Plus, Larry David's fashion advice for Obama
Ilia YEFIMOVICH / POOL / AFP via Getty Images
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks during a ceremony commemorating Israel's Remembrance Day on Mount Herzl in Jerusalem on April 21, 2026.
Add JewishInsider on GoogleGood Monday morning.
In today’s Daily Kickoff, we look at the split between Washington and Jerusalem over the White House’s 15-point plan to disarm Hamas, and spotlight the House and Senate primaries in Minnesota that are testing the power of the state’s far-left activists. We look at the congressional primary taking shape in Hartford, Conn., where Rep. John Larson aims to hold his seat against a challenger calling for generational change, and report on the American Psychological Association’s decision to table a vote to recognize a Jewish group within the organization. Also in today’s Daily Kickoff: Will Scharf, Noach Hacker and Dario Amodei.
We also have a new on-demand Live Briefing that you can access throughout the day via our new app (on Apple and Android) and on our website.
Today’s Daily Kickoff was curated by JI Executive Editor Melissa Weiss and Israel Editor Tamara Zieve, with assists from Danielle Cohen-Kanik and Marc Rod. Have a tip? Email us here.
What We’re Watching
- Todd Blanche will be sworn in as attorney general this afternoon, following last week’s 50-49 Senate vote to confirm him.
- We’re keeping an eye on the talks between Iran and Oman to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, after the weekend yielded little progress toward reopening the waterway. President Donald Trump told Axios on Sunday that, despite Iran issuing new demands to the U.S. in order to reopen the strait, Washington is “only semi-negotiating with them” and is “low-keying it,” relying on Tehran’s economic crisis to bring it to an agreement.
- In Tehran, Mohsen Rezaei, the newly tapped head of the Islamic Republic’s national security body who led the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps during the 1980s and ’90s, issued new demands, including the end of efforts to target Iranian proxies in the region and the cessation of U.S. threats to Iran.
What You Should Know
A QUICK WORD WITH JI’S mELISSA WEISS
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday said Jerusalem “does not accept the 15-point document” agreed to last month by the U.S.-led Board of Peace and Hamas that would see the eventual disarmament of the terror group and withdrawal of the IDF from the Gaza Strip — a rare public break with the White House, which has touted the plan since it was announced.
In comments to his Cabinet on Sunday, Netanyahu said Israel “would not carry out any withdrawal until Hamas is disarmed.”
The White House and Jerusalem have largely been in lockstep on issues related to Gaza. The rupture over Hamas’ disarmament is one of the more significant policy breaks between President Donald Trump and Netanyahu.
Jonathan Conricus, a former IDF spokesperson who is now a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told JI that the mediating countries benefit from Hamas’ continued rule in the Gaza Strip and have no urgency to press for the terror group’s disarmament.
That lack of seriousness, he added, makes it unlikely that Hamas will take the necessary steps to disarm. “It’s all a show, it’s a charade, a spectacle,” Conricus said. “The only way that Hamas really ceases to control the Gaza Strip is if all of their weapons are handed in — not stored, not temporarily safeguarded somewhere else, but actually handed in, and if that is verified. As long as we won’t see that happening, I don’t think that Israel is going to agree with any charade.”
GOPHER BROKE
The latest Senate showdown between the center and the left set in Minnesota
In an echo of Michigan’s bruising Democratic Senate primary last week, the bitter Democratic primary for an open Senate seat in battleground Minnesota this week is pitting a moderate House member with a long-standing pro-Israel record, Rep. Angie Craig (D-MN), against an outspoken progressive, Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan, whose attack lines have frequently centered on AIPAC, which spent over $30 million in its unsuccessful effort to help Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI) in Michigan, Jewish Insider’s Matthew Kassel reports.
Neck-and-neck: Recent independent surveys have shown a statistical dead heat in the final weeks of the primary, with each candidate garnering around 40% of the vote. The candidates’ equivocations over AIPAC and individual ties to the group have also emerged as fault lines in recent weeks, complicating the ideological divisions that have shaped other primaries in which Israel and Middle East policy have featured prominently. In a reflection of the extent to which AIPAC is now viewed as a liability in Democratic primaries, Craig has distanced herself from the group, which has not officially made an endorsement in the race even as its donor network has contributed to her campaign.
