A group of Democratic lawmakers is launching a political action committee to support candidates who have prioritized tackling antisemitism, alongside standing up against other forms of hate. 

Reps. Greg Landsman (D-OH), Laura Friedman (D-CA) and Ted Lieu (D-CA) will be chairing the committee, called the Alliance Against Antisemitism PAC. The PAC filed a statement of organization with the Federal Election Commission in October.

“We want to celebrate and lift up those leaders who are unapologetically going to fight back against hate in all of its forms, including antisemitism. Sometimes antisemitism gets lost,” Landsman told Jewish Insider on Thursday. “This is our effort to root it out on our side, and I think it’s going to have an enormous impact.”

The idea of a PAC focused solely on a candidate’s stance on antisemitism is new, and a contrast from political action committees devoted to advancing pro-Israel candidates.

“I think that an individual could have a wide variety of opinions about the conflict in Israel, for instance, and still be very effectively standing up against antisemitism,” said Friedman. “Also, by extension, someone who, let’s say, is very pro-Israel, is not necessarily taking a big stand against antisemitism.”

That doesn’t mean a candidate’s approach to Israel is irrelevant. Both Landsman and Friedman described the need to target instances when criticism of Israel crosses a line into antisemitism.

“I personally believe that denying that the Jewish people have or deserve a homeland — that can have antisemitic roots to it,” said Friedman. 

“I think there is some misunderstanding around what is and isn’t antisemitic, and what does lead to a growing misunderstanding of Jewish people and a growing anger towards Jewish people, and it’s really important for us to support those candidates that are clarifying all of this,” Landsman explained. “There has been a lot of demonizing and othering of Jews, particularly Jews who believe in Jewish self-determination and statehood. I think it’s really important that we clarify that for folks.” 

The lawmakers’ goal is to start making endorsements and spending early next year, before congressional primaries begin. Landsman and Friedman declined to share who the PAC is considering endorsing, whether it will support only incumbent candidates versus new candidates and if it would challenge an incumbent deemed insufficiently supportive of measures to combat antisemitism. 

Nor is there a scorecard the group is using to determine whether to support a candidate; there are not particular stances candidates need to have taken in order to earn the endorsement of the Alliance Against Antisemitism PAC.

“We have not talked about any kind of legislative litmus test,” said Friedman, though Landsman added that passing the long-stalled Antisemitism Awareness Act is a priority for the group. 

“That bill should have been passed a long time ago,” he said.

The PAC will only support Democratic candidates. The chairs are looking at candidates whose stance against antisemitism is coupled with action against other forms of hate. 

“It can’t just be the one issue, because, personally, the solution to this is to bring other marginalized groups into an understanding of what antisemitism is, and to be our allies on this,” said Friedman. “There are people who have stood up against antisemitism who have been absolutely hateful when it comes to the LGBT community. Those are not the kind of people we’re looking for.”

Landsman said that his party is adept at fighting hate, but that antisemitism does not always get included in the litany of biases Democrats want to root out. 

“Sometimes we, on this side of the aisle, stand up for everybody, but we’re not as clear-eyed about Jews and Jew hate, and that needs to end,” Landsman explained.

A spokesperson for Lieu did not respond to a request for comment.

One of the defining characteristics of our age is the utter lack of institutional gatekeepers and red lines against hate in our politics and culture. Extremist rhetoric, antisemitism, racism and approval of political violence are all becoming commonplace in our discourse, to the point where Americans have become numb to the crazy. 

Just take a look at the headlines over the last month of scandals that have captured national attention — and would have been unthinkable not long ago. 

1. Paul Ingrassia, President Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the Office of Special Counsel, withdrew himself from consideration yesterday after belated backlash over his history of racist and antisemitic comments — including a recently revealed text message chain where he said he has a “Nazi streak.” We reported on Ingrassia’s extremist record in May, revealing a string of antisemitic and racist public social media posts, including this shocking comment on X days after Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, terror attack: “I think we could all admit at this stage that Israel/Palestine, much like Ukraine before it, and BLM before that, and covid/vaccine before that, was yet another psyop.”

Ingrassia also has been an ally of Nick Fuentes, a virulently antisemitic podcast host and far-right influencer who has long trafficked in Holocaust denial. He attended a rally in 2024 for Fuentes, and in 2023 defended Fuentes after he was banned from Twitter.

Ample documentation of Ingrassia’s bigotry didn’t stunt his nomination, though the new shocking revelations from the private text chain caused key Republicans — most notably, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) and Sens. Ron Johnson (R-WI), Rick Scott (R-FL) and James Lankford (R-OK) — to withdraw their support and end his chances of getting confirmed.  

But the fact that he got as close as he did to receiving a hearing for the plum role shows just how much antisemitism is becoming normalized.

