What I’m watching right now, in 2026, is a breakdown in respectful language toward the Jewish community,” Joel Rubin, a progressive strategist and former State Department official, explained in an interview with JI last week. “It is very troubling and implies hostility that is undeserved — considering nobody should be treated to that kind of language. But it is also really dangerous for the Democratic Party and our electoral prospects to have this internal hostility and disunity.”

In New York City, which elected a fierce critic of Israel as mayor last November, Jewish Democrats say that line has moved in a particularly troubling direction. More recently, for example, Brad Lander, a former city comptroller now challenging Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) in a heavily Jewish House district, drew scrutiny for hiring a campaign consultant who had boosted antisemitic conspiracy theories using a pseudonymous X account that also celebrated Iran and Hamas, among other controversial social media posts.

Even as Lander fired the consultant, Kaif Gilani, after his online activity was uncovered by JI earlier this month, the episode still fueled questions about whether he was adequately vetted, given that the consultant had established a profile as a well-known promoter of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani during the recent election. It also underscored just how common such extremism has now become in New York City — where protesters have in recent months openly chanted their support for Hamas outside synagogues.

Meanwhile, leading progressive lawmakers such as Ocasio-Cortez and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), both of whom are seen as potential presidential contenders, have avoided publicly distancing themselves from a popular far-left streamer, Hasan Piker, who recently sided with Hamas while sharing his views on one of those protests, near a synagogue in Queens hosting an event promoting Israeli real estate investment.

Joel Rubin, a progressive strategist and former State Department official now at work on a book about Democratic foreign policy, said he interprets such rhetoric as part of a broader “political tactic by some folks in the base to try to silence Jewish voices and to intimidate them into not advocating on these issues.”

“What I’m watching right now, in 2026, is a breakdown in respectful language toward the Jewish community,” he explained in an interview with JI last week. “It is very troubling and implies hostility that is undeserved — considering nobody should be treated to that kind of language. But it is also really dangerous for the Democratic Party and our electoral prospects to have this internal hostility and disunity.”

“There has always been this struggle within the Democratic Party of the argument, on every issue, of what is acceptable and what is not,” Sam Lauter, a political consultant and pro-Israel activist in the Bay Area, told JI. “With regard to Israel, that argument is not new, but what is new is how much it’s increased and what has become acceptable and what has been just dismissed.”

The increasingly charged tenor of conversation around Israel “is not the way Democrats should be thinking about communicating to voters if we want to win elections outside of deep blue areas,” Rubin suggested. “My biggest fear is that people are afraid to stand up and speak out.”

Kenneth Baer, a former Obama administration official who now directs a communications firm, sounded a similar note of caution. “Democrats are running to outdo each other to criticize Israel to curry favor with the massively online left and the interest groups that constitute the party,” he told JI recently. “The political dynamics of 2026 may mean this doesn’t matter in November, but in 2028 and beyond, running to the extremes is not a political winner.”

“There has always been this struggle within the Democratic Party of the argument, on every issue, of what is acceptable and what is not,” Sam Lauter, a political consultant and pro-Israel activist in the Bay Area, told JI. “With regard to Israel, that argument is not new, but what is new is how much it’s increased and what has become acceptable and what has been just dismissed.”

Still, he argued, pro-Israel Democrats have also “missed out” on the opportunity to forcefully defend their positions. “It has been very clear for years that people who disagree with us have been organizing at a grassroots level while building up support and making their viewpoint a part of the party mainstream,” he said. “And our community stopped engaging at that level years ago, which is why many of us have been screaming that this is a huge problem.”

Former Rep. Steve Israel (D-NY), who previously helmed the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, attributed the changing landscape in large part to what he views as a demographic shift driven by younger voters “generations away from romantic images of Israel” that are now “replaced by algorithm-fueled social media portraying Israel dropping bombs on schools and hospitals in Gaza.”

“In politics, perception is reality, and the reality for younger people is that Israel is wrong,” he told JI.

But he said it would be a miscalculation to disengage from that conversation. “Pro-Israel activists who don’t understand the need to push back proceed at their own peril,” he said. “You can’t surrender the narrative, which means supporters of Israel on both sides of the aisle need to find a much more effective narrative, particularly toward young voters.”

Many pro-Israel activists are at a loss, however, for how to recapture the debate, as Middle East policy now appears likely to be a focus of the next presidential election.

“It’s easy to observe a problem and then not have specific ideas on the solution,” Israel told JI. “That is a fundamental question now.”

“I don’t have a great answer, to be honest with you,” said Wolfson, the Bloomberg advisor. “I find it is far easier to identify the breadth of the problem than to identify a solution.”

According to Lauter, “the Overton Window has shifted” for Democrats, “and what needs to also shift is our community’s understanding of how to deal with it and approach it.”

“Let’s see how the midterms go and which candidates jump in,” said Aaron Keyak, the deputy special envoy to monitor and combat antisemitism in the Biden administration who now serves on the board of Combat Antisemitism Movement. “But in the lead-up to 2028,” he told JI, “the Middle East policy discussion will certainly be more prominent.”

“Regardless of what we think or say today, the particular policy conversation leading up to 2028 is going to be driven by the candidates, so until we can fill out the answer to the ‘what’ and ‘why’ questions, we need to be able to answer the ‘who’ one,” Keyak added.

In the meantime, said former Rep. Kathy Manning (D-NC), who is now the board chair of Democratic Majority for Israel, the party still boasts a number of pro-Israel elected officials as well as candidates, including some her group recently announced it is endorsing in a range of contested House primaries.

“There is no doubt that we are living through very difficult times for American Jews,” she told JI in a recent interview, pointing to what she described as “unprecedented condemnation” of the U.S. alliance with Israel from both sides of the aisle. “What gives me hope,” she said, “is I know from my experience campaigning in a purple state in a competitive seat that the vast majority of Democrats still believe that Israel has the right to exist as a Jewish state and has the right to defend itself and its people.”

“We don’t have to love Israel,” but voters should understand the strategic benefits of working with a key Middle East ally, Hank Sheinkopf, a veteran Democratic strategist in New York City, said. “It ain’t about Jews,” he told JI. “It’s about the future of the United States of America.”

As the midterms near, Manning maintained that nominating pro-Israel Democrats will be a crucial step toward reclaiming the House. “The seats that are going to make the difference to taking back the majority are seats where candidates have to appeal not just to Democrats but also to independents and Republicans,” she said. “I think that it’s important for us to understand where voters are, regardless of what the loudest voices online or on the stage might be saying.”

Hank Sheinkopf, a veteran Democratic strategist in New York City, agreed with that sentiment, arguing that pro-Israel party members should be seeking to push the debate “back to the middle” and pressing a “straightforward geopolitical argument” to highlight the advantages of the U.S.-Israel relationship rather than relying on expenditures that have proven to be divisive in primaries.

“We don’t have to love Israel,” but voters should understand the strategic benefits of working with a key Middle East ally, Sheinkopf said. “It ain’t about Jews,” he told JI. “It’s about the future of the United States of America.”

The AIPAC-linked United Democracy Project said in a statement Friday that it had anticipated the potential elevation of a far-left candidate who has accused Israel of genocide in New Jersey’s 11th Congressional District as a possible outcome of its spending against former Rep. Tom Malinowski (D-NJ), but indicated it may undertake further spending in the district.

The group spent $2.3 million attacking Malinowski over his support in 2019 for Immigration and Customs Enforcement Funding and stock trading while in Congress.

Though ballot-counting has not yet finished, progressive activist Analilia Mejia, who is well to the left of Malinowski on Israel issues, currently holds a narrow lead in the primary — an outcome that frustrated New Jersey Jewish leaders attribute at least in part to UDP’s attacks on Malinowski.

“The outcome in NJ-11 was an anticipated possibility, and our focus remains on who will serve the next full term in Congress,” UDP spokesperson Patrick Dorton said in a statement Friday. “UDP will be closely monitoring dozens of primary races, including the June NJ-11 primary, to help ensure pro-Israel candidates are elected to Congress.”

Thursday’s race was a special primary to fill the remainder of Gov. Mikie Sherrill’s term in the House, through January 2027. The winner will still face a general election against Republican Joe Hathaway, the mayor of Randolph, N.J. The progressive Mejia could be uniquely vulnerable in the general, though the district favors Democrats.

There will also be a second primary race in June, on which Dorton suggested that UDP is focused, for the next full term in the House.

Former Lt. Gov Tahesha Way, rumored to be AIPAC’s preferred candidate and endorsed by Democratic Majority for Israel, looks poised to finish in third, with around 17%, in Thursday’s special election primary.

Mejia, who would likely win with less than 30% of the vote, could be vulnerable in the June primary if moderate voters — split amongst Malinowski, Way and Essex County Commissioner Brendan Gill in Thursday’s race — coalesce behind Way in the June regular primary.