ISRAEL ANGLE
Democratic primary for Craig’s House seat in Minnesota showcases Israel divide within party
The three major Democratic candidates vying to replace Rep. Angie Craig (D-MN) are charting distinct lanes on Israel policy but only one of them, at a recent debate, offered support for Israel. The front-runner, former state Sen. Matt Little, is the Democrat positioning himself as most hostile to Israel in the race, Jewish Insider’s Marc Rod reports.
The split: At a July 19 debate, Little called not only for the U.S. to stop sending military aid to Israel but also to impose an arms embargo “on the sale of all weapons to Israel,” preventing Israel from buying U.S. military systems — its primary source of armaments — with its own funds. He said he would have voted for the amendment, sponsored by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) to cut all U.S. aid to Israel and would have offered it himself if he had the opportunity. State Sen. Matt Klein, running as a moderate and seen as most closely aligned with Craig’s own record, was the only one of the three candidates who did not express support for the Massie amendment at the debate. State Rep. Kaela Berg charted out something of a middle position, criticizing but supporting the Massie amendment and calling for a complete halt to U.S. taxpayer funding to Israel.
CONNECTICUT COMPETITION
Longtime Connecticut congressman faces primary challenger making generational case for change
Longtime Rep. John Larson (D-CT) is facing a serious challenge to his political survival from former Hartford, Conn., Mayor Luke Bronin, the latest in a wave of challengers to make the argument for generational change in the House of Representatives. Larson, 78, has held his House seat since 1999, Jewish Insider’s Marc Rod reports.
Divide: Larson was among the House Democrats who voted last month against an amendment to cut off all U.S. aid to Israel, and is endorsed by AIPAC. At the same time, he’s been critical of the human rights situation in Gaza and opposed the Iran war. The district is home to the largest concentration of Jews in the state, largely in the Hartford area. Bronin, 47, criticized Larson for his vote, adding that if elected, he would not support any further offensive aid to Israel, though he said he supports defensive systems that protect civilians such as the Iron Dome.
TALKING TURKEY
New defense pact between Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan concerns U.S. national security experts
A coalition of Sunni regional powers signed a historic joint defense pact on Friday, but national security experts expressed deep unease over the arrangement, arguing that it reflects U.S. shortcomings in the Middle East while raising serious questions about its practical military feasibility, Jewish Insider’s Matthew Shea reports. The agreement, dubbed the Mecca Joint Defense Agreement, was signed in the Saudi holy city of Mecca by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif.
Raising concerns: Edmund Fitton-Brown, a former British diplomat and senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, emphasized that the pact poses strategic complications for both Jerusalem and Washington, while raising alarms for regional actors. “For Israel, it is further confirmation of Turkish ambitions, which are explicitly directed against Israeli interests,” Fitton-Brown said. “For the U.S., it is questioning how reliable or permanent it is viewed as a player in the region. Stirring up a hornet’s nest in the Gulf and then appearing unsure about an endgame, or even clear red lines, has left American allies uncertain about the future and willing to hedge their bets.”
TRANSITIONS
Trump taps Will Scharf as White House counsel
President Donald Trump announced on Sunday that White House Staff Secretary Will Scharf will replace David Warrington as White House counsel effective Sept. 1, Jewish Insider’s Melissa Weiss reports.
Trump’s announcement: In a Truth Social post, Trump praised Scharf, whom he said has done “an amazing job” as staff secretary, as “Tough, Strong, and Smart! He also loves our Country, and respects the Law.” Scharf, who is Jewish, has served as White House staff secretary, a lower-profile role that includes managing the paper flow to the president, since early 2025. At the time of his appointment to the position, Trump described Scharf as “a highly skilled attorney who will be a crucial part of my White House team.”
IN LIMBO
American Psychological Association postpones vote recognizing Jewish representation
The American Psychological Association delayed its vote on Friday to recognize the Association of Jewish Psychologists within its organization, marking the second time this year the organization has postponed the decision to recognize Jewish representation in the organization, Jewish Insider’s Haley Cohen reports.
State of play: The APA has six official ethnic associations, representing Arab Americans, Black psychologists and Asian Americans, among other minority groups. Proponents of the proposed Jewish group within the APA argue that Jewish psychologists deserve to be included as well, especially given the rise of antisemitism within the organization. On Friday, the Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Medical Association condemned APA’s decision to postpone the vote again.