2. Graham Platner, the embattled far-left candidate in Maine’s Senate race, already under scrutiny over social media posts declaring himself a communist and calling the police “bastards,” acknowledged he has a skull-and-crossbones tattoo on his chest that his just-departed political director characterized as “anti-Semitic.” A former acquaintance of Platner’s said he called the tattoo “my Totenkopf,” referring to a symbol adopted by a Nazi SS unit.

Platner is facing Maine Gov. Janet Mills, the favorite of the party establishment (for good reason) in the Democratic Senate primary. Platner has been endorsed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), praised by several progressive senators and backed by a number of leading labor unions, including the UAW.

Despite Platner’s remarkable baggage and Nazi-themed tattoo, Sanders still is standing behind him. ”I personally think he is an excellent candidate. We don’t have enough candidates in this country who are prepared to take on the powers that be and fight for the working class,” Sanders said Tuesday, when pressed by reporters about the tattoo allegations.

3. A Young Republicans group chat from this year, with 2,900 pages of comments leaked to Politico, was filled with racist and antisemitic texts, with participants including elected lawmakers and up-and-coming professionals in GOP politics. Peter Giunta, a Young Republicans official, joked “I love Hitler” in the chat and said everyone who voted against him for a leadership position “is going to the gas chamber.” Joe Maligno, the general counsel for the New York Young Republicans, later responded: “Can we fix the showers? Gas chambers don’t fit the Hitler aesthetic.”

Politico characterized the group conversations as featuring a “dynamic of easy racism and casual cruelty” that played out in “often dark, vivid fashion” — and noted “the love of Nazis within their party’s right wing” as a common theme of the discourse. The chat included the N-word a dozen times.

But while many Republicans quickly spoke out against the unadulterated hate in the conversation, Vice President JD Vance downplayed the episode as young people “telling stupid jokes.” “I refuse to join the pearl clutching,” Vance said on X, arguing the private conversation was less significant than the scandal involving Jay Jones, the Virginia Democratic attorney general nominee who sent texts wishing political violence against a GOP colleague and his family.

4. Jay Jones’ text messages in 2021 saying his GOP colleague, former House Speaker Todd Gilbert deserved to be killed and calling Gilbert’s children “little fascists” shocked the political world — and upended a race in which Democrats were initially favored. The comments were especially shocking amid a rise in political violence, coming after the assassination of conservative pundit Charlie Kirk and the attempted killing of Trump in the last two years. 

But while many Democrats condemned the comments, no prominent members of the party withdrew their endorsement of the nominee. Even as polls show a small but critical mass of persuadable voters have switched their support to GOP Attorney General Jason Miyares, Jones has maintained near-universal partisan support. 

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA), reflecting the general Democratic sentiment in the state, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press”: “Those texts, private texts with a colleague, cannot be defended. They cannot be defended. But Jay Jones has apologized earnestly,” Kaine said. 

***

All of these recent episodes are bad enough on their own. But taken together, they are indicative of a deeper problem in our culture. It’s a telling sign of the times that so many political leaders have instinctively rallied around the partisan flag instead of speaking out with the moral clarity that, not long ago, came naturally for them. 

To be sure, there have been some pockets of political principle, mixed in with a smattering of self-interest. The opposition of several key Senate Republicans to Ingrassia’s nomination cut short his political aspirations, at least for now. Former Rep. Abigail Spanberger, the Democratic nominee for Virginia governor, hasn’t affirmed her endorsement for Jay Jones even as she won’t distance herself from him, either. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) endorsed Mills’ candidacy, shortly after news of Platner’s tattoos was revealed. 

But these are the exceptions to the rule, and the half-hearted nature of the distancing underscores how difficult taking on a radicalized base is in our polarized political world. 

This is the type of environment in which antisemitism is thriving — a nihilistic body politic with no rules, standards or expectations for respectable behavior. And it’s as much a demand-side problem, with voters growing numb and desensitized towards growing extremism, as it is about the supply of politicians catering to their constituents. Until Americans put their principles ahead of partisanship, we’re likely to see this dynamic continue to worsen.

New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft’s Foundation to Combat Antisemitism is rebranding under the name Blue Square Alliance Against Hate and launching a new advertisement focused on antisemitism that’s slated to debut on “Sunday Night Football” this weekend, Jewish Insider has learned. 

The rebranded group, whose blue square pins have become a ubiquitous symbol in the fight against antisemitism, is airing the “Sunday Night Football” ad as part of a $10 million media campaign designed to redouble awareness of the steep rise of anti-Jewish hate.

The new ad campaign, titled “When There Are No Words,” will be airing on one of the most watched shows on broadcast television — during a game between the AFC champion Kansas City Chiefs and Detroit Lions. Taylor Swift, engaged to Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce, is also expected to be in attendance and to draw her own fans to the broadcast, expanding the audience for the advertisement’s debut.