Way and Malinowski did not immediately respond to requests for comment on whether they plan to run in June. Gill’s team confirmed that he does not plan to run. 

Sam Brownback, the former U.S. ambassador at large for international religious freedom and a former GOP senator, warned Wednesday that, unless Syrian minority groups are allowed to maintain their own security forces, they face a likely genocide by government-aligned forces.

The stark warning is a repudiation of the policies of the new Syrian government led by President Ahmad al-Sharaa, which had pushed for full integration of minority-led forces into the Syrian military and most recently launched a military offensive against the Kurdish-led and U.S.-backed Syrian Defense Forces, largely forcing a Kurdish surrender.

Forces aligned with the Syrian government have also carried out massacres of Druze, Alawite and Christian minorities since al-Sharaa’s rise.

The Trump administration has remained largely supportive of the al-Sharaa government, even as critics have accused it of essentially abandoning the U.S.’ longtime Kurdish allies to the Syrian government onslaught.

“The new administration in Syria is purging religious minorities, threatening and killing them,” Brownback said at a hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. “These groups must be allowed to maintain their own security forces, or I guarantee you today, a genocide will happen in Syria like happened in Iraq to the Yazidis and Christians.”

Brownback urged the U.S. to pressure the Syrian government to change course.

“One Syria — not talking about breaking Syria — but the people there, the Druze, the Alawites and Christians, have to be able to provide their own security,” he said. “The Kurds are our best allies. We’ve got to keep standing with the Kurds. They will protect religious minorities and they need to be able to have their own security.”

Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-MI), who questioned Brownback on the issue, said that he and “many” of his colleagues “struggled” with the idea of repealing the Caesar Civilian Protection Act, the last major sanctions targeting Syria, but ultimately did so on the promise of continued congressional oversight.

In the Senate, a bipartisan pair of lawmakers is pushing to reverse course and re-institute sanctions in response to the attack on the Kurds..

Brownback also warned that there are “early warning signs of a Muslim-on-Christian war … brewing across Africa,” and that the U.S. needs to get out ahead of it. He pointed to Nigeria as a starting point of this conflict, with its government backed by China, Russia, Turkey and Saudi Arabia engaging in persecution of Christians.

Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX) accused the Trump administration, and colleagues on the Hill, of turning a blind eye to what he described as attacks on the Christian community in “Palestine, including Jerusalem” by Israeli government forces and Israeli settlers.

California state Sen. Scott Wiener announced on Thursday that he is stepping down from his role as one of the co-chairs of the California Legislative Jewish Caucus, capping off nearly two weeks of controversy and frustration among Jewish leaders in the state after the San Francisco Democrat declared Israel’s actions in Gaza to be a genocide. 

Wiener said in a statement, which was obtained by Jewish Insider, that the decision was prompted in part by the fallout of his genocide comments.

“My campaign is accelerating, and my recent statements on Israel and Gaza have led to significant controversy in the Jewish community. The time to transition has arrived,” Wiener said. He will remain in the role until Feb. 15.

Wiener, who is running for Congress in a competitive Democratic primary to fill the seat being vacated by retiring Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), has long declared himself a progressive Zionist while also criticizing the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israel’s actions in Gaza. 

But after a candidate forum this month where his two competitors were quick to say Israel has committed genocide in Gaza, Wiener faced pressure from his left to use the word himself, and released a video a few days later changing his stance. 

“I’ve stopped short of calling it genocide, but I can’t anymore,” Wiener said. A coalition of local and statewide Jewish advocacy groups responded with a statement saying his position “is both incorrect and lacks moral clarity.” 

Wiener said Thursday that the American Jewish community “is navigating an extremely difficult moment in time,” and called for more dialogue.

“As we move through this moment, it is even more important for Jews here and globally to foster open dialogue and acceptance of disagreement, even on the hardest of issues,” Wiener said. “Since I stated my view that the Netanyahu government committed a genocide in Gaza, I have had many in-depth conversations with members of the Jewish community with a range of perspectives. While many in the community strongly disagree with my view, I am grateful for their willingness to engage with me and hear my perspective, showing once again the deep respect for difference in our community.”

In an interview with Politico this week, Wiener said he had avoided using the word “genocide” until now because of the harm and hurt it would cause the Jewish community. 

“Until now, I have not used the word genocide really for two reasons: First of all, it is an extremely sensitive issue in the Jewish community,” Wiener said. “And [second] particularly because the word genocide has been weaponized against Israel and against Jews for a long time. There are people who think Israel’s mere existence is genocide.” 

He said he’s heard from Jewish voters and leaders in the days since who are unhappy with his statement, but asked them to remember his record.

“If you’re mad at me, if you feel betrayed, I respect and honor that. But just also remember how many times I’ve gone to the mat for this community, and the bullets I’ve taken for this community,” Wiener said. 

As another election year gets underway, two liberal Jewish politicians offered a window last week into just how fraught the issue of Israel has become in some Democratic primaries — and how even pushing back against claims that Israel is committing genocide is inviting intraparty political backlash, at least in the deepest-blue parts of the country. 

Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) faces a primary challenge from the left in Brad Lander, the former New York City comptroller endorsed by Mayor Zohran Mamdani. When Goldman formally launched his reelection campaign last week, he was asked by a reporter if he believes Israel has committed genocide in Gaza. Goldman equivocated — a notable shift for a lawmaker who in February 2024 signed onto a letter calling claims of genocide in Gaza “false.” 

“I think there needs to be a serious investigation into what went on in Gaza during the war,” Goldman said. “What you call it is I think more of a legal matter, in my view, but what we all can agree on is that the destruction [in Gaza] was unconscionable and devastating and I am really grateful that it is over and the hostages are out and we can move forward.” (Lander, in contrast, has accused Israel of genocide.)

Across the country, in San Francisco, California state Sen. Scott Wiener, a Democrat running to replace Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), was asked the same question at a candidate forum. His two primary opponents — Connie Chan, a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, and Saikat Chakrabarti, former chief of staff to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) — both raised placards that said “yes.” Wiener did not raise either the “yes” or “no” placard. 

Wiener followed up with a post on X claiming that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict “demands more discussion and certainly more time,” which, after receiving blowback on social media, he subsequently deleted. He then backtracked completely: On Sunday afternoon, Wiener posted a video to social media stating that he’s “stopped short of calling [Israel’s actions in Gaza] a genocide, but I can’t anymore.”  

“To those of you who saw the debate clip from last week,” he said in the video, “I want to clarify that I do believe Israel has committed genocide in Gaza and I want to explain why I hesitated at the debate. For the past two years, I have harshly opposed Israel’s escalations in Gaza and I’ve used phrases like ‘total destruction’ and ‘catastrophic levels of death’ and ‘moral stain,’ but I haven’t used the word genocide.” He went on to explain that, for Jews, associating the word “genocide” with Israel “is deeply painful and frankly traumatic.” But “we all have eyes,” he said, “and to me the Israeli government has tried to destroy Gaza and to push Palestinians out, and that qualifies as genocide.”

These Democrats’ latest rhetoric is a shift from their recent comments about the U.S.-Israel relationship, which they have historically supported, though with caveats about the current Israeli government.

“I have a very strong support for the State of Israel and its right to exist as a Jewish state, the only Jewish state in the world,” Goldman said last week, “But I have voiced my serious opposition to the Israeli government.” Wiener told Jewish Insider in October that the U.S.-Israel relationship “is incredibly important, and the U.S. should continue to support Israel’s defense,” but that Israel’s current ruling coalition is “horrific” and that he is in favor of withholding offensive weapons to Israel because of its “extremist, messianic government.” 

The about-face from Wiener, along with the more incremental shift in tone from Goldman, underscores signs that the two Democrats are trying to pander to a party base that, at least in these deep-blue urban districts, has turned against the Jewish state.

The candidates are running in two of the most progressive districts in the country, in New York City and San Francisco. Despite his rhetorical manuevering, Goldman is clearly the most pro-Israel candidate in his race (and has continued to underscore his support for the Jewish state as a central part of his faith), while Wiener’s challengers are even more hostile to Israel than he is. 

All told, despite a monthslong ceasefire in Gaza, the “genocide” debate looks likely to remain a factor in many Democratic primaries, challenging even ostensibly pro-Israel Democrats on how to maintain their principles against the creeping hostility towards Israel among the party base.

Several Trump appointees to the board of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum are pushing for the ouster of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), alleging that he has rarely attended meetings and that his accusations of genocide against Israel run counter to the museum’s mission.

Sanders has served on the council for nearly two decades.

The board, formally known as the Holocaust Memorial Council, is mostly made up of presidential appointees who serve for five-year terms, joined by a handful of members from the House and Senate chosen by congressional leadership. Sanders was appointed in 2007. Lawmakers are technically subject to the same five-year term limits but in practice have often served until a successor is appointed or they leave office.

Jonathan Burkan, who was appointed to the council twice by President Donald Trump, said he’s never seen Sanders at any meetings of the council — which he said has not been the case for other lawmakers, both Democrats and Republicans.