Worthy Reads
The Takeover of the Democratic Party: In The Free Press, Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) warns of the Democratic Socialists of America’s “hijacking” of the Democratic Party, and the refusal by many colleagues to stand up against the group’s growing influence. “What’s most worrisome is not just the ignorance underlying so much of the heated, abusive, and violent anti-Jewish sentiment. It’s also the cowardly amplification and kowtowing by the political class. As a Democratic member of Congress, I can attest that for a growing number of my colleagues, being anti-Israel has now become a nonnegotiable moral litmus test.” [FreePress]
Pat’s Politics: Politico’s Jason Beeferman spotlights Rep. Pat Ryan (D-NY), a West Point graduate and former Army intelligence officer who has shifted leftward as the party has moved in the same direction. “Former New York City Comptroller Brad Lander, a Mamdani ally who trounced Goldman by harnessing voters’ anger with Israel’s war in Gaza, was invited to be one of Ryan’s five featured speakers at his campaign kickoff rally last month. ‘I’ve known Pat for 10 years, and I hate to say this,’ said one Democratic official, granted anonymity to speak candidly about their colleague. ‘But I couldn’t tell you a single thing that he genuinely, sincerely cares about or believes in, other than advancing his own political career.’” [Politico]
Failing Grade: The Washington Post’s Megan McArdle reflects on the American Association of University Professors’s decision last month to endorse Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed in the state’s Democratic Senate primary. “Frankly, I’m not sure the AAUP’s endorsement even mattered. But to the extent it did, the net effect was probably a small boost for Republican Senate nominee Mike Rogers. The endorsement of El-Sayed will also send a message about the AAUP to legislators in other redder states, where races are often decided in the Republican primary and El-Sayed’s flavor of politics is poison.” [WashPost]
Find more Worthy Reads in our Live Briefing via our new app (on Apple and Android) and website.
Word on the Street
Sens. James Lankford (R-OK) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) introduced the “Lebanon Sanctions, Stabilization and Support Act,” which sanctions those involved in supporting Hezbollah, provides funding for state-run infrastructure and civil services and expands aid to the Lebanese Armed Forces and Internal Security Forces, conditioned on progress in countering Hezbollah…
The Senate on Friday passed a bill championed by the late Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to sanction Russia and extend existing sanctions on Iran by an 86-11 vote, with a handful of mostly Democratic lawmakers objecting over new tariff powers granted in the bill…
Rep. Ed Case (D-HI), one of the most moderate Democrats in Congress, easily fended off a primary challenge from state Sen. Jarrett Keohokalole, who had argued during the campaign that the state’s 1st District was in need of generational change…
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that Israel was “not aligned with U.S. national security objectives,” noting, “I want there to be a strong U.S.-Israel relationship. I support Israel. I cannot support this government’s actions”…
James Talarico, the Democratic Senate nominee in Texas, said he would not vote to send further military aid to an Israeli government led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and that aid beyond that should be conditioned on Israeli policies in Gaza and the West Bank, Jewish Insider’s Marc Rod reports…
Haverford College settled a lawsuit filed by a handful of students and the group Jews for Haverford over administrators’ handling of antisemitism on the Pennsylvania liberal arts campus…
The Information profiles Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, diving into his unorthodox leadership style and his tendency to rely on a small inner circle while ignoring outside advice — as the company approaches its IPO. Also detailed: Amodei’s South Florida meeting with Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, who had become friends with Amodei’s wife, Camilla Clark, about potential Anthropic funding (Kushner passed).…
Chabad of the Upper East Side and Park East Synagogue announced a new partnership that will see Chabad clergy, including longtime Rabbi Ben-Tzion Krasnianski, join the leadership of Park East alongside Rabbi Arthur Schneier…
The New Yorker reviews Wendy Wasserstein’s “An American Daughter,” a revival of which is now in previews at the Pershing Square Signature Center…
The Associated Press spotlights the Jews of Cochin, India, as the last remaining members of the community — the majority of which moved to Israel in the 20th century — work to preserve remnants of the past…
The Israeli government signed off on the redirection of approximately $333 million to the Ministry of Defense — including some $283 million from the Ministry of Economy — for urgent needs; the funds had originally been earmarked for Intel’s since-frozen expansion in Kiryat Gat…
The New York Times does a deep dive into Israeli and U.S. efforts to target Hezbollah’s funding sources and financial lifelines…
The Houthis claimed responsibility for an attack on Saudi Arabia’s Aramco refinery amid increasing tensions between the Iran-backed group in Yemen and Riyadh; the Saudi Energy Ministry confirmed a fire at the site but did not say what caused it…
Apollo Global Management in recent months appointed partner Reed Rayman to lead its AI sector and develop relationships to help the firm land more large AI infrastructure financings, The Information reports…
The founders of Israeli AI startup Decart are in advanced talks to sell the company to a major international technology company for approximately $6 billion-$7 billion, Calcalist reports…
Noach Hacker is joining the Israel Democracy Institute as vice president of policy…
Bill Goichberg, the founder of the Continental Chess Association who grew the field of competitive chess, died at 83…
Pic of the Day
In the season finale of Larry David’s “Life, Larry and the Pursuit of Unhappiness,” former President Barack Obama joins David for a sketch about the infamous tan suit that stirred controversy during a 2014 press conference. Watch the seven-minute clip of David and Obama here.