“What do you say when a Jewish boy is kicked on a New York city sidewalk?” a voice asks as the 30-second commercial begins. “What do you say when a Holocaust survivor is firebombed in the streets of Colorado? What do you say when one in three Jewish Americans were victims of hate last year? When there are no words, there’s still a symbol to show you care. The blue square.” 

The name change and advertisement campaign — which will be supplemented by billboards and social media posts — are an extension to the foundation’s “Blue Square” campaign, which launched in March 2023, aiming to turn the blue square into the symbol for Jewish solidarity and opposition to hatred against Jewish people. The organization has since debuted a blue square pin and bracelet for allies against Jewish hate to wear publicly. 

“This campaign is laser-focused on building recognition and appreciation for what the Blue Square represents and the importance it has in cultivating allies against antisemitism,” Adam Katz, the organization’s newly minted president, told Jewish Insider. 

Katz said a primary goal of the campaign — and the organization overall — is “to awaken people” to antisemitism, particularly to those outside of the Jewish community. While the foundation is not maintaining  “antisemitism” in its name, it spotlights in its commercial the rate of antisemitic incidents that have spiked around the U.S. in the aftermath of Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023 terrorist attacks in Israel. That focus on violence against Jews is distinct from some of its previous, high-profile ads. 

“[The name change] is meant to be inviting and bring people in and also not to feel off-putting to someone who is not part of the Jewish community but wants to participate — that’s who our target audience is, the 47% of Americans who are apathetic on the topic of antisemitism. They’re not doing anything of substance either positive or negative. This is about reaching them,” Katz said.

“The purpose of it is to raise broader cultural awareness about the magnitude and severity of antisemitism. I wish every person in this country knew [about the shooting of Israeli Embassy staffers] in D.C. in May or knew about [the firebombing at a walk advocating for the release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas] in Boulder a few weeks later. Even more than that, I wish they knew about the smaller but much more frequent transgressions that take place every day.” 

Most recently, the organization’s 30-second commercial titled “No Reason to Hate,” sparked criticism from some Jewish activists for not focusing on — or even mentioning — antisemitism when it ran during the Super Bowl earlier this year. The ad featured rapper Snoop Dogg and NFL legend Tom Brady exchanging deliberately vague insults. 

“The challenge is that we just can’t explain the complexity of Judaism or antisemitism in a 30-second ad. But what we can do is invite Americans into a conversation about something they do have experience with: hate,” Kraft told JI at the time.

But Katz, who in May was tapped to lead the organization, said that the group is trying something different now to ensure that awareness of rising antisemitism is widespread, while still attempting to appeal to a wide audience. “It’s different from our other television work in that it’s a little bit more emotionally raw and jarring,” he said. “We need the wake up call.”

“Our mission of ultimately creating allies against antisemitism has not changed,” Katz told JI. “That’s why it was so important with this campaign and future campaigns to make antisemitism as prominent as it should be.” 

“We’re trying to bring people in with a low-barrier-to-entry activity. That’s what digitally sharing the blue square is. When there are no words, at a minimum, you can show your support with a blue square.”

When Joe Biden announced his presidential campaign in 2019, he stated explicitly, in a slickly edited campaign video, that one of the issues motivating him to reenter politics was fighting antisemitism and hate. He specifically mentioned the violent Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Va., in 2017 and the white nationalist protesters who were “chanting the same antisemitic bile heard across Europe in the ‘30s.”

One of Biden’s former high-level aides pointed out to Jewish Insider how different that rhetoric was from the position staked out by Zohran Mamdani, the upstart New York assemblyman who won a surprise victory in the New York City mayoral Democratic primary on Tuesday.

In the closing days of the campaign, Mamdani, who began his activism journey as a Students for Justice in Palestine leader at Bowdoin College, defended the term “globalize the intifada” as an expression of Palestinian rights. Mamdani’s defense of the phrase was strongly criticized by Jewish groups across the ideological spectrum, who view the phrase as a call to violence. While Mamdani has pledged to keep Jewish New Yorkers safe, he has not acknowledged their concerns about his invocation of a phrase tied to a violent, yearslong Palestinian uprising. 

“Biden was elected running a campaign in 2020 premised on combating antisemitism. That was the animating feature that got him into the race. So the politics of this have really moved,” said the former White House official. “This is all about language and people using their microphones, and the fact that someone could feel empowered to double down on these ideas and win a mayoral race in New York City, that doesn’t happen by accident. It takes years of moving the goalposts on this language, on what it means to be antisemitic in America in 2025.”