“Everything that’s happened after Oct. 7, everything that has been going on with antisemitism, with the Holocaust — I do feel that if someone is a Jewish elected official, they should at least attend one meeting in over a 20-year period of time,” Burkan said. “They should find someone else besides Bernie just to be on the council.”

Each of the council members who spoke to Jewish Insider spoke in their personal capacities, not as representatives of the council as a whole.

Burkan added that “Bernie Sanders accusing Israel of genocide downplays the Holocaust, which actually hurts the museum which he serves.”

Stuart Eizenstat, the chair of the council, has pushed back on accusations of genocide against Israel and has argued that extreme anti-Israel rhetoric is fueling violent antisemitism. The museum’s director has also condemned comparisons between the war in Gaza and the Holocaust.

Daniel Huff, who was appointed to the board during Trump’s first administration, said that it’s “important that the museum be a bipartisan effort,” emphasizing that other Democratic lawmakers on the council have been frequent and active participants in its meetings.

“That’s the type of representation that we want,” Huff said. “My observation, simply, is that Sanders has not shown up to any meeting, as far as I can tell.”

“The problem is that he’s publicly out there advocating positions that are really at odds with some of the fundamental things that the museum does, and one of them is making sure that the word ‘genocide’ is carefully safeguarded, and deployed only when necessary, so as not to diminish the memory of those who died in the Holocaust,” Huff said.

Huff argued that, in a time of rising antisemitism, the Holocaust Museum has an important role to play, and it’s “important that everybody who’s in a leadership position there is focused on the importance of the moment, the urgency of the moment.”

“We’re living in a dangerous moment and everyone ought to be paying attention,” Huff said. “We need people who understand the fierce urgency of the moment we’re in, and the need to act wisely and decisively.”

He said that there are many Democrats who would be strong candidates and members of the board, but that Sanders does not fit that bill.

“It’s not a political statement … the ask is just, find someone who’s aligned and involved — that’s it, very simple,” Huff said.

Rob Garson, the president of the American Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists, who was recently appointed to the board for the first time, said that he was surprised to find out that Sanders was a member.

“It’s not as if they have that many [meetings] in any given year, and it’s not as if it’s in an inconvenient place for him to come to. He clearly just either doesn’t care or doesn’t want to care,” Garson said.

He added that Sanders’ public rhetoric is “diametrically opposed to the message of the Holocaust Memorial Council.”

“It should be people that actually are aligned with what the Holocaust Museum stands for, and Sanders just isn’t that,” Garson said. 

Tila Falic, another recent Trump appointee, said that people selected for the board “represent Holocaust education, and it represents combating antisemitism for Jews and for non-Jews in the United States … people that are appointed should take their job seriously by, first of all, showing up.”

If Sanders is unable to attend or is not aligned with the Museum’s mission, “then he should be removed and give that seat to somebody who wants to take an active role and make a difference.”

Sanders did not respond to a request for comment. Nor did Eizenstat, the chair of the council. The museum also did not provide comment on the effort to remove Sanders or confirm how many meetings the senator has attended during his tenure.

Trump stirred controversy early this year when he removed a slew of Biden appointees from the board, replacing them with several of his own picks.

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), a potential 2028 presidential candidate, is sparring with AIPAC on social media over ads the group ran criticizing his support for a House resolution describing the war in Gaza as a genocide.

“AIPAC just poured money into a series of ads in my district calling me a liar for speaking out about the truth in Gaza,” Khanna said in a video posted to X on Tuesday. “They’re asking you to disbelieve what you’ve seen on your own phone with your own eyes. AIPAC wants to weaken me electorally and prevent me from having a seat at the table in the leadership of our country.”

Khanna went on to link the ad campaign to a range of other issues unrelated to AIPAC, saying that he will not “cave to special interests” on health care, tech and artificial intelligence; bend to “the Epstein class, rich and powerful men who are totally disconnected from ordinary Americans and believe the rules don’t apply to them”; or accept PAC, lobbyist or corporate funding.

The ad in question, which ran on social media and digital platforms, proclaims in bold text: “Ro Khanna is lying to you.” It references his support for the Gaza genocide resolution, led by Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), stating, “Claims of genocide are a dangerous attempt to distort facts and rewrite history.” AIPAC is running identical ads against a series of far-left Democrats supporting the same resolution.

AIPAC spokesperson Marshall Wittmann said that Khanna is echoing antisemitic tropes.

“The war in Gaza has profoundly impacted millions of Israelis, Palestinians, and Americans, yet rather than helping build a better future of peace, Rep. Khanna is instead rewriting history and parroting a dangerous blood libel,” Wittmann said in a statement. “The only genocide in this war happened on October 7, when Hamas openly admitted it wanted to kill every Israeli man, woman, and child it could. Our ad simply informs his constituents about his support for legislation that is based on a lie, and it evidently got under his skin.”

In a post on X, AIPAC added, “The same ad is running featuring other cosponsors. You’re not that special.”

Wittmann did not say how much money AIPAC had spent on the ads. According to Meta’s ad library tool, the group spent between $900 and $999 running the ad on Facebook and Instagram.

Khanna has made attacks on AIPAC, and criticism of Israel more generally, a significant part of his legislative message in recent months, at times associating with extreme anti-Israel and antisemitic figures.

As two Democratic Michigan Senate candidates compete for the votes of anti-Israel voters with accusations of genocide against the Jewish state, Abdul El-Sayed, is going after state Sen. Mallory McMorrow, as insufficiently and inauthentically critical of Israel.

Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI), meanwhile, is solidifying her support for Israel, receiving an endorsement this week from Democratic Majority for Israel and calling herself a “proud pro-Israel Democrat [who] believe[s] America is stronger when we stand with our democratic allies, confront antisemitism and extremism, and keep our promises to our friends abroad and our working families here at home.”

With significant Arab and Muslim and Jewish constituencies, Israel policy issues are poised to play a significant role in Michigan’s Democratic primary next year.

El-Sayed entered the race as a vocal critic of Israel, while McMorrow, in recent months, has joined him in describing the war in Gaza as a genocide, as well as saying she would support efforts to cut off offensive weapons shipments to Israel.

El-Sayed, in a recent event at Michigan State University, criticized McMorrow for not taking that position sooner, describing allegations of genocide in Gaza as a matter of clear and incontrovertible fact. Video of the comments was published by the Michigan Advance.

He compared McMorrow’s position to someone taking months to decide that the sky is blue and saying, “let me give you five caveats about why it might not be blue.”

El-Sayed also suggested that McMorrow’s positions changed because she was seeking support from AIPAC, and only took a more critical stance on Israel after the group declined to support her. The far-left publication Drop Site alleged that McMorrow had been seeking an AIPAC endorsement earlier in the year and had authored a pro-Israel position paper. 

McMorrow’s campaign has denied that she completed a questionnaire for AIPAC and McMorrow said last month she would not accept the group’s support. AIPAC has previously endorsed Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI), who has maintained her position on Israel, in House races, but has not weighed in on the Senate race.

“When there’s 20,000 kids who died, that’s a genocide,” El-Sayed said in his remarks at Michigan State. “When people who are from the very country that committed — whose government committed that genocide say it’s a genocide, at some point you kind of just gotta be like, ‘Oh it’s a f***ing genocide.’ … “I don’t pretend that when 20,000 babies are murdered by our tax dollars, that there’s hemming and hawing about saying because it’s the truth.” El-Sayed was referring to numbers from the Hamas-run Ministry of Health indicating that almost 20,000 children and teenagers were killed in the war.

He suggested that McMorrow is trying to “package” herself as a progressive changemaker while the “substance” of her policies is “the same old politics.”

Asked last month whether the war in Gaza is a genocide, McMorrow said that it is.

“We have [Israeli Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu trying to tell us what we’ve been seeing with our own eyes is not true,” McMorrow said. “It is true. And two things can be true at once. … The position of the United States should not be that we support Netanyahu with no check and balances.”

Asked about El-Sayed’s criticisms, McMorrow’s campaign referred Jewish Insider to those remarks.

Rep. Maxine Dexter (D-OR) drew comparisons between the Holocaust and the war in Gaza, the latter of which she described as a genocide, in a speech on the House floor on Thursday, explaining her decision to support a resolution with far-left lawmakers, supported by anti-Israel groups, accusing Israel of genocide.

Dexter was backed by AIPAC’s United Democracy Project super PAC in her 2024 primary race against an opponent viewed as further left, and ran on a relatively standard Democratic platform when it came to Israel issues. But she has shifted dramatically to the far left on the issue in recent months, also throwing her support behind efforts to cut off offensive weapons transfers to the Jewish state.

The Oregon congresswoman began her speech by recounting a visit to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, the timing of which she described as “very intentional.”

