Several moderate House Democrats said they were concerned and frustrated by Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro’s account, which emerged over the weekend, of being questioned by Vice President Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign, as part of his vetting as her potential running mate, about whether he had ever been an agent of Israel.

Some progressives have defended the questioning by pointing to a subsequent report that the campaign had asked Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, the eventual vice presidential nominee, about whether he had served as an agent for China, where he once lived. 

But Shapiro, who volunteered on a kibbutz and briefly on an Israeli army base while in high school, also said that the campaign had pressured him to walk back condemnations of antisemitism on college campuses, and emphasized that he took offense to the scope and persistence of the questioning he faced about Israel.

“Totally insane,” Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) told Jewish Insider. “I don’t know how else to describe insanity. Literally insane.”

Rep. Greg Landsman (D-OH) said the questioning was “concerning” and that he was “glad Josh had the courage to say what happened.”

“Hopefully people will appreciate that you shouldn’t do that. … It’s a longstanding antisemitic trope that we’re all agents of the Israeli government, that we’re all working for this global Jewish cabal. And so that’s problematic,” Landsman, who is Jewish, continued. “Antisemitism is complicated. There’s a lot of pieces to it. They all get very dangerous for us. I do think that people should be open to say, if Jews say it’s antisemitic — even if some say it’s not — let’s just assume it is and be done and not do it.”

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) called the revelations “incredibly disturbing,” while saying she didn’t believe Harris would have approved the line of questioning.

“The process that allowed for those kinds of questions to be asked is disturbing to me. I’ve known Josh Shapiro for a really long time, and I understand how he felt and would have felt the same way,” Wasserman Schultz, a former chair of the Democratic National committee, told JI. “It’s a little bewildering that that would be the kind of question line that they would take, given that Vice President Harris’ husband is Jewish. From what I know and experienced of both she and he, separately and together, that doesn’t seem like a line of questioning that she would have approved of. Hopefully it was a rogue question, rather than something that was sanctioned.”

Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL) praised Shapiro personally and said he took issue with the questions he faced in the vetting process.

“I’ll give you my reaction to Josh Shapiro: This is someone who knows who he is, he’s confident in his identity and proud of where he comes from and strong in what he believes. I think he gave the right answers, and I think it was wrong that those questions were even raised.”

Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-NY) said that the questioning of Shapiro was not appropriate, calling it “very disturbing” and “unfair.”

Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) said in a statement over the weekend that Shapiro’s account was “nothing short of outrageous, and, if true, demand[s] an immediate explanation from the Harris campaign.

“That kind of insinuation and  targeting is antisemitism, plain and simple. No one should be judged or discriminated against because of their faith. We must do better,” Gottheimer continued.

Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-VA) said on CNN over the weekend, “If that question was asked of Governor Shapiro, it should have been asked to every other candidate who was vetted.”

Others largely withheld criticism of the Harris campaign.

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), a co-chair of the Congressional Jewish Caucus, said that it sounded like other potential nominees had also been asked about foreign ties, but described the line of questioning as “bizarre.”

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) withheld judgment when asked about Shapiro’s revelations, telling JI, “It’s obviously very interesting. I don’t know whether the person asking the vetting questions really reflected Kamala Harris’ personal opinions at all, so I’ve got to read more about it.”

Rep. Madeliene Dean (D-PA) said she didn’t want to comment on the situation without having read Shapiro’s book coming out next week, in which he describes the encounter, or having been present for the conversations in question, but said that she has known Shapiro for a long time and praised him as a man of “[faith], family and a belief in the American system.”

At a press conference outside the Capitol on Tuesday, House Democrats called for action by the U.S. government to ensure free internet access and telecommunications for Iranians amid a crackdown by the Iranian regime, but largely withheld comment on whether the administration should undertake military strikes on the regime in support of the protesters, as President Donald Trump has floated.

“People cannot reach loved ones, plan and organize or reach unbiased information. They are literally being kept in the dark by their own government, and it could very well be permanent,” Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ), the daughter of Iranian immigrants and the first Iranian-American Democrat in Congress, said. “It’s why long-standing bipartisan efforts to ensure internet access in Iran cannot be left on the back burner. This access could save lives, and this is all very personal to me.”

She thanked colleagues for signing on to a bipartisan resolution expressing support for the Iranian protesters, condemning the Iranian regime, calling for unrestricted internet access and urging the U.S. and allied governments to “implement concrete measures” to deter further killings of protesters.

“To the people of Iran: know that you are not alone. Members of Congress and the United States see your incredible courage, and your resolve, your fight for freedom, democracy and self determination has inspired millions around the world. The future of Iran belongs to you and to no one else. The United States and the international community must continue to stand with the people of Iran and support a democratic Iran free from the tyrannical Islamic Republic,” Ansari continued.

Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL) highlighted the bipartisan support for the protesters and asked the administration to take “concrete action to break through the communications blackout, to allow the people to succeed and to allow the people of Iran to control its destiny.”

He said that restoring communications access is critical to allowing Iranian dissidents to coordinate with each other and to share their experiences with the rest of the world, and for them to be able to see the support they have received from around the world.

Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-NY) praised the protesters, referencing slogans used in previous Iranian protest movements, and accused the Iranian regime of depriving and stealing from its own citizens in order to “serve as a terrorist banker” and “destabilize the Middle East and terrorize the world.”

“I hope that we can breach the internet blackout so the people will know that their protests these past three weeks have been [an] inspiration to us all,” Suozzi continued.

Rep. Greg Stanton (D-AZ) said, “We, the United States, this Congress, in a bipartisan way, has a moral obligation to amplify [the protesters’] voices when their own government tries to silence them, and we will make clear that we see them, we hear them, and we stand unequivocally with them.”

Asked by reporters about the possibility of military action, the Democratic lawmakers largely deflected.

“My personal belief is that any military action needs to come before Congress. That is the law of the United States within our Constitution,” Ansari said. “But no such action has been proposed or has been put forward by the president. No briefing has been had, no real formal proposal by the president of the United States has come to Congress when it pertains to Iran. So if he has any proposals, I know that many colleagues would be interested in hearing them.”

Trump has dialed back his rhetoric about the immediacy of the situation and the likelihood of strikes in recent days.

When pressed on whether she would support a proposal for military action if it were presented, Ansari reiterated that her “focus is the fact that there is no internet in Iran, and Donald Trump has done absolutely nothing to support internet freedom in the country,” criticizing the president for pulling funding from organizations supporting Iranian dissidents as part of the USAID shutdown last year.

She called for that funding to be “resumed immediately” and for Congress to act on legislation to restore internet and cellular access and her resolution in support of the Iranian people. She said she’s hopeful for a vote on the resolution this week.

“Right now we’re holding together a bipartisan coalition so we can’t go off in all different directions,” Suozzi said. “Right now, we have very strong support for the United States Congress standing by the people of Iran in their protest, and we have strong bipartisan support for providing internet access to the people of Iran. We need to hold that coalition together and get those steps done. And then we can move on to the next.”

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

“We are writing to you today to express our strong desire to ensure that the NSGP is adequately funded and unimpeded by new requirements that are unrelated to the security of grant recipients and their communities,” the letter reads. “Insufficient funding or unnecessary obstacles to obtaining grants could undermine the right of every religious community to freely and peacefully worship and congregate without fear.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A group of more than 30 House Democrats wrote to leaders at the Department of Homeland Security on Tuesday criticizing their management of the 2025 Nonprofit Security Grant Program, saying that a lack of information provided by DHS is severely hampering applications to and implementation of the critical program.

The lawmakers criticized DHS and the Federal Emergency Management Agency for publishing the application for the grants months behind schedule, and, they allege, failing to provide “basic information necessary to move the application process forward and to fruition,” including specific timelines for the grants and applications, which the Democrats said still have not been provided.

“States have repeatedly asked FEMA for this information, and they have received no response,” the lawmakers continued. “This has also created a chilling effect on faith-based and nonprofit organizations that are hesitant to participate in an opaque application process.”

The lawmakers stated that the delays in allocating 2025 funding are concerning given the ongoing spate of attacks on religious institutions across the country, including a Catholic church in Minneapolis, a Latter-day Saints church in Michigan and the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington.

They also said that FEMA has failed to engage in educational and outreach programs to prospective applicants about the grants and the application process — programs that are required under law.

“Because of FEMA’s delays and lack of coordination and communication with States, many States have already opened and closed the application period for nonprofit organizations, meaning that any outreach from FEMA at this point would be too late,” the letter continues. “Other States have not opened the application process and have not communicated with faith-based and nonprofit stakeholders, leaving the process and the potential applicants in limbo.”