Birthdays
Former director of the Jewish Museum of Vienna, she was a founder of the German-language magazine Nu devoted to Jewish politics and culture, Danielle Spera (middle) turns 69…
CEO at Royal Health Services in Beverly Hills, Calif., Robert N. Feldman… Professor emeritus of biochemistry at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Shimon Schuldiner turns 80… NYC-based real estate developer, he is the founder and principal of Clipper Equity, David Bistricer turns 77… Former governor of the South African Reserve Bank, the first woman to hold that position, Gill Marcus turns 77… Conservative rabbi who served as executive director of the Interfaith Alliance, Rabbi Jack Moline turns 74… Retired co-leader of the securities litigation practice at Weil, Gotshal & Manges, he is the co-president of NYC’s Metropolitan Council on Jewish Poverty, Joseph S. Allerhand… Certified registered nurse anesthetist for the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Edward Salkind… Author, media consultant and former film critic for The New York Post and The New York Daily News, Jami Bernard turns 70… Former member of the California state Senate, Steven Mitchell Glazer turns 69… Sephardi chief rabbi of Israel and Rishon LeZion since 2024, Rabbi David Yosef turns 69… Former member of the U.S. House of Representatives (D-MI), now a distinguished senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, Andy Levin turns 66… Professor of physics and astronomy at Tel Aviv University, Yaron Oz turns 62… Tech entrepreneur, he served as a Washington state senator until 2023, Reuven Michael Carlyle turns 61… Former member of the Florida state Senate, he authored a book about his time as one of the first employees of Yahoo, Jeremy Ring turns 56… Deputy attorney general of Israel, Sharon Afek turns 56… Regional chief technology officer in the South Texas office of Technologent, Jason P. Reyes… Senior director of development for the NYC-based Tikvah Fund, Eytan Sosnovich… Marketing and editorial consultant, Sophie Vershbow… SVP of commodities compliance at Citibank, Jacob Cohen…
Advocates say the pattern — agents advising cuts to Jewish names, editors going silent on Israeli-themed submissions — deepened sharply after the Oct. 7 attacks
Getty Images
Books
Meg Keene, an established nonfiction author who has sold more than 150,000 copies of her two books offering tips for wedding planning, couldn’t find a publisher for her first novel — not because of the writing, she said, but because it was “too Jewish.”
Keene said she was advised by one agent to cut anything Jewish from the manuscript unless it drove the plot, including changing a character’s name because Yael read as Israeli. The book, written soon after the Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attacks in Israel, about a Jewish woman’s long-distance relationship with a boyfriend in Tel Aviv, was never published.
Keene is one of a growing number of professionals who have announced in recent weeks the launch of their own Jewish publishing companies, aimed at fulfilling a need for frustrated authors who say they’ve hit the same wall: agents advising them to cut Jewish names and references to Israel, editors going silent on submissions that once would have been fast sales and a mounting sense that the industry’s embrace of the #ownvoices storytelling trend — a hashtag used to amplify the work of diverse and minority voices — has an unspoken exception for Jewish writers.
Keene recently announced the launch of Meg Keene Books, her own imprint at Wicked Son Press, a Jewish publisher known mostly for right-leaning nonfiction. The company plans to release four to six fiction books a year, from romance to thrillers, selected by Keene and the Wicked Son founders, with the goal of elevating Jewish voices.