“I went to reflect on the horrific history of dehumanization and ethnic cleansing that ultimately led the world to create a new term to describe such an unfathomable evil. That word is genocide,” Dexter said. “After the Holocaust, the international community made a commitment that such evil can never happen again to any people, anywhere. Never again, they said. That is why I recently signed on to a resolution recognizing Israel’s actions in Gaza led by the Netanyahu government as a genocide.”

Dexter said that she signed on “with a heavy heart” and “with the utmost respect for the Jewish people” but acknowledged that Jews in her district “may feel abandoned or deeply harmed by my action.” She professed her ongoing opposition to antisemitism and support for “our Jewish neighbors.”

“Many in this body have been reticent to clearly call out the mass suffering, the ethnic cleansing, the war crimes taking place in Gaza. I will not willingly continue to be part of that complicity,” Dexter continued. “As a United States representative, my job is to stand up against the power and our resources of this country being used in such ways.”

She said that “history has and will continue to judge this body, not just for what it did, but for what it failed to do. … I want my children to live in a country where leaders can be relied upon to lead with courage, empathy, and moral clarity. And I urge every Oregonian watching to hold me accountable in a shared unshakable belief in the sanctity of human life.”

Sara Bloomfield, the director of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, criticized Dexter’s comments.

“Exploiting the Holocaust to accuse Israel of genocide is unconscionable and adds further fuel to an already raging antisemitic fire,” Bloomfield said in a statement to Jewish Insider.

AIPAC spokesperson Marshall Wittmann said, “The claim of genocide by Israel is a mendacious attempt to distort facts, rewrite historyand a dangerous blood libel. The only genocide in this war happened on October 7, when Hamas openly admitted it wanted to kill every Israeli man, woman, and child it could.  To invoke the Holocaust against Israel is a grotesque moral abomination.”

President Donald Trump on Friday night publicly disavowed Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), once one of the president’s closest and most committed allies on Capitol Hill, saying he was withdrawing his endorsement of Greene and is prepared to support a primary challenger to the far-right Georgia congresswoman.

Greene, long dogged by controversy for her record of promoting antisemitic and otherwise fringe conspiracy theories, has emerged as one of the most vocal opponents of Israel on the right, accusing the country of genocide and leading efforts attempting to cut off U.S. aid to the Jewish state.

She has also repeatedly publicly criticized Trump’s policies and Republican leadership on Capitol Hill since the start of the government shutdown, earning Trump’s ire. Her breaks with the GOP have made her into a budding star in liberal media circles, where her ongoing promotion of conspiracy theories has increasingly been overlooked.

Trump said on his Truth Social platform that he has heard that “wonderful, Conservative people are thinking about primarying Marjorie” and that “if the right person runs, they will have my Complete and Unyielding Support,” accusing her of having “gone Far Left.”

Greene’s district is among the most heavily Republican in the country, and losing Trump’s support could prove a significant blow to the congresswoman.

“All I see ‘Wacky’ Marjorie do is COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN!” Trump wrote, adding that Greene’s criticism began after he showed her statewide polling that placed her at just 12% support and discouraged her from running for Senate or governor, both positions Greene had been eyeing.

According to NOTUS, Greene is discussing a presidential run in 2028, though she denied that to the publication.

“[Greene] has told many people that she is upset that I don’t return her phone calls anymore, but with 219 Congressmen/women, 53 U.S. Senators, 24 Cabinet Members, almost 200 Counties, and an otherwise normal life to lead, I can’t take a ranting Lunatic’s call every day,” Trump continued in his post.

He later called Greene a “Traitor” and a “disgrace to our GREAT REPUBLICAN PARTY!”

Greene responded on X, saying Trump had lied to her and claiming that two recent text messages about files related to child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein had “sent him over the edge,” saying it is “astonishing really how hard he’s fighting to stop the Epstein files from coming out.”

Greene is one of a small number of Republicans cosponsoring a measure to force a vote, over Republicans’ objections on files related to Epstein. Trump, an associate of Epstein, has sought to prevent the full release of those files, calling the push for further disclosure “the Epstein hoax.”

“Most Americans wish he would fight this hard to help the forgotten men and women of America who are fed up with foreign wars and foreign causes, are going broke trying to feed their families, and are losing hope of ever achieving the American dream,” Greene said. “I have supported President Trump with too much of my precious time, too much of my own money, and fought harder for him even when almost all other Republicans turned their back and denounced him. But I don’t worship or serve Donald Trump.”

In a subsequent post, Greene shared a graphic showing she has not received support from pro-Israel groups alongside another graphic comparing her “Liberty Score” to that of Trump-backed pro-Israel Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC). In the post, she wrote: “This and the Epstein files is why I’m being attacked by President Trump. It really makes you wonder what is in those files and who and what country is putting so much pressure on him?”

She also claimed that Trump’s posts are driving a wave of security threats against her.

Trump has also worked to defeat Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), another of the most vocal anti-Israel Republicans The president has endorsed retired Navy SEAL Ed Gallrein, who is challenging Massie in the GOP primary. 

On Friday, Trump called Massie a “LOSER!” in a separate Truth Social post, claiming that “the Polls have him at less than an 8% chance of winning the Election” and mocked his recent remarriage.

A group of 21 House progressives, led by Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), introduced a resolution accusing Israel of committing genocide in Gaza.

The legislation is cosponsored by Reps. Becca Balint (D-VT), Andre Carson (D-IN), Greg Casar (D-TX), Maxine Dexter (D-OR), Maxwell Frost (D-FL), Chuy Garcia (D-IL), Al Green (D-TX), Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), Hank Johnson (D-GA), Ro Khanna (D-CA), Summer Lee (D-PA), Jim McGovern (D-MA), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Mark Pocan (D-WI), Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), Delia Ramirez (D-IL), Lateefah Simon (D-CA), Nydia Velazquez (D-NY) and Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ).

Khanna, Ocasio-Cortez and Pressley are all seen as likely to seek higher office.

Dexter, notably, was elected on a generally pro-Israel platform with significant support from AIPAC’s United Democracy Project super PAC in a race against a candidate viewed as more anti-Israel, but has turned increasingly critical of the Jewish state in recent months.

Frost had previously told Jewish Insider he hesitated to use the term “genocide” himself, though he said he did not criticize others for doing so.

Casar is the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, while McGovern is the ranking member of the House Rules Committee.

Balint is the only Jewish member cosponsoring the resolution.

The resolution is backed by a slew of anti-Israel groups, including the Democratic Socialists of America, Jewish Voice for Peace, IfNotNow, the Quincy Institute, Sunrise Movement, Amnesty International, Code Pink, CAIR, American Muslims for Palestine, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee and DAWN.

The resolution asserts that “the overwhelming evidence is clear that the State of Israel has committed acts (actus reus) within the scope of the Genocide Convention against Palestinians in Gaza.”

It states that the U.S. must “prevent and punish the crime of genocide wherever it occurs,” and must therefore halt the transfer of any weapons or equipment to Israel, impose sanctions on Israel and individuals and companies involved in “facilitating the commission of genocide or incitement to commit genocide,” support efforts at the United Nations to punish Israel, cooperate with the International Criminal Court’s investigation of Israel and lift sanctions on the ICC, enforce the International Court of Justice’s decisions against Israel and ensure funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency — which was halted following findings that UNRWA employees participated in the Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas attacks.

It also states that the U.S. should “ensur[e] that individuals and corporations in the United States and within United States jurisdiction are not involved in the commission of genocide, aiding and assisting the commission of genocide, or incitement to commit genocide, and investigat[e] and prosecut[e] those who may be implicated in these crimes under international law.”

Among the various sources the resolution cites in accusing Israel of genocide is the International Association of Genocide Scholars, describing the group as the “world’s leading subject matter experts on genocide.” 

But supporters of Israel found, after the group’s vote to condemn Israel, that the association had an essentially open membership policy with no requirements of any actual subject matter expertise, beyond paying a membership fee of as little as $30.

The resolution also cites Amnesty International and other groups, which reinterpreted the legal definition of genocide in order to level that charge at Israel, as well as the United Nations Commission of Inquiry on Israel, whose members have repeatedly faced accusations of blatant antisemitism.

Michael Blake, a former New York state assemblyman and eighth-place-finishing New York City mayoral candidate, announced a primary challenge to Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY) on Wednesday focused squarely on Torres’ support for Israel and ties to AIPAC.

But Blake himself has an extensive history with AIPAC and was, at least through 2020, a vocal supporter of the Jewish state.

In his campaign announcement on X, Blake said, “I am ready to fight for you and lower your cost of living while Ritchie fights for a Genocide. I will focus on Affordable Housing and Books as Ritchie will only focus on AIPAC and Bibi,” a reference to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “I will invest in the community. Ritchie invests in Bombs.”

Blake attached a video that focuses heavily on attacking Torres’ support for Israel and the backing he has received from AIPAC, with clips accusing Torres of being “bought” by supporters of Israel and of focusing more on Israel than his own district. At one point, the video shows Torres with dollar signs over his eyes.