The Democrats criticized DHS for ignoring bipartisan requests from Congress to share the names of organizations awarded NSGP funding under a supplemental funding round earlier this year, which had been standard procedure in the past.

They also said DHS has added burdensome new requirements on state administrators for nonprofits that are seeking reimbursements for security costs from grants that have already been provided, slowing down reimbursements, increasing administrative costs and discouraging further applications.

The letter also raises concerns about language included in some NSGP materials suggesting that the grants could be conditioned on compliance with immigration enforcement efforts and alleges that DHS may be attempting to ban Muslim organizations from receiving security funding. The administration has already pulled funding from some Muslim groups with alleged ties to terrorism.

“FEMA must take immediate steps to get the FY 2025 NSGP back on track so that FY 2026 can proceed without the present delays, inconsistencies and uncertainties, and lack of uniformity and predictability that have previously been the hallmarks and guardrails for a program serving several thousand faith-based and nonprofit applicants each grant cycle,” the letter concludes.

The lawmakers urged DHS and FEMA to take immediate action to rectify the series of concerns they outlined and move the 2025 grant process ahead quickly. 

The letter was led by Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), the ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, and co-signed by Reps. Eric Swalwell (D-CA), Lou Correa (D-CA), Shri Thanedar (D-MI), Seth Magaziner (D-RI), Dan Goldman (D-NY), Delia Ramirez (D-IL), Tim Kennedy (D-NY), LaMonica McIver (D-NJ), Julie Johson (D-TX), Nellie Pou (D-NJ), Troy Carter (D-LA), Al Green (D-TX), James Walkinshaw (D-VA), Bobby Scott (D-VA), Nydia Velazquez (D-NY), Lloyd Doggett (D-TX), Ed Case (D-HI), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), Yvette Clarke (D-NY), Andre Carson (D-IN), Dina Titus (D-NV), Tom Suozzi (D-NY), Lizzie Fletcher (D-TX), Sylvia Garcia (D-TX), Shontel Brown (D-OH), Gabe Amo (D-RI), Greg Landsman (D-OH), Jennifer McClellan (D-VA), Laura Friedman (D-CA) and Dave Min (D-CA), and Dels. Pablo Hernandez (D-PR) and Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC).

“It is absolutely unacceptable that the Trump administration is dragging its feet on the awarding of these vital security grants,” Pou said in a separate statement. “As domestic extremism and terrorist threats to synagogues and other religious and community centers explode, Congress appropriated these grant funds to help support readiness. Americans have an unshakeable right to worship in peace and security. Congress deserves answers and our nation deserves action from this administration.”

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.

Forty-seven progressive House Democrats, led by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), signed onto a letter to President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio calling for the U.S. to recognize a Palestinian state on the heels of similar decisions by European allies last week.

“It has long been acknowledged by much of the international community and previous U.S. administrations of both major political parties that a Palestinian state recognized as a full and equal member of the community of nations is necessary to fulfill the legitimate national rights of the Palestinian people and ensure the state of Israel’s survival as the democratic homeland of the Jewish people,” the letter, which was first reported on by Jewish Insider, reads.

The lawmakers argue that because the current Israeli government opposes a two-state solution — a position currently shared by much of Israeli society — and is “actively undermin[ing]” the prospects of an independent Palestinian state, “meaningful action is necessary to join the majority of the world in codifying Palestinian statehood and to unlock the potential for a broader regional peace and security arrangement.”

Trump vowed last week week that he would not allow Israel to annex the West Bank.

The letter also claims that recognizing Palestinian statehood would make reform of the Palestinian Authority “far more achievable and sustainable.”

Signatories to the letter include Reps. Becca Balint (D-VT), Donald Beyer (D-VA), André Carson (D-IN), Greg Casar (D-TX), Joaquin Castro (D-TX), Judy Chu (D-CA), Danny Davis (D-IL), Madeleine Dean (D-PA), Diana DeGette (D-CO), Chris Deluzio (D-PA), Mark DeSaulnier (D-CA), Maxine Dexter (D-OR), Lloyd Doggett (D-TX), Veronica Escobar (D-TX), Dwight Evans (D-PA), Bill Foster (D-MA), Maxwell Frost (D-FL), John Garamendi (D-CA), Chuy García (D-IL), Sylvia Garcia (D-TX), Robert Garcia (D-CA), Al Green (D-TX), Val Hoyle (D-OR), Jared Huffman (D-CA), Jonathan Jackson (D-IL), Sara Jacobs (D-CA), Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), Hank Johnson (D-GA), Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Stephen Lynch (D-MA), Betty McCollum (D-MN), James McGovern (D-CA), Chellie Pingree (D-ME), Mark Pocan (D-WI), Mike Quigley (D-IL), Emily Randall (D-WA), Mary Gay Scanlon (D-PA), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Bennie Thompson (D-MS), Mike Thompson (D-CA), Jill Tokuda (D-HI), Paul Tonko (D-NY), Nydia Velázquez (D-NY), Maxine Waters (D-CA) and Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ).

Dexter and Garcia were both beneficiaries of significant outside spending from AIPAC’s United Democracy Project super PAC in their primary races, running against farther-left anti-Israel opponents.

Balint and Schakowsky are both Jewish. Davis, Evans and Schakowsky are retiring from Congress at the end of their current terms.

Many of the furthest-left lawmakers in the House, including some of the Jewish state’s most outspoken critics, did not sign onto Khanna’s letter, nor did some of the more moderate Democrats backing a concurrent effort to place strict restrictions on U.S. aid to Israel.

The letter is backed by groups including American Muslims for Palestine, DAWN, Emgage Action, Indivisible, J Street, MoveOn, MPower, Muslim Public Affairs Council, New Jewish Narrative and the Quincy Institute.

There is a notable split on this issue within the Democratic caucus: Khanna’s letter follows a letter from 30 moderate pro-Israel Democrats condemning unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state as “performative” and saying that doing so risks “emboldening Hamas, entrenching division, and undermining the very legitimacy and peace such recognition purports to advance.”

A group of 30 House Democrats urged Secretary of State Marco Rubio to leverage a joint statement from the Arab League this summer — which called for Hamas’ disarmament and removal of power, the release of hostages and a path toward a two-state solution — as a potential diplomatic breakthrough for the region.

The lawmakers also condemned the unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state recently undertaken by several close U.S. allies.

“While there is much we disagree with in the statement, we do believe that this breakthrough presents a rare and urgent opportunity to ensure Israel’s security and create a brighter future for innocent Palestinians free from Hamas through American leadership,” the lawmakers said in a letter to Rubio on Thursday, emphasizing that it is the first time the Arab League has explicitly rejected Hamas.

“The statement made at the conference offers a unique opportunity — one that strengthens both Israel’s long-term security and Palestinians’ aspirations for self-determination under accountable, nonviolent leadership,” the letter continues. “While we once again emphasize that we do not endorse everything in the text, we recognize the unprecedented nature of the declaration and believe it presents a positive shift that opens the door to productive diplomacy and long-term solutions.”

The lawmakers urged Rubio to work with Israel to bring together regional and international partners to broker an agreement that would immediately and unconditionally free the hostages, remove Hamas from power in Gaza and achieve a “responsible deescalation of the conflict” in Gaza that would allow for rebuilding, governmental reform and peace.

They said that such an approach would be “far more constructive than recent unilateral and performative recognitions of a Palestinian state by other nations, which risk emboldening Hamas, entrenching division, and undermining the very legitimacy and peace such recognition purports to advance.”

“With regional partners signaling readiness to help facilitate both security and governance transitions, the United States has a pivotal role to play in turning principle into progress toward a two-state solution,” the letter reads. “This is a chance to protect Israel — our strongest ally — and align American values with regional momentum, and also leave a lasting legacy.”

The letter was led by Reps. Jake Auchincloss (D-MA), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), Greg Landsman (D-OH) and Tim Kennedy (D-NY), joined by Reps. Dan Goldman (D-NY), Grace Meng (D-NY), Marilyn Strickland (D-WA), Emilia Sykes (D-OH), Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), Frank Pallone (D-NJ), Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), Lois Frankel (D-FL), Kim Schrier (D-WA), Tom Suozzi (D-NY), Jimmy Panetta (D-CA), Brad Schneider (D-IL), Angie Craig (D-MN), Kevin Mullin (D-CA), Juan Vargas (D-CA), Ritchie Torres (D-NY), Chris Pappas (D-NH), Eric Swalwell (D-CA), Ted Lieu (D-CA), George Latimer (D-NY), Haley Stevens (D-MI), Darren Soto (D-FL), Greg Stanton (D-AZ), Nikki Budzinski (D-IL), Shri Thanedar (D-MI) and Wesley Bell (D-MO).