“Earlier this year I got to the point where I realized I didn’t have anything left to lose,” Keene told Jewish Insider. “Jews were having all these conversations behind the scenes but it felt like whoever came forward was going to destroy their career. I felt like I was in a position — because of my past in digital publishing and connection to editors, I knew how to do it. So many authors couldn’t sell their first book. At least I had a track record, I could say I was a successful author and be taken seriously.”
“PEN America’s recent blog post about the targeted harassment of Jewish and Israeli authors and literary institutions is an important acknowledgment of this problem,” Ari Ingel, executive director of Creative Community For Peace, told JI. “At the same time, many in our community believe that acknowledgement came only after a long period in which prominent incidents involving Jewish and Israeli writers did not receive the kind of timely and forceful public defense expected from a leading free-expression organization.”
While discrimination against Jewish authors has been reported for years, industry professionals say it became more apparent and accepted after Oct. 7 and the ensuing Israel-Hamas war.
In 2024, the Palestinian Festival of Literature published a petition signed by Irish author Sally Rooney and more than 1,000 others, which stated that, “We cannot in good conscience engage with Israeli institutions without interrogating their relationship to apartheid and displacement.” More recently, the free speech organization PEN America published a report detailing interviews with more than 30 Israeli and Jewish writers and literary professionals describing a widening cultural isolation.
“PEN America’s recent blog post about the targeted harassment of Jewish and Israeli authors and literary institutions is an important acknowledgment of this problem,” Ari Ingel, executive director of Creative Community For Peace, told JI. “At the same time, many in our community believe that acknowledgement came only after a long period in which prominent incidents involving Jewish and Israeli writers did not receive the kind of timely and forceful public defense expected from a leading free-expression organization.”
There is no reliable industry-wide figure showing what percentage of Zionist or Jewish authors have been dropped, although Keene has collected data specifically on Jewish fiction publishing, which found that between 2023 and 2024, there was a 76% decline in fiction deal announcements to large presses that mentioned Jews, Judaism or Israel. “Publishing decisions are generally confidential and are rarely explained to involved parties,” said Ingel. “But the evidence points to a recurring and increasingly documented pattern rather than a handful of isolated cases.”
“What we are seeing is a form of a silent boycott set in, with authors being dropped or their projects not being picked up by editors, publishers, agents and publicists, sometimes not because of anything they had said about Israel, but because they were told that it was not the right time for a Jewish-themed book,” Ingel said. “[New] publishing ventures of this kind are necessary in the current climate.”
Howard Lovy with Canary Publishing and Jessica Kasmer-Jacobs with Blueprint Literary are among several others also launching new literary agencies for Jewish and Israeli authors.
Lovy, a former editor at Jewish Telegraphic Agency, said he started noticing Jewish exclusion in the industry before Oct. 7, with a novel he wrote several years ago.
“A publisher and agent kept saying, ‘We value diversity and we want under-represented voices,’ and it didn’t take me long to figure out that they did not mean Jews. We were not considered marginalized voices and it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy: We become marginalized because of this perception that we’re over-represented,” he told JI.
“Then Oct. 7 happened and in my work as a book editor and as a Jewish author and advocate, people came to me telling me their stories about how they were canceled or their agents suddenly wouldn’t return their calls. They’ve been asked to take the Jewish content out, or if there’s an Israeli character make it something else.
“No one publisher can pick up the slack for canceled and excluded authors; it’s literally going to require building an entire new industry,” said David Bernstein. “So we’re doing everything we can to not only encourage new entrants, but also to leverage our decades of publishing expertise to give them a leg up and to help build sustainable businesses. We’ve got a lot of things in the works behind the scenes that will change the game entirely.”
“It’s hard to prove a negative, to say because they’re Jewish this happened. But I have a lot of anecdotal evidence,” he said.
Lovy said the mission of Canary “is going to be finding the books that have been rejected elsewhere because of their Jewish or Zionist content,” though the press has not signed any authors yet.
“That doesn’t mean explicitly Zionist, it could mean anything,” he continued. “The criteria I’m looking for right now is whether this is something the mainstream literary world rejected that otherwise has literary merit. That’s going to be top of my list. We’re on a mission to amplify these voices that have been silenced.”