This Biden administration staffer, who requested anonymity for fear of professional backlash, is one of many Jewish Democrats questioning where their party is heading after a dynamic young socialist with radical anti-Israel politics is on track to become mayor of the largest city in America, which has the largest Jewish population outside of Israel. Coupled with Democrats’ reluctance to offer support for President Donald Trump’s targeted strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, which drew support from major Jewish groups, Mamdani’s ascension has some pro-Israel Democrats concerned about the future of their party.

Put more bluntly by another senior Biden administration official: “I feel like a person without a party,” they told JI. 

Those two voices, who served at high levels of the Biden White House, are part of a small cadre of disillusioned former Biden staffers who want to see a more vocally pro-Israel tack from the Democratic Party’s current leaders, although they aren’t yet willing to say so publicly with their names attached. But their frustration represents a simmering undercurrent of concern among Jewish Democrats that has started to spill into the open after Mamdani’s victory.

Lawrence Summers, an economist who served as treasury secretary under President Bill Clinton and director of the National Economic Council under President Barack Obama, said in a post on X that he is “profoundly alarmed” about the future of the Democratic Party and the country “by yesterday’s NYC anointment of a candidate who failed to disavow a ‘globalize the intifada’ slogan and advocated Trotskyite economic policies.” 

Some prominent Jewish Democrats acknowledged Mamdani’s shortcomings but tempered that concern by noting that voters were likely drawn in by his economic messaging, not his anti-Israel stance, and by the presence of a scandal-plagued rival in Andrew Cuomo, who ran a lackluster campaign.

“I think it is very disheartening that he was not able to say the phrase ‘globalize the intifada’ feels very threatening to Jews. I find that very distressing, but I don’t think that that’s the issue that the majority of New Yorkers were voting on,” said former Rep. Kathy Manning (D-NC), the board chair of Democratic Majority for Israel. “I don’t see it as a referendum on, people don’t care about antisemitism.”

Halie Soifer, CEO of the Jewish Democratic Council of America, expressed concern that New York Democrats elected a candidate “whose views on Israel deeply concern many American Jews.” But, she argued, “Democratic leadership and the vast majority of our elected officials stand with Jewish Americans on the range of issues of importance to Jewish voters.” 

Mamdani’s election came days after a watershed foreign policy moment, in which Trump ordered American strikes on several Iranian nuclear sites. Democrats, even many moderates, responded by criticizing Trump for his unilateral action without consulting Congress, with many — including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) — failing to even acknowledge the threat Iran posed to Israel and the U.S.

“I think overwhelmingly, Democrats have not done a good job, and the proof is in the pudding, that even staunch Democrats who would never consider supporting Donald Trump or ever vote for a Republican are just really pained by what feels like a refusal to even acknowledge the seriousness of the threat of the Iranian nuclear program,” said Amanda Berman, CEO of Zioness, a progressive pro-Israel organization. Manning said she “would have loved to see not just my [former] colleagues but newscasters acknowledge that Iran is a bad actor.”

Wary Jewish Democrats are keeping a watchful eye on how party leaders handle Israel- and antisemitism-related issues. 

“While I believe the majority of Democrats are pro-Israel economic moderates, we will see if our party leadership capitulates to the party’s most radical anti-Israel wing in the city with the most Jews in the world,” Esther Panitch, a Democratic state representative in Georgia and the only Jewish politician in the Georgia Statehouse, told JI on Wednesday. “I’m not optimistic at this moment, given that they have welcomed non-Democrats DSA [Democratic Socialists of America] and WFP [Working Families Party] into the tent.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Jeffries, both of whom live in New York City, each congratulated Mamdani with social media posts on Wednesday, although they did not outright endorse him.  

Sara Forman, the executive director of New York Solidarity Network, which promotes pro-Israel candidates in local races in New York, called Mamdani’s election “a seismic change” for Democratic politics in New York.  Far-left activists, she said, are now firmly inside of the party apparatus in the city, and she pledged to stick around and work to make sure the party is not represented by those activists. 

“I am not advocating Jews leaving the Democratic Party,” Forman told JI. “One of the things that I’m going to work on, and I’ve been working on, is getting people to join me in the chorus and to not sit back and watch the car accident happening in front of their eyes, but instead, speak up. Speak out. Don’t surrender.”

According to Bradley Tusk, a venture capitalist and longtime political operative who served as former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s 2009 campaign director, the challenge for Democrats is how to overcome the most ideological voters who turn out to vote in primaries.

“It wasn’t that he was this candidate who had all these interesting, exciting affordability ideas, but also happened to be anti-Israel. The anti-Israel was a big part of what allowed him to succeed,” Tusk told JI. “I think structurally, we have put ourselves in a bind where, when the Democratic Party is only decided by small ideological actors who vote in primaries, and that group tends to lean much more into anti-Israel, antisemitism, the Democratic Party is pretty stuck.”