Craig, Pappas and Stevens are all running for the Senate in their respective states.

Democratic Majority for Israel supported the letter.

“The U.S. must act quickly to seize on this diplomatic opportunity which presents a unique opening to both ensure Israel’s security and create a future for Israelis and Palestinians free from the terrorist group Hamas,” the group’s CEO, Brian Romick, said in a statement. “While there is much we disagree with in the Arab League statement, its historic nature is unprecedented. By calling for the release of hostages, condemning the October 7 attacks, disavowing Hamas and endorsing a two-state path, Arab countries have signaled a potential willingness to be part of a new, constructive chapter for the Middle East.”

“At the same time, we call on all leaders to reject unilateral performative recognition of a Palestinian state which risks emboldening Hamas rather than advancing peace,” Romick continued.

Most House Democrats, including all of the current and former top Democratic leaders, signed on to a letter on Thursday to Israeli leaders warning them against unilaterally annexing territory in the West Bank or Gaza.

At a time when Democrats are increasingly divided over the U.S.-Israel relationship and its direction, the letter highlights a strong degree of unanimity within the party against annexation, among both Democrats who largely remain supportive of Israel and those who have become more critical over the war in Gaza. President Donald Trump reportedly told Arab leaders on Tuesday that he would pressure Israel against annexation.

“As long-standing supporters of the U.S.-Israel relationship, Israel’s security, and Israel’s future, we are deeply opposed to proposals for unilateral annexation of territory in the West Bank,” the 178 lawmakers, led by Reps. Brad Schneider (D-IL) and Jamie Raskin (D-MD), said. “Such a move would not only violate international law but undermine decades of bipartisan U.S. policy and threaten the progress of the Abraham Accords, which offer Israel and its neighbors the opportunity to build a more secure, cooperative, and prosperous regional future. Unilateral annexation of the West Bank would plunge the region, already reeling from tens of thousands of deaths in the horrific Gaza war, into further chaos and violence.”

The letter is addressed to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Israel Katz and Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar. Included among the signatories are House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-MA) and Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar (D-CA), as well as former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), former Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and former Democratic Whip Jim Clyburn (D-SC).

The signatories highlighted that leaders from the United Arab Emirates have expressed that West Bank annexation would be a red line for them that would endanger regional normalization and integration with Israel.

“Moves toward annexation would undermine Israel’s progress on normalization, prevent international cooperation to rebuild Gaza after this devastating war, risk instability in Jordan, and even further strain ties with key European partners,” the letter continues.

They added that annexation of territory in Gaza, as discussed by some Israeli ministers, “would not only violate international law but exacerbate humanitarian and diplomatic challenges at a moment when broad international support for Israel is at risk.”

The lawmakers stated that they are “convinced that unilateral steps by either side,” including Israeli annexation of territory in the West Bank or Gaza, would be an impediment to direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians toward a two-state solution and make a “just, sustainable peace” harder to attain.

“We respectfully urge your government to refrain from steps toward unilateral annexation and to recommit to a negotiated outcome consistent with U.S. policy and the regional vision embodied in the Abraham Accords,” the letter concludes. “That path best safeguards Israel’s security and democratic ideals, advances regional cooperation against shared threats, and offers Israelis and Palestinians the possibility of living side by side in peace and dignity, freed from perpetual attacks on civilians and the threat of war.”

Schneider, a co-chair of the Congressional Jewish Caucus, has been a leader in the moderate pro-Israel wing of the party, though he has expressed concerns about the humanitarian situation in Gaza and previously warned individually against annexation. The progressive Raskin is a co-sponsor of legislation that would severely restrict many critical arms transfers to Israel.

Signatories to the letter similarly span the spectrum from consistent supporters of Israel to vocal critics.

Other signatories include Senate candidates Reps. Angie Craig (D-MN), Robin Kelly (D-IL), Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) and Chris Pappas (D-NH); No. 4 House Democrat Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA); Jewish Caucus co-chair Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY); and Reps. Greg Meeks (D-NY), Adam Smith (D-WA) and Rosa DeLauro, the ranking members of the Foreign Affairs, Armed Services and Appropriations Committees, respectively.

Some of Israel’s most vocal far-left critics, as well as some of its most ardent centrist defenders, did not sign onto the letter.

Some congressional Republicans, meanwhile, have shown signs of increasing openness to recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank.

Citing United Nations statistics showing that the vast majority of U.N. aid convoys are diverted or looted before reaching their intended destination, a group of House Democrats is set to call on U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres this week to request a peacekeeping operation to secure those convoys.

“We write to you with an urgent call to request a resolution from the United Nations Security Council authorizing the deployment of a UN Peacekeeping operation to secure your aid convoys in Gaza, ensuring their safe passage,” a group of Democrats, led by Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), wrote in a draft letter obtained by Jewish Insider. “Please do not continue to allow aid trucks to be robbed by Hamas while civilians struggle to get food. As we know, Hamas diverts and sells aid and is not focused on feeding innocent Palestinian families and children.”

The letter calls the diversion and looting problem “beyond a breakdown in logistics. It is a failure of the UN to execute its mission,” and says that situation has “led to huge issues.”

The letter also calls on the U.N. to work with the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation — which the U.N. has refused to do — to create a distribution network “utilizing the security of GHF distribution with the know-how and reach of the UN” and to “accept Israeli offers of coordination where they can provide security, contrary to the current posture of rejection.”

The letter asserts that the U.N.’s refusal to work with Israel on security “empowers the armed actors in Gaza, while forcing desperate civilians to risk their lives with no choice but to jump onto moving trucks to access aid,” leaving vulnerable people without aid.

“If the United Nations is serious about bringing relief to Gazans, it will do what is necessary to achieve that goal, not accept a nearly 90 percent failure rate. Authorizing peacekeepers to protect aid convoys is a crucial step toward that end,” the letter reads. “This moment calls for bold leadership. You must step up and lead the call for UN members to prioritize the needs of Gazan civilians, not Hamas.”

The letter notes that the U.N. special rapporteur on the right to food has similarly suggested that U.N. peacekeepers escort food convoys and that the recent General Assembly resolution on a two-state solution “called for the protection of aid without offering solutions toward that end.”

The letter calls for Guterres to “take decisive action” because “we have no time for bureaucracy.”

Gottheimer and other lawmakers who have recently traveled to Israel have emphasized the need to better protect aid shipments inside Gaza. Gottheimer argued in an op-ed, “The problem is not a lack of aid — it’s that too little of it ever reaches the people who need it most.” He praised the GHF’s model and secure distribution sites.
The letter will be circulating for additional signatures through Monday, and is set to be sent later in the day. It currently has 15 signatories, including Gottheimer, consisting of moderate pro-Israel Democrats: Reps. Jim Costa (D-CA), Henry Cuellar (D-TX), Laura Gillen (D-NY), Vicente Gonzalez (D-TX), Greg Landsman (D-OH), George Latimer (D-NY), Susie Lee (D-NV), Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), Donald Norcross (D-NJ), Jimmy Panetta (D-CA), Brad Schneider (D-IL), Darren Soto (D-FL), Tom Suozzi (D-NY) and Juan Vargas (D-CA).

Two senior pro-Israel House Democrats, who are co-chairs of the House Abraham Accords Caucus, warned on Wednesday that any moves that would prevent the ultimate establishment of a two-state solution could endanger the survival of the Abraham Accords.

Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL) said at an American Jewish Committee event in Washington that his concerns about Israeli movements toward annexing the West Bank remain. Israel agreed to put those moves on hold five years ago when it sealed the Abraham Accords with the United Arab Emirates. Schneider said that any attempt at a one-state solution would create a permanent violence and conflict.

“Jump ahead five years, there are still folks in Israel who are again talking about annexation,” Schneider said. “The UAE has made clear that if Israel goes down that path it has the likelihood — not the possibility, but the likelihood — of cleaving the Abraham Accords to such a point that they may not be recoverable.”

At the same time, Schneider said he also opposes moves by European countries to unilaterally recognize a Palestinian state.

“Recognizing a Palestinian state before the elements necessary to be successful as a state — the institutions, having elections, having responsive government, having control of all security under one authority — it’s not there yet,” Schneider said. “To even be talking about recognizing a Palestinian state before other steps have been taken, giving the perception [to Israelis] of rewarding the actions of Hamas on Oct. 7, that creates a dynamic that is also a threat.”