“In 2025, Ritchie has nearly $15 million on hand, largely from AIPAC, while many of his constituents barely have $15 to get by,” Blake states in the video. “Ritchie Torres cares more about Bibi than he cares about the Bronx. More about AIPAC than he does about your academics.”

Social media posts by Blake and others show that he was for years a frequent attendee at AIPAC events, having attended no less than 10 of the organization’s events between 2014 and 2019, and was a featured speaker at least once.

“From entrepreneurship, to political organizing, to deepening my faith as a Christian, AIPAC and AIEF [AIPAC-affiliated American Israel Education Foundation] changed my life forever,” Blake said as a speaker at AIPAC’s 2017 policy conference. “Traveling to Israel made me a better legislator, better activist, and helped me to understand that as a leader within my community and the Democratic Party, I have a responsibility to support America’s friend and ally, Israel.”

Blake traveled to Israel with AIEF and with the New York Jewish Community Relations Council.

As recently as 2020, as a Democratic National Committee vice chair, Blake insisted that the Democratic Party would continue to support Israel, saying of the party platform, “We have been attentive to the previous conversations that have happened in terms of making sure there’s not language in there that would be anti-Israel.”

In a 2020 interview with Jewish Insider, Blake — who posted a photo of Netanyahu speaking at a 2014 AIPAC event — declined to endorse Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) characterization of Netanyahu as a “reactionary racist.” And he drew parallels between his experience as a Black man in the Bronx and the experience of Israeli Jews facing terrorism.

Blake also met on various occasions with Israeli officials and diplomats and attended the 2018 Israel Day Parade in Manhattan.

The former state lawmaker made a sharp turn on Israel following the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel and the ensuing war in Gaza, accusing Israel of “genocide” weeks after Oct. 7 and calling for a ceasefire while making no mention of the Israeli hostages held by Hamas. 

He also opposed congressional legislation aimed at combating antisemitism and the censure of Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) for antisemitic and anti-Israel comments, and backed former Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY), who denied Hamas atrocities on Oct. 7.

A pro-Israel activist who requested anonymity in order to speak candidly told JI, “The pro-Israel community is surprised by his 180-degree reversal. Blake spoke at pro-Israel events and received considerable financial support from the community. Once he proclaimed to be a pro-Israel stalwart and now he has joined the ranks of the detractors.”

Blake’s campaign did not respond to questions from JI but he faced criticism and questions on X over his past AIPAC ties. In response, he claimed that he walked away from the group “before the Genocide” and after “seeing how they treated Black leaders including Pres. Obama.”

But Blake’s appearance at an AIPAC conference, and other contacts with the group, continued well after Obama’s time in office and the former president’s public clashes with the group over issues like the Iran nuclear deal.

Blake also downplayed his speech at the 2017 policy conference as having happened eight years ago, even as he continued to attend AIPAC events for years afterward. 

The return of the final, living hostages to Israel last week has reopened discussion of putting the Palestinian perpetrators of the Oct. 7, 2023, atrocities in Israel on trial.

Israeli Justice Minister Yariv Levin threw his support behind legislation to allow for the formation of a special tribunal to prosecute Hamas terrorists who are part of the Nukhba, the terrorist group’s special forces unit, on charges of genocide, which carries the death penalty.

The bill is meant to “ensure that the legal process will be run efficiently and to ensure that justice will be done and seen,” Levin said in a joint statement with the bill’s sponsors, Knesset Law, Constitution and Justice Committee Chairman Simcha Rothman of the Religious Zionist Party and Yisrael Beytenu lawmaker Yuli Malinovsky. The group plans to bring the legislation to a first vote as soon as possible and usher it through the process “at the greatest speed, with a shared aim to bring the Nukhba terrorists to justice soon.”

Levin, Rothman and Malinovsky said that the office of the Israeli state attorney, the country’s chief prosecutor, has drafted indictments against Nukhba terrorists.

They noted that during the two years since the Hamas attacks on southern Israel, the State Attorney’s Office, police and Shin Bet have interrogated the Nukhba terrorists and collected evidence “of an unprecedented scope,” including thousands of hours of video of the atrocities and of testimony. 

During that time, the Law, Constitution and Justice Committee held a series of meetings to examine possible ways to put the Nukhba terrorists on trial and ensure they are prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

“We met with the Justice Ministry once every few months,” Rothman told Jewish Insider. “Levin finally supports [the bill]. Every obstacle was standing in our way, and [Levin] didn’t make an effort to remove them. Now, there’s nothing preventing it from moving forward.”

The move toward putting Oct. 7 perpetrators on trial comes soon after the return of the living hostages, as well as weeks after a heated debate in the Knesset over instituting the death penalty for terrorists. The legislation’s explanatory portion says it is meant to “nip terrorism in the bud and create a heavy deterrent.” 

The death penalty has only been carried out once in Israel’s history — following the conviction of senior Nazi official Adolf Eichmann for crimes against the Jewish people and crimes against humanity.

The bill, which applies to terrorists broadly, not only those who participated in the Oct. 7 attacks, was proposed by members of National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir’s Otzma Yehudit Party and brought before the Knesset National Security Committee, chaired by Tzvika Foghel, also of Otzma. The Prime Minister’s Office asked Ben-Gvir to postpone the vote. 

Gal Hirsch, the coordinator for the hostages, said in the committee meeting that Ben-Gvir’s effort was potentially harmful to the ongoing discussions to secure the release of the remaining hostages. Representatives from hostage families have also pleaded with the lawmakers to stop the proceedings, concerned that the moves could endanger their loved ones.

On Monday, Ben-Gvir made an ultimatum to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that either the death penalty bill passes a first Knesset vote in the next three weeks, or his party will no longer vote with the coalition. 

“When terrorists remain alive, the terrorists outside are motivated to carry out kidnappings in order to free their Nazi brothers in future deals,” Ben-Gvir said. “If they murder a Jew, they do not stay alive.”

Rothman argued that his bill is significantly different from Ben-Gvir’s, and pointed out that he held a committee meeting the same week as the one that courted controversy, and neither Netanyahu nor Hirsch asked him to hold off.

“It’s a question of whether you want real results. [Otzma lawmakers] don’t understand what they’re dealing with. The law they want to pass [is so broad], I think it would end up giving a Jewish Israeli the death penalty first,” he remarked.

While Rothman said that having all of the living hostages home will help the Oct. 7 trials to move forward, when he asked senior defense figures over the last two years whether there was a risk to the hostages’ lives from his actions, “they said no. They said when there’s a conviction or maybe even an indictment, possibly, but just building the framework is not a risk.”

As such, Rothman said that though it may seem like a long time has passed, “the time hasn’t been a waste. A lot of material was collected and we oversaw the legislative and political decisions that needed to be made.”

Rothman and Malinovsky’s bill would establish a special tribunal for those who participated in the Oct. 7 attacks, with the proceedings made public. The legislation sets different rules for presenting evidence to protect the privacy of victims and their families, and to streamline the process of prosecuting large numbers of defendants. It also allows for non-Israeli judges to be appointed. In addition, it would establish a committee of representatives of Israel’s justice minister, defense minister and foreign minister to determine government policy as to whether to prosecute the Nukhba terrorists on genocide charges, which carry the death penalty, taking national security into consideration.

In a Knesset Law, Constitution and Justice Committee meeting on Wednesday, the first since Levin publicly supported the bill, Malinovsky said that she and Rothman “understand that it was difficult to gather evidence … and I know that law enforcement and the State Attorney’s Office overturned every stone to find evidence. [Regular] criminal justice proceedings do not have a response for the events of Oct. 7, therefore MK Rothman and I wrote this bill to regulate the jailing and prosecution of the terrorists who participated in the Oct. 7 massacre.” 

Malinovsky said that there is difficulty tying specific terrorists to specific murders, and genocide is a collective crime, by which they can be charged as a group. In cases in which there is no evidence tying a terrorist to genocide, they can be tried in a military court as illegal fighters who committed acts of terror against Israel, a crime that carries a life sentence. 

Much of the bill is focused on clear criteria for genocide charges.

“At first, the Justice Ministry said that genocide charges won’t work,” Rothman recalled earlier this week, “but today, I think they understand that they need to go there.”

The special tribunal is meant to prevent the Oct. 7 trials from getting caught up in the Israeli justice system’s significant backlog.

“It’s a lot of heavy cases that will block up the whole justice system” if the trials are in regular courts, Rothman explained. 

In addition, he said, “I don’t want a situation where a judge is with the Nukhba in the morning and in the afternoon is dealing with an Israel who stole a car. We could end up lowering the standards of defendants’ rights in all of Israel. When we authorized preventing meetings [of terrorists] with lawyers, [judges] used it for all kinds of other cases, just because they can. We’re not going to allow that.”

Rothman said that the question of appointing foreign judges to the tribunal remains open, because it may be too complex. However, he said, “bringing a major jurist from the U.S. or somewhere else can give the trials an international imprimatur.”