The new companies follow the 2020 launch of publishing company Wicked Son, co-founded by David Bernstein and Adam Bellow.
“We were operating out of a sense of civic responsibility to rebuild the Jewish reading public; for Jewish authors, opportunities to publish were widespread and often lucrative,” Bernstein told JI. “Obviously all of that changed in the last couple of years as we’ve all seen the rising antisemitism in publishing and other arts and media. What’s heartening is that, mirroring our own renewed energy to build a thriving, independent Jewish publishing world, so many others are joining the fight as well.
“No one publisher can pick up the slack for canceled and excluded authors; it’s literally going to require building an entire new industry,” said Bernstein. “So we’re doing everything we can to not only encourage new entrants, but also to leverage our decades of publishing expertise to give them a leg up and to help build sustainable businesses. We’ve got a lot of things in the works behind the scenes that will change the game entirely.”
“It’s not just a matter of publishers, it’s a matter of the entire pipeline,” Jewish literary consultant and advocate Erika Dreifus said. “It’s a matter of writers feeling empowered to attend conferences and classes and to write their Jewish stories in supportive spaces. Then it’s a matter of agents being willing to look at those stories and take them on. Then it’s a matter of the books being covered in pre-publication trade reviews, which I have noticed are not necessarily including certain narratives and certain authors. That’s how reviewers find out about books. Everything has a drip-down effect.”
Jewish literary consultant and advocate Erika Dreifus described the wave of new ventures as “wonderful,” but cautioned against reading it as a comprehensive fix for what ails Jewish authors.
“There’s certainly more writers out there who would love to be published than there are going to be slots, even with these new publishing houses. I welcome the developments and I’m eager to see what they’ll all be doing,” she told JI.
The deeper problem, she said, extends beyond the number of publishers willing to take a chance on Jewish stories.
“It’s not just a matter of publishers, it’s a matter of the entire pipeline,” Dreifus said. “It’s a matter of writers feeling empowered to attend conferences and classes and to write their Jewish stories in supportive spaces. Then it’s a matter of agents being willing to look at those stories and take them on. Then it’s a matter of the books being covered in pre-publication trade reviews, which I have noticed are not necessarily including certain narratives and certain authors. That’s how reviewers find out about books. Everything has a drip-down effect.”
She also called on the Jewish philanthropic world to “take a look” at helping to build the ecosystem “even beyond these publishers.” (Lovy declined to provide details on how his company will be funded, but said it has a funder who gave enough seed money to get it going.)
“Already within the Jewish philanthropic world, a miniscule fraction of funding goes to arts and culture to begin with. How much of that goes to individual initiatives?” said Dreifus.
“It’s all a big problem and challenge. We need to do a lot more,” she added. “This is an encouraging step, but if it’s just going to be publishers shouting into the wilderness, that may not be ultimately as positive a development as one would hope.”
Citing Rabbi Diana Fersko’s framework for how Jews have historically responded to antisemitism — stay and fight; leave and build something new; or do nothing — Dreifus said after witnessing this for two decades, she is personally worn out by the “stay and fight” approach. She’s now focused on supporting new, welcoming spaces for Jewish stories rather than fighting within existing institutions, although she credited groups like the Jewish Book Council for trying to work both the “stay and fight” and “build something new” angles at once.
Naomi Firestone-Teeter, CEO of JBC, told JI that “Jewish authors thrive when publishers are willing to take a chance on them. Publishers thrive when their books can reach readers. And the Jewish community thrives when it has access to high-quality Jewish literature with diverse voices and perspectives.”
“Authors need opportunities across the full spectrum of publishing, from major houses to independent presses. We believe that the existence of a wide range of publishers promotes a healthy ecosystem for Jewish literary excellence,” she said. “Part of our role is to demonstrate to publishers that there is a real, engaged audience for Jewish books and ideas.”
Jews in the industry have noted a double standard as major publishing houses continue to publish authors with viewpoints hostile to Israel or Jews.
Publishing giant Simon & Schuster, Ingel noted, recently published prominent Palestinian-American author Susan Abulhawa, who has repeatedly used terms such as “parasites,” “demons,” “ghouls” and “monsters” to describe Jews.