He said that the U.S. should be offering “more robust leadership” to sideline “extremists” and “maximalists” on both sides.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) similarly said at the AJC event that “we are at a crossroads with the Abraham Accords” and warned that “progress could be squandered by any steps that permanently foreclose a two-state future.”

“We should seize diplomatic opportunities to expand the Abraham Accords and think carefully before taking any actions that would cause setbacks,” she continued.

She noted that a key threat to the Abraham Accords is that acceptance of those agreements has not filtered down from the government into the public in the Arab states that have normalized relations with Israel — which in many places continue to hate Israel and would not mourn the death of the Abraham Accords.

“Making sure that we are fostering those dialogues and being able to have that harmony and those relationships seep deeper down into society will make it easier and take the pressure off of those leaders to issue statements that some of them issued after Oct. 7 that were less than condemnation and that were even worse than that,” Wasserman Schultz said.

The Florida lawmaker also said that the U.S. and its partners should pursue “near-term openings with countries like Mauritania and with Azerbaijan,” countries that already have ties with Israel, to bring them into an “[Abraham] Accords Plus framework,” as well as continue “patient, serious tracks of engagement with Saudi Arabia, Indonesia and Oman.”

Last year’s election cycle marked a high point for pro-Israel groups, buoyed by the ouster of two virulently anti-Israel House Democrats (former Reps. Cori Bush of Missouri and Jamaal Bowman in New York), the defeat of a House Republican who opposed funding to Israel (former Rep. Bob Good of Virginia) and the success of mainstream Democrats in numerous contested primaries. 

But the political environment for next year’s midterms is looking somewhat choppier in the Jewish world, amid growing anti-Israel sentiment in the Democratic Party, an anti-establishment, transgressive mood in both parties and the reticence of moderate voices to speak up.

In this less hospitable landscape, pro-Israel groups will be playing more defense than offense — ensuring like-minded incumbents are able to avert serious primary challenges, while working to prevent virulently anti-Israel voices from emerging as nominees in key races.

One of the biggest potential showdowns is developing in St. Louis, where Rep. Wesley Bell (D-MO) faces the prospect of a rematch against Bush, whom he comfortably defeated by six points in last year’s primary. With the benefit of incumbency, Bell would be favored in any rematch, but he is facing an organized campaign by anti-Israel protesters who disrupted his recent town hall after he returned from a trip to the Jewish state. 

AIPAC’s super PAC spent over $8 million against Bush in the 2024 race, and would be expected to prioritize Bell’s reelection as a top priority if she ran again. Bush, for all her celebrity in leftist spaces, has numerous vulnerabilities that haven’t gone away since her last defeat — from her calls to defund the police, lackadaisical constituent service and ethical improprieties involving the use of campaign funds in paying her husband to provide personal security.

Still, in a sign that advocating against Israel can get far-left candidates some traction in deep-blue districts, a Bush comeback will be worth monitoring closely. Indeed, any pro-Israel Democrat running in an urban district with a distinct progressive bent will have to pay attention to any real or prospective primary challenges. 

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), one of the most stalwart pro-Israel Democrats, is already facing two primary challengers running to his left. And while neither has made Israel a major part of their platform, neither challenger shares the incumbent’s long-standing support for the Jewish state. (Sherman’s district is solidly Democratic, but also heavily Jewish, making his Israel advocacy a political asset.)

Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY), representing a Lower Manhattan district that Zohran Mamdani comfortably carried in the New York City mayoral primary, will have to be attuned to any challengers on his left. Goldman has done an effective job of locking down his seat since first winning with just 26% in a crowded 2022 primary. But he could face a credible threat from Comptroller Brad Lander, a Mamdani ally who finished third in the city’s Democratic mayoral primary.

Other contests Jewish groups are watching warily include the Michigan Democratic Senate primary, where Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has been rallying support for anti-Israel candidate Abdul el-Sayed, as many party leaders have rallied around the mainstream Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI), a strong pro-Israel ally. 

Pro-Israel groups are also concerned about the candidacy of Graham Platner in the Maine Senate race against Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), whose reelection would become an even bigger priority if he emerged as the Democratic challenger.

As notable in assessing the political environment are the primaries we’re not talking about. The original members of the anti-Israel “Squad” — Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) and Summer Lee (D-PA) — aren’t currently facing serious primary opposition even though they’ve been vulnerable in past elections. 

It’s a clear sign that this will be an election cycle focused on protecting hard-fought gains more than one where pro-Israel groups have the luxury to challenge the remaining worst offenders.

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.

A group of 14 House Democrats, including 11 first-term lawmakers, are currently visiting Israel with the AIPAC-affiliated American Israel Education Foundation.

The group includes Reps. Tim Kennedy (D-NY), Gil Cisneros (D-CA), Josh Riley (D-NY), Nellie Pou (D-NJ), Wesley Bell (D-MO), Laura Gillen (D-NY), Johnny Olszewski (D-MD), Eugene Vindman (D-VA), Luz Rivas (D-CA), Herb Conaway (D-NJ) and George Latimer (D-NY).

They make up a third of the 33 freshman Democratic members of the House — a sign of AIPAC’s continued pull among more centrist pro-Israel Democrats even as progressives have sought to make the group politically toxic. An AIEF-sponsored Republican trip which visited Israel last week included around the same number of freshmen lawmakers.

The trip comes at a time when tensions, even among Israel’s most vocal Democratic supporters, and the Israeli government are at a high point, amid concern with the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and Israel’s newly finalized plans to expand the war and conduct a military takeover of Gaza City.

The Democratic delegation also includes Reps. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), Pete Aguilar (D-CA) and Brad Schneider (D-IL). Aguilar is the No. 3 Democrat in the House.

The Democratic group met with Israeli President Isaac Herzog on Monday, who said that the “visits show the bi-partisan, steadfast alliance between the United State[s] and Israel, and of the true shared values between our peoples.”

“I told them that Israel continues to operate in accordance with international law, that it was dramatically increasing the flow of humanitarian aid to Gaza, and that Israel continues to strive with all its might and in every way possible to bring our hostages home,” Herzog said in a statement. “I also made clear that Hamas continues to hold, starve, torture and abuse the hostages, holding 50 still in captivity, in a deliberate and flagrant crime against humanity. I told them it was Hamas which was looting and stealing the aid, preventing the distribution to the civilians in Gaza. And that Hamas was blocking and rejecting a deal that would bring an end to the suffering.”

The Democratic group also appears to have visited the City of David.

Reps. Maxine Dexter (D-OR) and Valerie Foushee (D-NC), two House Democrats who received significant backing from the AIPAC-aligned United Democracy Project super PAC in their primary races against far-left opponents, announced this week that they would support efforts to block the transfer of offensive weapons to Israel.

They join a third UDP-supported Democrat, Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA), who indicated his potential support for such a policy more than a year ago.

The latest moves highlight the growing anger among Democrats with Israel’s continued war operations in Gaza — and the limited efficacy in advocating for a strong U.S.-Israel relationship towards liberals at a time when public support for the Jewish state within the Democratic party is declining. 

Dexter, who represents a deep-blue Portland, Ore. district, benefitted from more than $2 million in UDP donations provided during her 2024 primary race to other PACs supporting Dexter and attacking her opponent, Susheela Jayapal. 

Dexter said in a statement this week that the U.S. “must halt the transfer of offensive weapons to Israel and ensure immediate, sufficient and sustained humanitarian aid into Gaza,” also stating that “Palestinians and Israelis alike have the right to security, safety, self-determination and peace. Netanyahu’s war crimes against the Palestinians in Gaza shatter any path toward those aims.”

She added that “Netanyahu clearly believes U.S. support comes without conditions. Israel has the right to defend itself from attack, but it does not have the right to commit gross violations of human rights or obstruct humanitarian aid to innocent civilians. Netanyahu’s government is doing both and worse. … We must use all means necessary to stop Netanyahu’s government from perpetuating these crimes against humanity.”

Jayapal, the sister of Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), supported conditions on U.S. aid to Israel during her campaign. Dexter, in an interview during her campaign in 2024, told Jewish Insider she would not support imposing additional conditions on U.S. aid to Israel that don’t apply to all U.S. allies.

Dexter said “Israel had the right to defend itself, they were obligated to defend itself” while also calling for a negotiated ceasefire and raising concerns about the humanitarian situation in Gaza. She said she did not believe that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was interested in peace.

Asked about her apparent turnaround on the issue, Dexter said in a statement to JI that she would apply a similar standard to any ally.