Malinovsky said at the committee meeting that the Oct. 7 attacks “are like nothing else in the world, and I invite anyone who has knowledge to speak. We need creative solutions, outside of the box, and therefore we need a change of attitude, especially in the Justice Ministry.” 

A longtime former board member of the International Association of Genocide Scholars criticized the group’s passage of a resolution on Monday accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza, calling the move deeply flawed and the result of a politicized process.

Sara Brown, the American Jewish Committee’s regional director in San Diego who has a Ph.D. in genocide studies, argued that “the whole premise and tenor of the resolution is deeply problematic.”

In an interview with Jewish Insider on Tuesday, Brown, who maintains her membership in IAGS, also pushed back against the narrative that most genocide scholars are accusing Israel of genocide.

The resolution passed with only 129 out of over 500 IAGS members voting, 108 in favor, 18 opposed and three abstaining. All paid members have the right to vote, and membership is not restricted to academics; its ranks include artists, activists and others interested in the field of genocide studies. As a result, some pro-Israel figures paid to join the IAGS following the resolution’s approval.

Under normal circumstances, Brown said, any member can propose a resolution, which goes before a committee for comments and feedback. Controversial or high-stakes resolutions are brought before a virtual town hall to discuss the text.

This time, when the resolution was proposed on an IAGS listserv, Brown said that she and others attempted to publish a dissent that was deleted by the moderators.

“One of the executive board members who moderates the listserv refused to publish it and said they are going to have a town hall,” Brown recalled. “Weeks passed as we waited for the town hall … I reached out to ask the president of the executive board when it would happen, and was told ‘we don’t have to hold one and we’re not going to.'”

In addition, Brown said, the resolution was posted anonymously, and the executive board refused to reveal its authorship, an unusual move that “raised red flags.” 

“It’s very telling about the biases and agenda of the leadership that they refused to host a town hall … There is no interest in having a transparent dialog and debate about such an important and damning [resolution] in terms of the reputation of the IAGS,” Brown said.

“We’re supposed to be a scholarly organization. We should value above all else transparency, cited sources, debate and diversity of opinion that strengthens us. Instead, we saw deliberate silencing of debate,” she added.

The three-page resolution claims that “the government of Israel has engaged in systematic and widespread crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide, including indiscriminate and deliberate attacks against the civilians and civilian infrastructure … in Gaza.” It also claims that Israel has engaged in “torture, arbitrary detention and sexual and reproductive violence” as well as “the deliberate deprivation of food, water, medicine and electricity essential to the survival of the population.” In addition, it claims that Israel targeted children, which constitutes genocide.

Brown said that “for that determination to be made, we would need to see documented proof of intent to destroy, in whole or in part, the Palestinian people living in Gaza. To date, we do not have that documentation. A couple of overly cited posts on social media — which are often from right-wing fringe members of the government who are not actually behind a lot of the decisions being made in Gaza — or one quote from Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu about not forgetting Amalek, are not indicative of intent to destroy.”

“What we do see,” Brown added, “is the IDF rewriting the rules of war and engagement, having, a number of times, foregone strategic advantage in order to reduce civilian casualties,” giving as an example Israel’s warnings to civilians in advance of imminent strikes and efforts to move them out of the battle zones.

The IAGS also claimed that “the International Court of Justice found in three provisional measures in the case of South Africa v. Israel … that it is plausible that Israel is committing genocide in its attack in Gaza.” 

Brown said that this is “a deeply problematic, skewed interpretation of the ICJ rulings.” The court’s decisions did not determine whether Israel committed genocide or the plausibility of such a claim, but whether South Africa had standing to petition the court to protect the Palestinians in Gaza. The court said that “the facts and circumstances … are sufficient to conclude that at least some of the rights claimed by South Africa and for which it is seeking protection are plausible.” 

Brown also took issue with the sources the IAGS cited in its decision, relying heavily on activist groups with an anti-Israel history.

“There was no original research cited in this work,” she said. “They cited Amnesty International, that had to rewrite their definition of genocide to accuse Israel. They cite [United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories] Francesca Albanese who is renowned as an antisemite called out by numerous governments. They cite Human Rights Watch, which has been known to be anti-Israel for a long time.” 

Brown noted that she wrote one of the only peer-reviewed works about the current war, in which she determined that Hamas was guilty of genocidal intent and attempted genocide on Oct. 7, 2023. 

The IAGS resolution did not come as a surprise to Brown, she said. 

After the Oct. 7 attacks, Brown said that while the IAGS made a statement, it had a “noted lack of outrage, passion or empathy. I wish [the IAGS leadership] applied a fraction of the concern [for Gazans] to the civilians mass-raped, mass-murdered and brutally tortured, and hundreds kidnapped on and after Oct. 7. I think the initial silence was deafening. That was my first indication that perhaps all would not be well.”

Brown recounted that “in conversations with members of the executive board, dehumanizing rhetoric was used to describe IDF soldiers and their strong social media presence indicated bias against Israel.”

Asked about the argument that genocide studies, as a field, minimizes the uniqueness of the Holocaust, Brown, whose doctoral thesis was about the genocide in Rwanda, said that “there is definitely a schism among some in the Holocaust field and genocide studies more broadly.”

The IAGS has long included “pressure groups that want to advance the idea that they have experienced a genocide, and it’s become a broad field. … You can see how it has been manipulated for nefarious results,” she said.

Democratic Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner is putting anti-AIPAC and anti-Israel messaging front-and-center in fundraising appeals he’s circulating on social media.

Platner is currently running a series of Facebook and Instagram advertisements soliciting donations for his campaign that highlight his opposition to AIPAC and accuse Israel of committing genocide. The pitches indicate that Platner is treating the issue as central to rallying support for his campaign.

“My opponent has already been endorsed by AIPAC — an endorsement I will never get. Because what is happening right now in Gaza is a genocide,” Platner says in one direct-to-camera video ad focused specifically on his opposition to AIPAC. “I need your help because we refuse to take money from AIPAC, and we refuse to take money from the billionaires who support it.”

Every one of the eight active ads that Platner is running on Facebook and Instagram, according to Meta’s political advertising library tool, includes a repudiation of AIPAC, and around half accuse Israel of genocide. In most of Platner’s other ads, that language comes alongside comments on a range of other issues.

Some of the written advertisements being circulated by Platner’s campaign on Facebook and Instagram include language such as “there is a genocide happening in Palestine,” “why are we funding Netanyau’s genocide in Palestine?” and “I won’t kowtow to AIPAC or billionaires.” 

Platner’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment.

Platner, in the days since launching his campaign, has been repeatedly and vocally critical of Israel and of AIPAC, including calling the group “weird.”

Platner’s potential general election opponent, Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) has been a vocal supporter of Israel in the Senate, as chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee. It’s not clear yet how Platner’s stance on Israel will play in the election, but Collins is already attacking him for his views. 

The candidate’s advocacy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict appears to date back to his high school days — a page from his yearbook that Platner’s campaign shared on X shows him holding a sign that appears to read “Free Kosovo Chechnya Kashmir Palestine Kurdistan Tibet.”

Two leading Jewish groups aimed at countering antisemitism, along with several faculty, blasted the American Association of University Professors for moving “even further away from its mission” after its president said in a recent interview that the United States should not send defensive weapons to Israel amid its war against Hamas, which he called a genocide in Gaza. 

“Such rhetoric is deeply troubling and fuels hostility against Jewish and Zionist individuals in academic spaces and beyond,” the Anti-Defamation League and the Academic Engagement Network said Thursday in a joint statement to Jewish Insider, in response to comments made by Todd Wolfson, the president of AAUP, to Inside Higher Ed on Tuesday. 

“We believe strongly that no weapons should be sent to Israel, at all. Not defensive or offensive, nothing,” Wolfson said. “We need to stand up for academic freedom, for freedom of speech, for freedom of assembly for our students so they can protest the war — the genocide, excuse me — that’s taking place in Gaza,” he continued. 

The ADL/AEN statement said that “the role of AAUP leadership should be to encourage robust study and rigorous debate of such contentious issues — not to plant the organization firmly on one political side, thereby silencing dissent and undermining the very academic freedom it purports to defend. With the leadership’s latest move to isolate Jewish and Zionist faculty, the AAUP has moved even further away from its mission.” 

Raeefa Shams, AEN’s director of communications, told JI that there has been a “pattern of escalating extreme political stances” among AAUP leadership since the Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attacks. “So [Wolfson’s statement] wasn’t surprising, but it doesn’t mean that it’s normal,” said Shams. In April, the AAUP partnered with anti-Israel groups including Jewish Voice for Peace and Faculty and Staff for Justice in Palestine to co-sponsor a National Day of Action. 

Faculty who are longtime members of the association told JI that Wolfson’s latest remark further enforces a climate where Jewish and Zionist members no longer feel represented or protected within the association.