“The point is not that Abulhawa’s books should be banned or she should be silenced. The point is that an industry willing to platform such extremism is not showing the same courage when it comes to merely platforming Jewish, Israeli and Zionist writers telling any story,” said Ingel.
There’s another part of the equation that’s equally critical — sales after a book is published.
Firestone-Teeter pointed to her group’s program called Nu Reads, a bi-monthly book subscription service. “In less than a year, Nu Reads has grown to nearly 2,500 subscribers; this is significant, when, by some accounts, close to 90% of titles released by major publishing houses sell fewer than 2,000 copies,” said Firestone-Teeter.
But for authors who want their books on store shelves, “that’s gonna be an issue,” said Lovy.
Lovy edited a Judith Magazine April report that found many independent bookstores refuse to include Jewish and Zionist authors. Last week, Nashville indie bookstore Bell Bird Books canceled a planned book launch event for Jewish author Alyssa Rosenheck’s memoir, White. Blonde. Jew.: A Call to End Extremism, Speak Up, and Reclaim Center, after an online pressure campaign accused the store of promoting Zionism, according to statements from the author and the store’s owner.
“It’s ironic because that pushes readers to Amazon to get the books,” said Lovy. “Everybody wants to support the local indie bookstore but that’s hard to do when they’re silencing Jewish and Zionist voices. I don’t see that as an impediment but more that we can work around it to make them still become best-sellers.”
Even as she champions the new wave of Jewish-focused press, Keene said she still hopes there’s room for Jewish authors within mainstream publishing houses.
“Jews have a long history of founding companies when we’re shut out and then turning them into serious businesses, so I don’t think this is ghettoization,” she said. “I think this is the beginning of businesses starting that will be very significant. That said, should we still be pursuing publishing and representation with the big five [Penguin Random House, HarperCollins, Macmillan Publishers, Hachette Book Group and Simon & Schuster]?”
“Yes. I want them to change. I haven’t seen proof they will, but I don’t think we should stop trying.”
Miller is being accused of abuse by his ex-wife Emily Moreno, daughter of Sen. Bernie Moreno, who on Sunday said Miller is unfit for office
Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
Rep. Max Miller (R-OH) leaves for a break during a House Republican Steering Committee meeting at the U.S. Capitol Building.
Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-OH) publicly accused Rep. Max Miller (R-OH), his former son-in-law, of domestic abuse on Sunday and said Miller is unfit for office. Moreno’s comments came in response to a video address by Miller denying wrongdoing amid growing scrutiny of the allegations of domestic violence and abuse by his ex-wife Emily Moreno, the senator’s daughter.
Recent polling and reports indicate that the unfolding scandal could lead Miller, one of the few Jewish Republicans in the House to lose his House seat. The New York Times reported last week that Miller’s polling is slipping in the wake of the recent allegations about his past conduct, with a Democratic internal poll showing him just one point ahead of his Democratic challenger, progressive Brian Poindexter, despite the district favoring Republicans.
Another poll conducted by a Republican firm last week reported by NOTUS found Poindexter leading Miller by five points, with Miller’s favorability 15 points underwater.
The allegations against Miller include repeated physical abuse of both Emily Moreno and their daughter.
Democratic aides told the Times they intend to target the district, which the Cook Political Report rates as “likely Republican.” The handicapper already increased Democratic chances of winning the seat as the abuse allegations gained increasing attention.
White House officials are concerned that Miller’s continued candidacy endangers Republicans’ chances of holding the House, according to the Times. Miller, in a statement, vigorously denied to the newspaper that he was in any danger of losing his seat.
Miller released a video on Sunday denying the abuse allegations against him, also posting what he claimed was exculpatory evidence. He has argued that his ex-wife suffers from mental health issues, is fabricating her claims and is a danger to him and their child, repeating allegations he has made in other public interviews. Miller said in the video address he intends to stay in the race and continue campaigning.
He has emphasized that he has never been charged with or convicted of wrongdoing and has been permitted to maintain joint custody of their 2-year-old daughter.
A spokesperson for Emily Moreno called the statement “shameful” and “a bizarre and lie-filled rant about his ex-wife to desperately try to save his political career.”
After previously withholding comment, Moreno said in a lengthy statement that the past two years since his daughter’s divorce from Miller have been “hell” and that his priority has been keeping the matter private to protect his family but that Miller’s “increasingly erratic and dangerous behavior has made that impossible.”