“It is clear to me that Israel has violated international humanitarian law in the way it has prosecuted this war,” Dexter said. “The withholding of offensive arms, in light of these violations, is a standard to which I would and will continue to hold any American ally. The safety, security, and peace for Israelis and Palestinians alike depend on Netanyahu’s government being held accountable.”

Dexter also voted earlier this year against sanctions on the International Criminal Court, the first major Israel-related vote for new members in the current Congress.

Foushee, whose Durham, N.C.-based district is among the most progressive in the state, was among the first beneficiaries of UDP assistance during her 2022 primary campaign. The group spent $2.1 million supporting her campaign against progressive Nida Allam and former “American Idol” finalist Clay Aiken. Allam had a record of anti-Israel activism even before her campaign for Congress.

Foushee this week announced she would sponsor legislation “to prevent the sale of offensive weapons to Israel.”

“A ceasefire and de-escalation are urgently needed to ensure the sufficient flow of aid into Gaza and protect innocent civilians at aid delivery sites from military attacks,” Foushee said on X. “We simply cannot continue to provide the Israeli government with weapons when they are not being used in accordance with international law to maximize the protection of civilians in Gaza.”

Foushee’s campaign said this week that she would not accept further support from AIPAC.

Her new stance on U.S. aid to Israel comes as the culmination of a series of more critical stances she’s taken since first being elected to office, though she maintained AIPAC’s endorsement in the 2024 cycle.

In June 2023, Foushee signed onto a letter opposing Israel’s entry into the Visa Waiver Program, but subsequently told Jewish Insider she’d done so by mistake. As early as December 2023, Foushee signed onto a letter calling for a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas.

She has voted against numerous measures since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas-led attacks on Israel cracking down on Iran, the Houthis and the International Criminal Court. And she voted against several measures to combat antisemitism including the Antisemitism Awareness Act and a resolution describing the slogan “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” as antisemitic.

Even so, she traveled to Israel in March 2024 with an AIPAC-affiliated delegation and voted in favor of supplemental aid to Israel.

In December 2024, she signed onto a letter led by other lawmakers accusing Israel of failing to fulfill the conditions of U.S. arms sales policy and law, and co-led a resolution in June condemning the humanitarian situation in Gaza.

Foushee’s office also did not respond to a request for comment.

Asked about Dexter and Foushee’s positions, AIPAC didn’t address them directly, but said that the U.S. should not abandon Israel.

“If American leaders desire to end the conflict, they should take concrete steps to pressure Hamas to free the hostages and surrender,” the group said in a statement. “This is not a moment to abandon an American ally that is battling Hamas terrorists who launched this war with the barbaric attack of October 7.”

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

Garcia — who was backed by around $500,000 in UDP spending in 2022 — has also taken a more critical stance since taking office. Though he ran as the more moderate Democrat in his campaign, Garcia has frequently aligned with the left since taking office.

He signed onto a letter in April 2024 calling for the U.S. to withhold offensive arms transfers from Israel if it “fails to sufficiently mitigate the harm to innocent civilians in Gaza … and if it fails to facilitate — or arbitrarily denies or restricts — the transport and delivery of humanitarian aid into Gaza.”

His office did not respond to a request for comment on whether he currently supports suspending offensive aid. He voted, after that letter, in favor of supplemental aid for Israel and traveled to Israel with the AIPAC-affiliated American Israel Education Foundation.

Garcia called for a ceasefire on Nov. 11, 2023, and announced last year he would boycott Netanyahu’s address to Congress. Like Foushee, he has opposed many of the measures the House has voted on in the past two years aimed at countering Iran and its proxies, and several of the antisemitism-related measures.

Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), in a private meeting with House Democrats in Washington on Wednesday, avoided confronting Zohran Mamdani, the far-left Democratic nominee for mayor of New York City, over his controversial defense of calls to “globalize the intifada” and fierce opposition to Israel.

Gottheimer, a moderate Jewish Democrat who is among the most outspoken supporters of Israel in the House, has not been shy about publicly calling out members of his own party when disagreements over Israel and antisemitism have arisen in recent years.

But during the breakfast meeting this week, Gottheimer did not bring up his objections to the 33-year-old democratic socialist, according to a House aide familiar with the matter, even as his views on Israel have raised alarms among Jewish voters and faced pushback from Democratic leaders who have so far withheld endorsements in the New York City mayoral race. 

In a statement, Gottheimer reiterated his concerns about Mamdani’s progressive policy proposals and his acceptance of rhetoric that Jewish leaders have condemned as antisemitic. But the New Jersey congressman suggested he was willing to hear from the mayoral nominee about his stunning primary upset that has rattled the political establishment.

“I don’t think higher taxes, anti-job creating socialism, and an acceptance of antisemitic rhetoric is the right direction for America,” Gottheimer told Jewish Insider, echoing comments he shared in an interview with CNBC on Thursday morning and elsewhere in recent weeks. “That said, I am always open to learning how I can reach more people with my commonsense, problem-solving approach.”

He declined to comment further on the meeting to JI on Thursday. “I don’t have anything to say beyond what I put out,” the congressman said.

Later on Thursday, Gottheimer announced he was introducing a bipartisan resolution condemning the phrase “globalize the intifada,” which Mamdani has refused to condemn. The motto chanted frequently at anti-Israel demonstrations is “hate speech, plain and simple,” the congressman wrote in a statement that did not mention Mamdani, arguing such words “incite violence, fuel hate and put Jewish families at risk.”

Still, Gottheimer voiced no such disapproval in the Wednesday breakfast hosted by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) — which included several progressive House Democrats and was promoted as a “communication and organizing” session as the party rethinks its messaging strategy ahead of next year’s midterms.

Gottheimer’s reticence to speak out directly during the in-person meeting stands in contrast with his past denunciations of Mamdani, whose defense of the “intifada” phrase — seen by critics as a violent provocation to target Jews — he has called “insane and unacceptable” amid rising antisemitic activity.

The divisive slogan “is a well-known antisemitic chant that calls for the eradication of Israel and violence against Jews,” Gottheimer said in a social media post a week before the primary last month. 

“Zohran Mamdani’s pathetic, hateful lies are a blatant slap in the face of the Jewish community,” he added. “He must apologize immediately. I also suggest that he visit the Holocaust Museum in the coming days and learn why these words are so dangerous.”

Even as no discussion of Israel or antisemitism was raised at the Wednesday gathering, top Democrats have continued to signal their hesitation regarding Mamdani’s approach to such issues, particularly his stance on the “intifada” slogan that he has defended repeatedly as an expression of Palestinian rights.

For his part, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who did not attend the breakfast but is expected to meet with Mamdani in New York City on Friday, has said that the nominee’s comments about the phrase will be a part of their discussion — suggesting that his support is likely contingent on a change in tone.

Mamdani, who has faced questions about the phrase in other meetings this week, has privately indicated he plans to take a more calibrated stance with regard to the matter, a key point of tension as he now works to expand his coalition in a crowded race that includes Mayor Eric Adams and former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, both running as independents. 

The Democratic mayoral nominee said in a private meeting with business leaders earlier this week that he would “discourage” use of the phrase but still did not go so far as to condemn it himself, according to reports of the closed-door discussion on Tuesday.

Additional reporting contributed by JI senior congressional correspondent Marc Rod

House and Senate Democrats are pushing ahead with efforts to bring forward votes this week in both chambers on resolutions that aim to constrain the administration from taking any further military action against Iran in spite of President Donald Trump’s surprise announcement of a ceasefire between Israel and Iran.

Trump’s diplomatic breakthrough is creating some political awkwardness for Democrats who had insisted the president would escalate the war, but many are still likely to support the resolutions, which reflect their dissatisfaction with the president’s decision to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities without congressional authorization. 

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), the lead sponsor of one war powers resolution in the House, said he no longer plans to force a vote on it, explaining, “if we’re not engaged in hostilities, I think it’s a moot point.” He said he had told House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) that he would not attempt to bring the resolution to the floor.

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), Massie’s lead co-sponsor, said, “The anti-war advocacy of the left and right broke through. I am glad cooler heads prevailed and Trump seems committed to stopping this war. I spoke with Rep. Massie this evening and we are taking a wait and see approach about whether a vote will be needed now on our War Powers Resolution.”

But a group of senior House Democrats introduced a separate resolution on Monday evening, which they are expected to continue to advance.

The U.S. strike, Massie’s resolution and broader questions about the situation in Iran have been causing heartburn for many House Democrats, particularly supporters of Israel, Democratic staff sources told Jewish Insider earlier Tuesday.

Democratic staffers not authorized to speak publicly explained that, behind the scenes, the largely unified public Democratic opposition to the strikes has been driven by several factors, including the perceived lack of political support for the strikes, concerns about an escalating war and frustration with the Trump administration.