Jeffrey Podoshen, a professor in the business department at Franklin & Marshall College, where he formerly served as AAUP chapter president, has suspended contributing dues to the association “as the organization has become much more politicized over the past number of years” in relation to Israel. 

“The AAUP unfortunately seems to have found a singular fixation on Israel as of late, and specifically under Wolfson’s leadership,” said Podoshen. “This is problematic. The AAUP has become more of an organization that is interested in politics than it is its core mission when it comes to university professorships. The AAUP has been on a downward spiral and it’s not something that I want to be a part of, which is a shame.” 

Gregory Brown, a professor of history at University of Nevada, Las Vegas and former president of the Nevada state conference of AAUP, views it worthwhile to remain an AAUP member because of its push for campus values such as academic freedom. But in the past, statements from association leaders went through a vetting process including a review by committees, which gave them “credibility,” Brown said. 

“In that sense, I am quite surprised insofar as the statements that have been coming out are not about any of the reasons people join the AAUP,” Brown continued. “Those statements have not been studied, vetted and revised. They appear to be statements that come from just the leadership, maybe just one leader. It is really contrary to what has been the key to the AAUP’s success in advocating for higher education, faculty and students.”  

Wolfson, who was elected president in June 2024 and is on leave from his position as a Rutgers University associate professor of journalism and media studies until 2027, has a history of making hostile comments towards Israel. 

In response to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s condemnation of the anti-Israel encampments and building occupations that overtook dozens of campuses around the U.S. in the spring of 2024, Wolfson wrote on X that Netanyahu is a “fascist” who has “no right to talk about peaceful protests in the U.S. as he murders thousands in Gaza.” In July 2024, Wolfson tweeted a petition urging the New Jersey Senate to vote against adopting the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism. “Anti-Zionism is not antisemitism,” he wrote. 

Under Wolfson’s leadership, AAUP dropped its longtime opposition to academic boycotts in August 2024. Although the policy does not mention Israel, the move led to faculty members on several campuses implementing non-official boycotts of Israel by not assigning articles written by Israeli scholars, refusing to invite Israeli academics to conferences and declining to write study abroad letters for students wishing to spend a semester in Israel. 

The head of the American Association of University Professors said in a recent interview that the United States should not send defensive weapons to Israel amid its war against Hamas, which he called a genocide in Gaza. 

“We believe strongly that no weapons should be sent to Israel, at all. Not defensive or offensive, nothing,” Todd Wolfson, the president of AAUP, told Inside Higher Ed. 

“First and foremost, our job is to safeguard ourselves at home and to set a vision that aligns with what we’re trying to do in the United States,” Wolfson, who was elected president in June 2024, continued. “We need to stand up for academic freedom, for freedom of speech, for freedom of assembly for our students so they can protest the war — the genocide, excuse me — that’s taking place in Gaza.”

Wolfson, who is on leave from his position as a Rutgers University associate professor of journalism and media studies until 2027, has a history of making hostile comments towards Israel. 

In response to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s condemnation of the anti-Israel encampments and building occupations that overtook dozens of campuses around the U.S. in the spring of 2024, Wolfson wrote on X that Netanyahu is a “fascist” who has “no right to talk about peaceful protests in the U.S. as he murders thousands in Gaza.” In July 2024, Wolfson tweeted a petition urging the New Jersey Senate to vote against adopting the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism. “Anti-Zionism is not antisemitism,” he wrote. 

Under Wolfson’s leadership, AAUP dropped its longtime opposition to academic boycotts in August 2024. Although the policy does not mention Israel, the move led to faculty members on several campuses implementing non-official boycotts of Israel by not assigning articles written by Israeli scholars, refusing to invite Israeli academics to conferences and declining to write study abroad letters for students wishing to spend a semester in Israel. 

After a video surfaced last week of Rep. Katherine Clark (D-MA), the House minority whip, referring to Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide, Clark walked back the remark on Monday — and maintained her endorsement from AIPAC amid the controversy, a spokesperson for the group told Jewish Insider. 

“Last week, while attending an event in my district, I repeated the word ‘genocide’ in response to a question,” Clark told the Jewish News Syndicate on Monday. “I want to be clear that I am not accusing Israel of genocide. … We all need to work with urgency to bring the remaining hostages home, surge aid to Palestinians and oppose their involuntary relocation, remove Hamas from power and end the war.” 

AIPAC spokesperson Marshall Wittmann told JI on Monday that the organization will stick by Clark, the second highest-ranked Democrat in the House.

“We appreciate that the congresswoman clarified her remarks, as Israel is fighting a just and moral war against a barbaric terrorist enemy. Our endorsement is unchanged and based upon her long standing support for the U.S.-Israel relationship,” Wittmann said. 

In a video from an event hosted on Thursday by the Friends Committee on National Legislation in Cambridge, Mass., Clark made a passing reference to Israel’s actions in Gaza. “We each have to continue to have an open heart about how we do this, how we do it effectively, and how we take action in time to make a difference, whether that is stopping the starvation and genocide and destruction of Gaza, or whether that means we are working together to stop the redistricting that is going on, taking away the vote from people in order to retain power,” said Clark.

Rep. Katherine Clark (D-MA), who serves as the House Democratic whip, the No. 2 Democratic leader in the chamber, described the war in Gaza as a “genocide” in an event this week, based on video of the event that has been shared online.

“We each have to continue to have an open heart about how we do this, how we do it effectively, and how we take action in time to make a difference, whether that is stopping the starvation and genocide and destruction of Gaza, or whether that means we are working together to stop the redistricting that is going on, taking away the vote from people in order to retain power,” Clark said in a brief clip from an event that was first reported by Axios. 

Clark spokesperson Joy Lee has said in a statement provided to multiple outlets that Clark’s “position on the war has not changed,” including that she supports a permanent ceasefire, the return of all hostages and an increase of aid to Gaza.

“It should not be controversial to say that Israeli children did not deserve to be kidnapped and murdered by Hamas, nor should it be controversial to say that Palestinian children, who bear no responsibility for Hamas’ atrocities, do not deserve to be killed by war or starvation,” Lee’s statement reads. “A secure future for Israeli and Palestinian children demands a real two-state solution and a permanent end to efforts to deny their rights to exist.”

Clark’s office did not respond to a request for comment seeking further clarity.

Lee told The Boston Globe that Clark’s comments came in response to protesters at the event. The brief clip shared online does not include the context of Clark’s remarks.

Only a small number of far-left and far-right lawmakers have described the situation in Gaza as a genocide, and none who serve in leadership roles in Congress.

Clark was speaking at an event organized by the Friends Committee on National Legislation, a lobbying group of the Quaker movement, which has been heavily critical of Israel and supported efforts in the Senate to block arms sales to Israel.

Clark’s office did not respond to a question about whether she supports efforts to block some or all weapons sales.

The group’s criticism of Israel predates the war in Gaza, and it lobbied in favor of the Iran nuclear deal. It also advocates more broadly against militarization generally, including pushing for shrinking military spending.

Clark has been endorsed by AIPAC and is featured alongside each of the other top House leaders on the group’s PAC website.

Two political activists closely affiliated with Omar Fateh, a far-left Minnesota state senator who is now running for mayor of Minneapolis, have expressed a range of extreme views on the Hamas terror attacks of Oct. 7, 2023, endorsing the violence as a justified act of resistance and accusing Israel of initiating the war in Gaza, among other inflammatory comments.

Their rhetoric could fuel concerns among local Jewish leaders who sounded alarms about Fateh’s close alliances with anti-Israel activists after he won the state Democratic Party endorsement last month over Jacob Frey, the incumbent seeking a third and final term. Fateh, a 35-year-old democratic socialist whose campaign has recently drawn comparisons to New York City Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani, has likewise been a staunch critic of Israel, calling its conduct in Gaza a genocide and pushing for a ceasefire 10 days after Hamas’ attack.

In a mayoral candidate questionnaire solicited by the Twin Cities chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America — which endorsed his bid after facing widespread criticism over its response to the Oct. 7 attack — Fateh also backed the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement targeting Israel, according to portions of the form reviewed by Jewish Insider. 

He additionally pledged, without explanation, to “refrain from any and all affiliation” with what the DSA questionnaire dismissed as “Zionist lobby groups,” citing AIPAC, J Street, Christians United for Israel and, most notably, the Jewish Community Relations Council, a nonpartisan organization that typically engages with a diverse group of elected officials in both parties. The local JCRC — which represents the Jewish community to Minneapolis government officials — has voiced reservations about its ability to interact with Fateh if he is elected, in light of his statements on Israel.

But some of Fateh’s campaign staffers have gone significantly further than the state legislator, raising questions over his tolerance for incendiary language on a sensitive issue that has stoked growing internal tensions in the state party and could possibly inflect an increasingly bitter mayoral race in the lead-up to November.