“I think a lot of members support the strike privately but see this as a politically vulnerable issue for [Trump],” one Democratic staffer said.

Another staffer said that Democrats are afraid of echoes of the Iraq war: If the U.S. ends up in a full-scale, protracted, politically unpopular war with Iran, they don’t want to be on record as having supported it.

And, the staffer said, there’s a deep level of distrust for the Trump administration, which acted largely unilaterally in the strikes, did not make efforts to keep congressional leaders informed about the strikes and hasn’t yet presented any evidence to Congress of the need for the strikes or their success.

Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT), the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, who worked with other top Democrats on an alternative war powers resolution, said the resolution effort should continue “if United States forces remain engaged.”

Himes, along with Reps. Greg Meeks (D-NY) and Adam Smith (D-WA), the top Democrats on the Foreign Affairs and Armed Services committees, introduced their own war powers resolution Monday evening, after the ceasefire was announced.

Whether that resolution will come to the floor remains an open question. The House speaker was reportedly working on a procedural plan that would strip the Massie resolution of its privileged status, sidestepping a vote on the House floor, and could potentially use the same tactic to defuse the new Democratic resolution.

On the Senate side, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) said he also plans to push forward with his efforts, and said that Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) is working with Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to facilitate a vote.

“Whether or not a ceasefire between Israel and Iran comes to fruition — and I hope it does — I will move forward to force a vote on my resolution to require Congress to debate and vote on whether or not the United States should engage in a war with Iran,” Kaine said in a statement to JI. “Americans don’t want matters of war and peace, bombing and ceasefire, to rest upon the daily whims of any one person.” 

“That’s why the Framers of our Constitution decided that war should only be declared following a public debate and congressional vote,” Kaine continued. “Congress must affirm its commitment to that principle and send a clear message: no more endless wars.”

Other Democrats agreed that a war powers resolution should still receive a vote in spite of the ceasefire.

Rep. Greg Casar (D-TX), the chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, told JI, “At the end of the day, I think that a war powers resolution makes good sense to vote on and for Congress to finally reassert what is in black-and-white letters in the Constitution, which is that only Congress and the consent of the American people can start a war.”

Rep. Pat Ryan (D-NY), a former Army intelligence officer, argued that the uncertainty of the situation necessitated that Congress step in.

“It’s a very volatile situation, which, to me, makes it even more urgent that we make clear and reassert what the Constitution of the United States says, which is that it is the Congress that has the authority to declare war or authorize the use of [force],” Ryan told JI.

He added that it “should be concerning to every American that multiple days after doing — not even a preemptive strike — a preventive strike, there’s still no legal justification, there’s still no clarity about the effectiveness.”

A memo sent by Trump to the Senate cited presidential foreign relations authorities enshrined in the U.S. constitution as the legal backing for the strike.

Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), among the few House Democrats who supported the strikes, told JI that he wants to see Congress reclaim its power but that the administration also has the ability to take defensive action without consulting Congress. He said that the war powers resolution push is likely no longer relevant if the ceasefire continues.

“Based on the ceasefire that was announced, it if holds, it appears that the issue in this current climate is moot, but overall, still important,” Moskowitz said. “[The war powers resolution] is no longer relevant to this particular purpose. It would be more of a general ‘us reasserting our authority as Congress.’”

Kaine told reporters earlier in the day that his resolution in the Senate would come up for a vote on Thursday or Friday.

Kaine said that the vote was “fluid” but he expected to see Republican support, and that he expected nearly all Democrats, with the exception of Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA), to support it.

“I think the fluidity and change is something that I think warrants — this is why you get a congressional discussion, because these things can escalate,” Kaine said. “They can move in ways that are hard to predict, and that’s why a discussion and a vote is a good idea.”

He said that, “my colleagues on the Democratic side, regardless of whatever they feel about Iran, [believe] wars without Congress, wars that bypass us, are a bad idea.”

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) confirmed he planned to support the resolution as well, arguing that the Constitution is clear that war powers are vested in Congress and that his position on the issue has been consistent across administrations.

“There have always been people who argue the president can do whatever he wants,” Paul said. “The problem is, that’s a recipe for chronic intervention. It’s a recipe for endless war.”

Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA), a pro-Israel Democrat, also said he supported the resolution.

Ahead of the ceasefire, some specific concerns with the wording of the Massie resolution had split Democrats, one Democratic staffer said. That prompted the separate resolution from Meeks, Himes and Smith. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) claimed at a press conference on Monday that he hadn’t reviewed the Massie resolution yet, indicating that he would not be supporting it. 

A Democratic staffer explained that there were fairly widespread concerns that Massie’s resolution could block the U.S. from continuing to support Israel’s defense.

The Democrat-led resolution includes a specific exception allowing the U.S. to defend itself or any ally or partner from “imminent attack,” whereas Massie’s resolution only allowed for continued defense of the United States and intelligence sharing with allies. The Democrats leading the resolution emphasized in a statement that it would allow U.S. forces defending Israel to continue their activities.

“What we’re trying to get clarity on is to ensure that there’s no ambiguity or doubt about our ability to fully support the defense of Israel and the Israeli people, that we can continue … intelligence sharing and information sharing, cyber,” Ryan said earlier, of the Massie resolution. “There are key dimensions where we have to continue to be very closely aligned.”

“My concern is less about the language of the resolution and more about who introduced it, frankly,” Ryan continued. Massie has a history of comments that colleagues on both sides of the aisle have condemned as antisemitic.

Jeffries, at his press conference, largely focused on the fact that the Trump administration had failed to inform Congress about the strikes in the normal manner and had still not provided a proper justification for the strikes or accounted for Iran’s nuclear material.

He also argued that the administration’s claims to have destroyed Iran’s nuclear program completely couldn’t be trusted.

Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), a former House majority leader and perhaps the most prominent Democratic supporter of the strikes, told JI that his support for the strikes was consistent with unilateral action taken by administrations dating back to President Bill Clinton. 

He added that it would be “hypocritical” not to support the strikes now, when administrations have said for decades that they will not permit a nuclear Iran, and said that the recent International Atomic Energy Agency report showed that Iran was “too close” to a nuclear weapon and “stopping them was the right thing to do.”

Hoyer also noted that Congress moves more slowly than the executive branch and that a slow public debate over a potential strike in Congress over strikes would have “incentivized [Iran] to move ahead as quickly as possible.”

He said that as a general matter, however, he believes that it is important for Congress to be able to put a check on the administration’s ability to go to war, though he said that the decision to strike Iran was a long time coming.

Fetterman, the only Senate Democrat who has announced he plans to oppose the war powers resolution, blasted some colleagues who have called the strikes unconstitutional. He said he would have opposed the Kaine resolution before the strikes.

He noted that previous Democratic administrations had conducted similar “one-off” strikes and argued that congressional approval would only be needed if the U.S. was going to start a broader, protracted war.

Fetterman also blasted Democrats for joining Massie’s effort calling him, “that weirdo from Kentucky.”

Among Republicans, Massie’s resolution may have seen some additional support from a handful of isolationist Republicans, but likely not many. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), the Republican who, alongside Massie, has been most outspoken against the U.S. strike, told Punchbowl News she would not support the effort.

But she also said she wanted to push to cut off U.S. aid to Israel, and has previously condemned Israel’s military action against Iran. 

A group of four House Democrats introduced legislation on Wednesday that aims to exempt Israel and Ukraine from the recent global tariffs that President Donald Trump imposed by executive order.

Trump announced a 17% tariff on Israel in April, above the global 10% minimum tariff that the president said he would apply to U.S. trading partners.

The Trump administration is “alienating some of our closest allies around the world, including those that are currently facing aggression from hostile nations,” Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), the bill’s lead sponsor, said in a statement. “I support efforts to increase domestic manufacturing, but those efforts shouldn’t come at the expense of our global standing, our national security, and the strength of our economy. Congress has to stand up to the destruction these tariffs are threatening against American families and our allies Israel and Ukraine, and I’m leading the charge to do it.”

The bill is co-sponsored by Reps. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL), Dan Goldman (D-NY) and Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ).

Moskowitz accused the administration of placing on Americans “the largest tax increase since 1968” through the tariffs, describing them as “a tax on American families that makes goods inaccessible, threatens retirement accounts, and takes a sledgehammer to U.S. economic growth.”

The legislation is a companion to a bill Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) introduced in early April. She sought unanimous consent in the Senate at the time to pass the bill, but was blocked by Republicans.

“Both these countries are currently under attack. They need the United States to be standing with them, not hitting them with nonsensical tariffs that could cause them even more harm,” Cortez Masto said at the time. “It is outrageous that my Republican colleagues blocked an opportunity to fix this and come together to protect our allies.”

Some Republicans have been critical of the administration’s decision to place tariffs on Israel, particularly since Israel announced it would lift all of its own tariffs on the United States, but most have opposed efforts by Democrats in the Senate to force votes on legislation to block the tariffs.

The administration has delayed the implementation of tariffs and multiple federal courts have ruled that the president does not have the unilateral authority to impose them.

A group of 22 left-wing House Democrats introduced legislation pushing for a series of sweeping and unprecedented new restrictions on U.S. aid to Israel, requiring specific authorizations from Congress for each transfer of numerous key weapons and guarantees from Israel about their use.

The legislation would prohibit the administration from transferring or selling a series of arms to Israel including several types of bombs, bomb guidance kits and tank and artillery ammunition without the passage of a distinct law from Congress authorizing the individual transfer.

The bill would require Congress, in those authorizations, to identify “the specific purpose or purposes for which such articles or services may be used for.” And Israel would have to provide “written assurances satisfactory to the President” that the weapons would be used in accordance with those specified purposes, as well as in line with existing U.S. arms sales law — which is already binding on Israel — and international law.

The proposal, which stands no chance of passing in the current Congress, goes beyond the conditions that have previously been proposed for U.S. arms sales to Israel or in place for any other recipients of U.S. aid. It contains no emergency waiver provision for the administration, should Israel face an attack.

Bradley Bowman, senior director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ Center on Military and Political Power and a former Senate staffer, told Jewish Insider that the bill “would be an extraordinary measure targeting Israel alone in a unique manner with the clear purpose of depriving Israel of some of the munitions it needs most” and is “among some of the most concerning anti-Israel legislation we’ve seen in recent years.” 

He said that, while Congress has placed conditions on arms transfers to other nations in the past, the requirement of specific congressional approval for each transfer is “particularly aggressive.” He described the bill as “part of a campaign on the far left in this country focused on depriving the world’s only majority Jewish state of the means of self defense.”

“If it were to become law, it essentially is an arms embargo against Israel for these munitions,” Bowman said, making it “incredibly time consuming” to provide those weapons and slow the transfers down by months, and giving anti-Israel members opportunities to further derail the process through procedural means.

The bill is led by Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-IL) and co-sponsored by Reps. Sara Jacobs (D-CA), Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), Mark Pocan (D-WI), Becca Balint (D-VT), Andre Carson (D-IN), Greg Casar (D-TX), Lloyd Doggett (D-TX), Veronica Escobar (D-TX), Maxwell Frost (D-FL), Chuy Garcia (D-IL), Jonathan Jackson (D-IL), Hank Johnson (D-GA), Summer Lee (D-PA), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Lateefah Simon (D-CA), Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), Nydia Velazquez (D-NY) and Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ).

A Ramirez spokesperson told JI that Ramirez introduced the legislation prior to the news of the murder of two Israeli Embassy staffers in Washington last week. “Out of an abundance of respect and care for the communities and loved ones impacted by the murders of Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim, Ramirez and the cosponsoring legislators decided to hold any plan to discuss it publicly, honoring the intention of the legislation to uphold our shared humanity and interconnectedness. We will be sharing more information on the legislation once members return to DC,” the spokesperson said.

Bowman noted that the group in support of this bill is nowhere near a majority in either chamber, but “could be increasingly problematic” as their numbers grow and members gain leadership roles in key committees.

He said the weapons in question are critical for Israel’s operations against Hamas and Hezbollah, as well as for preventing imminent launches of rockets toward Israeli cities. And, he noted, some of the weapons included, like the bomb guidance kits, are designed to improve targeting and decrease civilian casualties, making the effort counterproductive.

A group of 41 pro-Israel House Democrats released a statement on Wednesday praising the resumption of humanitarian aid to Gaza as helping to refocus international attention on releasing the hostages and calling for a comprehensive plan for postwar Gaza.

The statement, first shared with Jewish Insider, argues that the renewed delivery of aid, which began on Monday, was “essential to alleviate the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, so that the primary focus of the international community can return to releasing the hostages that remain in captivity.”

“We strongly believe that there can be no lasting peace while Hamas remains in power. Its tyrannical rule over Gaza must end. To achieve that objective, the United States, Israel, and key Arab partners must agree upon a serious and credible political and security plan to govern Gaza after the war,” the lawmakers added. “Then, with the hostages returned and Hamas removed from power, the rebuilding process can begin to ensure lasting peace and security for Israelis and Palestinians alike.”

The statement highlights that Israel has facilitated the entry of 1.78 million tons of aid into Gaza since Oct. 7, 2023, and states that aid “must be disbursed swiftly and safely to Palestinian civilians and not Hamas, which has been stealing aid since the start of the war.”

It notes that Hamas continues to hold 58 hostages, saying, “Every day that goes by without the hostages’ release is a dagger in the hearts of their families.”

“We call on President Trump and his administration to do everything within their power to secure the release of the hostages, facilitate the disbursement of aid, and bring a swift end to the war,” the statement concludes.

The statement was organized by Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY), in cooperation with Democratic Majority for Israel.

The statement was co-signed by Reps. Haley Stevens (D-MI), Greg Landsman (D-OH), Jimmy Panetta (D-CA), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), Jake Auchincloss (D-MA), Vicente Gonzalez (D-TX), Dina Titus (D-NV), Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) Don Davis (D-NC), Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL), Ritchie Torres (D-NY), Lois Frankel (D-FL), Tom Suozzi (D-NY), Wesley Bell (D-MO), Brad Sherman (D-CA), Angie Craig (D-MN), Hillary Scholten (D-MI), Grace Meng (D-NY), Frank Pallone (D-NJ), Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), Greg Stanton (D-AZ), George Latimer (D-NY), Emilia Sykes (D-OH), Sarah Elfreth (D-MD), Mike Levin (D-CA), Brad Schneider (D-IL), Steve Cohen (D-TN), Frederica Wilson (D-FL), Jim Costa (D-CA), Laura Friedman (D-CA), Laura Gillen (D-NY), Sarah McBride (D-DE), Marilyn Strickland (D-WA), Josh Riley (D-NY) and Janelle Bynum (D-OR), Adriano Espaillat (D-NY), Juan Vargas (D-CA), Marc Veasey (D-TX), Jimmy Gomez (D-CA) and Ted Lieu (D-CA).

“This statement from 41 congressional Democrats, spearheaded by DMFI, reflects a clear-eyed understanding of the moral and strategic imperatives at stake in the continuing Israel–Hamas war,” DMFI President Brian Romick said in a statement. “Hamas’s continued captivity of 58 hostages after some 600 days, including the remains of American citizens, is a humanitarian outrage that demands the world’s attention. At the same time, aid intended for Palestinian civilians must not be diverted by Hamas to fuel terror and prolong this devastating war.”

“Their voices send a powerful message: the United States must remain steadfast in its commitment to our ally Israel, to the return of the hostages — both living and dead — and to a post-conflict vision that rejects terror and embraces peace,” Romick continued.

House Democrats urged Education Secretary Linda McMahon not to make cuts to the Education Department’s Office of Civil Rights as employees work through the backlog of cases, which includes scores of civil rights complaints from Jewish students alleging discrimination at their universities since the Oct.7, 2023, attacks on Israel. 

After Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ) accused McMahon and the Trump administration of being broadly unconcerned with civil rights, citing the Office of Civil Rights and the Education Department “being decimated,” McMahon responded: “It isn’t being decimated. We have reduced the size of it; however, we are taking on a backlog of cases that were left over from the Biden administration.”

Asked why she’d reduce resources to the office given the backlog from the previous administration, McMahon replied, “Because we’re working more efficiently in the department.”

Rep. Lois Frankel (D-FL) similarly urged McMahon not to make cuts to OCR “if you are sincere about fighting antisemitism and also all kinds of unlawful discrimination.” Frankel also referenced several other programs she wanted McMahon to protect, a number of which McMahon expressed openness to considering. 

After recounting an experience of a Jewish friend who took their children out of the Washington, D.C., public school system due to its unwillingness to address concerns about antisemitism, Rep. Stephanie Bice (R-OK) offered McMahon an opportunity to speak about the rise of antisemitism in primary and secondary education. 

“Certainly the president has made it very clear that he does not condone any kind of discrimination — racial and especially, we’ve seen religious, we’ve seen it across our college campuses, some of the most elite in the country. We took very strong and very decisive action against those universities who clearly were not protecting Jewish students against antisemitism,” McMahon told the committee. 