In a series of now-deleted social media posts, for instance, Fateh’s communications manager, Anya Smith-Kooiman stated that Israel “does not have a ‘right’ to exist” and “must be dismantled,” while amplifying comments dismissing widespread reports of sexual violence on Oct. 7 as “propaganda” and hailing the attacks as a form of “resistance” that succeeded where the peace process had failed.

Elsewhere, Smith-Kooiman, who joined Fateh’s campaign in December, according to her LinkedIn page, declared a month after the Oct. 7 attacks that she did “not give a flying f**k about Hamas,” claiming “the root of the problem is a colonial government segregating, ethnically cleaning, murdering Palestinians, stealing their land with impunity and not expecting a resistance group to violently fight back.”

“Colonial and oppressive regimes love to call everyone but themselves a terrorist,” she continued in her November 2023 post to X, now removed from her profile. “Israeli terrorism created Hamas and the cycle will go on and on until Israel, Britain and the U.S. are held accountable for their violence and thievery. Let’s address root causes: imperialism.”

More recently, Smith-Kooiman, in a June social media post, advocated for the release of what she called “all Palestinian hostages,” equating prisoners held in Israel with the captives who were kidnapped by Hamas on Oct. 7.

In addition to Smith-Kooiman, another activist with ties to Fateh’s mayoral bid, David Gilbert-Pederson, has unreservedly praised the Oct. 7 attack, which he has characterized as a heroic feat of defiance against “imperial domination.”

Speaking on a panel discussion about “connecting movements for collective liberation” in December 2023, Gilbert-Pederson — who has been listed as a Fateh campaign staffer in filings — celebrated “what happened collectively for the people of Palestine on Oct. 7,” saying it was not his place to cast judgment on the violence. 

“We as Americans, people who live in the imperial core, our job is to stand in unconditional solidarity with those resisting oppression,” Gilbert-Pederson, a close ally of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), explained in his panel remarks. “Unconditional solidarity does not mean that we get to say, ‘Oh, this tactic you did, we don’t really like that,’ or, ‘We agree with you, but I think that some of your methods are too extreme.’ That’s not what unconditional solidarity means.”

“We live in the core of the empire,” he said, “so it is our job to demand that our government divest from Israel, divest from the colonial project, and start to free the U.S. as well.”

Broadly summarizing his approach, he argued that “all resistance to that kind of imperial domination is justified.”

Fateh’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment on Wednesday about Gilbert-Pederson and Smith-Kooiman, both of whom have previously faced some scrutiny for their rhetoric on Israel and Oct. 7, or his answers to the DSA’s questionnaire.

For his part, Frey, a Jewish Democrat, has been outspoken against rising antisemitism in the wake of Hamas’ attacks. The mayor, 44, has clashed with the City Council over anti-Israel resolutions he has dismissed as one-sided, even as he has condemned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his government’s handling of the ongoing war in Gaza.

The Young Democrats of America, a leading youth advocacy group representing party members under the age of 36, approved a new platform at its recent national convention accusing Israel of “genocide” in Gaza, raising long-simmering internal tensions over Middle East policy.

The organization, whose biennial convention concluded in Philadelphia on Saturday, narrowly passed a new amendment expressing opposition to the “Israeli government’s ongoing genocide in Gaza, its occupation of the West Bank, and its denial of civil and political rights on an equal basis in the territories it militarily occupies,” according to an updated foreign policy plank reviewed by Jewish Insider.

The change, which added the “genocide” reference to an existing amendment, was proposed “to reflect current events and align with present-day actions,” according to a platform committee document from the convention.

Other efforts to amend YDA’s Middle East policy plank, which ultimately failed to be adopted, included striking a line endorsing Israel’s “right to exist as a Jewish democratic state,” screenshots shared with JI show. Meanwhile, some delegates also proposed removing language condemning “the oppression of the Iranian government” and backing “anti-regime protests,” among other suggested changes that were met with alarm by Jewish members who are now weighing a collective response.

Even as those proposals were rejected, that such changes were suggested at all “presents a scary reality,” one member of YDA’s Jewish caucus told JI after the convention.

The Jewish caucus declined to comment on the new platform as it decides “how to move forward,” it told JI on Monday.

YDA’s decision to formally describe Israel’s conduct in Gaza as a genocide more broadly underscores how the party is moving away from support for Israel as Democrats show declining sympathy for the Jewish state, according to polls.

The group also approved a resolution at its convention that voiced support for student protests “against U.S. complicity” in what it called the “Israeli government’s genocidal actions in Gaza,” according to a document shared with JI.

YDA, which claims more than 24,000 members, has grappled with internal divisions over its approach to Israel and antisemitism in the aftermath of Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, terror attacks. It faced pushback from Jewish caucus members, for instance, who criticized the group’s denunciation of President Joe Biden for condemning violence at campus anti-Israel protests.

YDA did not respond to a request for comment on Monday.

Google cofounder Sergey Brin recently panned the use of the term “genocide” to describe Israel’s war against Hamas, describing it as “deeply offensive” to Jewish people “who have suffered actual genocides.”

Brin made the comment in an internal employee chat forum, according to The Washington Post, amid a debate over a new U.N. report that accused corporate entities, including Google, of profiting from “Israel’s economy of illegal occupation, apartheid and now, genocide.”

In the Google DeepMind staff forum, screenshots of which were viewed by the Post, Brin wrote, “With all due respect, throwing around the term genocide in relation to Gaza is deeply offensive to many Jewish people who have suffered actual genocides. I would also be careful citing transparently antisemitic organizations like the UN in relation to these issues.” 

The U.N. report was authored by U.N. special rapporteur Francesca Albanese, who has faced ongoing accusations of antisemitism from U.S. officials and lawmakers who have called for her to be removed from her position. 

Vice President JD Vance defended Israel against an accusation of genocide from podcaster Theo Von on Saturday, but said “this whole debate” around the Israel-Hamas war “has caused us to lose our humanity.”

Speaking on the comedian’s podcast, Vance called the images coming out of Gaza “very heartbreaking” and said the administration is trying to “solve two problems here.” The first, he said, is that “you’ve got innocent people, innocent Palestinians and innocent Israeli hostages, by the way, who are like caught up in this terrible violence that’s happening as we speak. OK? And we’re trying to get as much aid and as much support into people as humanly possible.”

The second, Vance said, is that “Israel’s attacked by this terrible terrorist organization … So I think what we’re trying to do in the Trump administration with that situation is to get to a peaceful resolution.” 

He laid out his vision of that resolution: “You’ve got to give Israel confidence that Hamas is never going to attack them and kill a bunch of civilians. And then you’ve got to get as much aid and support into these innocent Palestinians as possible, because in some ways, they’re caught in the middle of this thing too.”

Vance opined that “one thing that I don’t love about the whole Israel-Palestinian debate is, I think it kind of degrades our humanity a little bit. Because I’ve seen people on the left, mostly on the left, who will … completely ignore that all these innocent Israelis were killed in this terrorist attack. And you have some people, usually on the right, who will completely ignore that there are, like, kids who are caught up in this violence.” He continued, “And I think it’s why the president has been — you know, I call him the president of peace — it’s why he cares about solving this problem. Because the longer this goes on, the more suffering, the more death. So we’re trying to solve it as much as we can.”

Vance described Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff as “a Jewish guy, very pro-Israel. He’s done more to try to bring this conflict to a close than anybody. And you sometimes have people who say that they’re pro-Israel who attack Steve for not being pro-Israel enough. And I think it’s totally bogus. I see this guy operate every single day. … He’s a Jewish guy who believes in the purpose of the State of Israel. He also is a guy with a heart who’s trying to prevent the killing. … When I talk about, ‘this whole debate has caused us to lose our humanity,’ I think of the people who are constantly going after Steve.”

Von characterized the conflict as a genocide, saying, “We’re seeing all these videos of people, like, picking up pieces of their children and  it’s the sickest thing I think that’s ever been televised. … It feels like a massacre, and it feels like, you know, I’ve called it a genocide.” Von said the U.S. is “complicit” in the conflict “because we help fund military stuff, you know, and that’s where it’s, like, as a regular guy, you’re like, ‘Well, I’m paying these taxes, and they’re going towards this.’”

“Do I think it’s a genocide? No,” Vance replied. “Because I don’t think that the Israelis are purposely trying to go in and murder every Palestinian. I don’t think that’s what they’re doing. I think they got hit hard. And I think they’re trying to sort of destroy this terrorist organization. And war is hell, and that is true.”

But Vance criticized some on the right for a lack of empathy for Palestinians: “I mean, I’ve seen people on my side of the political aisle … who will see these videos of these innocent Palestinian kids and say, ‘Oh, well, they had it coming to them.’ No, no. If you have a soul, your heart should break when you see a little kid who’s suffering, which is why we have the policy that we have, which is we’re trying to stop, eliminate the conflict, eliminate the source of the conflict, so that we can actually bring some peace and some some humanitarian assistance in to people.”