“When you see students barricaded in a library, and others pounding on the glass going, ‘Death to Jews. Death to Israel. Death to United States,’ that is unacceptable at our college campuses. And we reacted,” she continued.

McMahon went on to discuss her engagement with Columbia University, praising its acting president, Claire Shipman, for her response to student protesters involved in the takeover of the school’s main library earlier this month.

“We reacted to Columbia first. This incident happened at Columbia, and I met with the president of Columbia. I’ve had two conversations now with the current president of Columbia. We’ve talked about things that we need to do at those universities. We want to be able to be supportive, but those universities, albeit they’re private, do receive federal funding. We have leverage to withhold some of that federal funding or to cancel some of the grants, and we would do that unless it could be proven that these colleges and universities are going to respect all rights and set their policy in place and enforce them,” McMahon said.

“I was complimentary to the acting president now at Columbia, Claire Shipman, when I talked to her last week, and I said, ‘You reacted just as you said you would to the recent uprising on campus. You were looking at whether or not– you’ve suspended students, are you going to expel them?’ And that’s still what she’s looking at. So we’ve seen that that kind of action can deliver results,” she continued. 

Rep. Seth Magaziner (D-RI) was home in Rhode Island during the congressional recess late last week, “stewing” about Tucker Carlson’s widely viewed interview with a vocal Holocaust revisionist.

In response, he sent a text to a group chat of Jewish Democratic members of the House suggesting they speak out, which led, in a matter of days, to a joint statement from all 24 Jewish House Democrats, a rare example of unanimity from a group including members from both ends of the Democratic Caucus.

“My concern was that this kind of embrace of literal fascism is happening in plain sight on the far right, and people have become so desensitized to it that they are treating it as normal, and we cannot let it become normal,” Magaziner told Jewish Insider on Tuesday.

He emphasized that he was concerned not only about the interview itself, which garnered millions of views, but also that it was promoted by Elon Musk and that Republican vice presidential nominee Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) refused to condemn it.

Magaziner said he drafted a statement on Friday and his colleagues were eager to join the statement.

“I’m very pleased that we were able to come together as a group, because it is an extremely ideologically diverse group, even when it comes to matters related to Israel, related to antisemitism, related to what it means to be Jewish in America,” Magaziner said. “It’s a very diverse group with often diverging opinions. But I’m glad that we were able to come together on this and come together quickly.”

Magaziner said there had been some discussion among the members of whether to mention Musk in the statement, given that the X owner deleted his post promoting the interview, but said the lawmakers ultimately decided to include the tech billionaire because he “never disavowed what Carlson and Cooper said” and “this is — just to be blunt — not the first time that Musk has dabbled with antisemitic ideas and statements.”

Magaziner acknowledged that Jewish House Democrats haven’t spoken in a similar unified voice to condemn antisemitism on the left, explaining that it was “easier in this case to find language that all members were comfortable with.”

But he said that he believes each of the Jewish Democrats has condemned antisemitism on the left “in the way that they felt was appropriate,” although there are differences of opinions of when and how to do so, and “what rises to the level of antisemitic versus perhaps misguided.”

Magaziner said, “we hope we can get our colleagues on the other side of the aisle” to speak out about Carlson and the interview, but noted that the Democrats didn’t reach out to their Jewish Republican counterparts about joining the statement.

“I thought it was important that J.D. Vance be included in the statement because he is running to be vice president,” Magaziner said. “And the reality is that our Republican colleagues were not going to sign on to a statement that was critical of J.D. Vance.”

Reps. David Kustoff (R-TN) and Max Miller (R-OH) declined to comment last week on the Carlson interview, and didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment about the statement.

Magaziner, when running for Congress, said he does not practice Judaism and highlighted his mixed heritage — his father is Jewish and his mother is Catholic. But he’s been involved with various efforts by Jewish House Democrats, particularly since the Oct. 7 attack on Israel. His office described the statement on Carlson as a “statement from Jewish members of the House.”

The Rhode Island Democrat explained that other Jewish Democrats approached him early in his term about joining regular informal meetings and discussions among Jewish Democrats.

“I said to them, ‘I don’t know whether or not it’s appropriate for me to be a part of that,’” but the lawmakers “were very welcoming, and they recognized that even though I don’t practice, that I do have Jewish heritage, that my family has experienced the antisemitism and the many traumas that have come with being Jewish through the years and and they welcomed me into those discussions.”

He said he would have deferred to a more senior member if they had wanted to lead the Carlson statement, but the lawmakers asked him to draft it.

The House Democratic leadership team, Reps. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), Katherine Clark (D-MA), Pete Aguilar (D-CA) and Ted Lieu (D-CA), in a joint statement issued on Sunday evening rejected comments by Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) describing Israel as a “racist state.”

Jayapal, speaking at the Netroots Nation conference in Chicago on Saturday, said, “I want you to know that we have been fighting to make it clear that Israel is a racist state, that the Palestinian people deserve self-determination and autonomy, that the dream of a two-state solution is slipping away from us, that it does not even feel possible.” Jayapal’s remarks came in response to chants from pro-Palestinian protesters who interrupted the event.

“Israel is not a racist state,” the Democratic leaders said. “As House Democratic leaders, we strongly support Israel’s right to exist as a homeland for the Jewish people.”

“Certainly, there are individual members of the current Israeli governing coalition with whom we strongly disagree. That is also the case with respect to some on the other side of the aisle who we serve with in the United States Congress,” they continue. “Government officials come and go. The special relationship between the United States and Israel will endure. We are determined to make sure support for Israel in the Congress remains strongly bipartisan.”

They also stated that they “look forward to welcoming Israeli President Isaac Herzog” for his speech before a joint session of Congress this week. At least four Democrats are expected to boycott Herzog’s speech. Lieu is a CPC member, the first to publicly distance himself from Jayapal’s comments.

Jayapal walked back her remarks on Sunday evening, stating, “I do not believe the idea of Israel as a nation is racist. I do, however, believe that [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu’s extreme right-wing government has engaged in discriminatory and outright racist policies and that there are extreme racists driving that policy within the leadership of the current government.”

She said that she was attempting to “defuse a tense situation” and was “on a very human level… responding to the deep pain and hopelessness for Palestinians and their diaspora communities when it comes to this debate, and I in no way intended to deny the deep pain and hurt of Israelis and their Jewish diaspora community.”

Separately, seven pro-Israel Democratic lawmakers have signed onto a draft statement saying they are “deeply concerned about” Jayapal’s  “unacceptable comments about our historic, democratic ally Israel.”

The statement, which was still circulating for additional signatories as of Sunday evening, has been signed so far by Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), Greg Landsman (D-OH), Brad Schneider (D-IL), Dean Phillips (D-MN), Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) and Kathy Manning (D-NC). A draft was obtained by Jewish Insider. 

The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism provides as an example of antisemitism, “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.” 

In the joint statement, the lawmakers said they “appreciate [Jayapal’s] retraction.”

They continued, “Regardless of extremist views from groups aligned with either party, efforts to rewrite history and question the Jewish State’s right to exist, or our historic bipartisan relationship, will never succeed in Congress. We remain committed to peace between Israel and the Palestinians to establish two-states that exist side-by-side in peace, prosperity, and mutual security.”

They also state that they “will never allow anti-Zionist voices that embolden antisemitism to hijack the Democratic Party and country” and that “efforts to delegitimize and demonize [Israel] are not only dangerous and antisemitic, but they also undermine America’s national security.”

Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt said in a statement that Jayapal’s initial comments were “rashly inaccurate” and “reckless,” adding that ADL “welcome[s] Rep. Jayapal’s clarification.”

“We see again and again how hostile rhetoric can spawn hateful actions, so we would hope that an elected official at her level would choose her words far more carefully,” Greenblatt said. “While we vehemently disagree with many of Rep. Jayapal’s characterizations of Israel and its policies, we share her hope of an ultimate two-state solution to the conflict.”

Greenblatt also offered to travel to Israel with Jayapal “to share with her a diverse, vibrant country where Jews, Muslims, Christians and Bahais; Arabs and Israelis; gay and straight; and essentially people of all ethnicities, faiths and persuasions are living and working side by side.”

Jeremy Ben-Ami, the president of J Street, which has endorsed Jayapal, praised her walk-back statement.

“Thank you @RepJayapal. You are staking out a thoughtful space on a tough issue,” Ben-Ami tweeted. “You’re defending @janschakowsky, expressing your support for the state of Israel and voicing important critiques of its government’s policies. Twitter may not value nuance but the world needs it.”