He called Miller a “danger” to his daughter and granddaughter and said that he fails to meet any “basic standards of character” to serve in office and “should not continue to be free” until he receives psychological help.
Miller dismissed Moreno’s claims and accused him of trying to “hide from your own media circus” and of only speaking out for political reasons, as well as questioning why he had not spoken out earlier.
Some of Miller’s colleagues in Ohio’s congressional delegation were muted in their reactions to Moreno’s accusations against him, with no members of the House Republican Conference calling for Miller’s resignation.
Rep. Mike Turner (R-OH), the former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and a fellow Ohio Republican, declined to answer several questions on the accusations against Miller on Sunday, telling CBS’ “Face the Nation” that the matter should be handled “in a courtroom” as opposed to the court of public opinion.
“This is a matter of litigation. This is best handled in a courtroom and not in a TV studio,” Turner told the network. “This is an issue that is currently part of a divorce and part of litigation that’s in a courtroom, and the court should be handling this, which is clearly ongoing, and that’s where this needs to be.”
Miller, while in office, has been a close ally of Ohio’s Jewish community and active on various issues of interest to the Jewish community including supporting Israel and combating antisemitism. He has also faced harassment, threats and violence for being a Jewish member of Congress.
He serves on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
Miller also helped lead the charge to oust former Rep. George Santos (R-NY) from the House, during which time Santos alluded to allegations of domestic violence against Miller. That reference was to a separate, earlier allegation: in 2021, Stephanie Grisham, a former White House press secretary who dated Miller before his marriage to Emily Moreno, publicly accused him of physically abusing her during their relationship. Miller denied those allegations as well.
Miller’s challenger Poindexter is an ironworker, union organizer and Brook Park, Ohio city, councilmember whose record on Israel and other issues of interest to the Jewish community is largely undefined.
“No one credibly accused of holding a gun to his wife’s head and breaking their two-year-old daughter’s collarbone belongs in the halls of power,” Poindexter said on X on Sunday.
He has been endorsed by the Congressional Progressive Caucus PAC and Our Revolution, the progressive campaign group founded by alumni of Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) presidential campaign.
House GOP lawmakers included $73 billion in defense spending in their bill, but the Trump administration has said it needs an additional $350 billion
Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images
Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker (R-MS) arrives for a confirmation hearing in Dirksen building on Tuesday, May 13, 2025.
Senate Republicans said this week that a House-passed budget reconciliation bill does not contain enough defense-related funding and that they want to significantly increase it, setting up a clash between GOP lawmakers in the two chambers.
The bill passed by House Republicans includes $73 billion in defense-related funding, designed to largely cover the administration’s $87.6 billion supplemental funding request for the Iran war. But the administration has said it needs an additional $350 billion, separate from the Iran war funding, to help bring to fruition the $1.5 trillion defense budget it envisions for 2027.
The reconciliation bill is aimed at advancing GOP spending priorities without Democratic support by avoiding the Senate filibuster.
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS), who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, told Jewish Insider, “I’d rather it be much bigger.”
Sen. Ted Budd (R-NC) told JI he doesn’t think the House-passed defense funding is sufficient.
“I think that number really needs to be plussed up,” Budd said. “It’s such a far gap from what we see with the supplemental request, which is legitimate. There’s a lot baked into the supplemental that’s necessary. We can get that in the form of reconciliation. It has a long way to go.”
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) told reporters this week that that view is shared by other Senate Republicans. He said he would prefer to double the reconciliation funding, and that increasing the defense funding level might be necessary to get the 50 Republican votes needed.
“Frankly, if we’re gonna do this and what it’s gonna take to get this done, you kind of want to make it worthwhile, and I think the president asked for $350 billion … We’re at 67,” Thune said on Monday.
Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) took a somewhat different view than some of his colleagues, telling JI that the Senate will have to follow the House’s lead, even if he personally wants more funding.
“I think it ought to be higher, but we’ve got to work with the House and what they’re willing to do,” Scott said. “That’s the number the House was willing to do.”
Some House conservatives have worried about boosting defense spending without other budget cuts to offset it.
George Moraitis is running against Boca Raton Mayor Scott Singer and businessman Dan Franzese to take on Moskowitz
George Moraitis campaign website
Former Florida state Rep. George Moraitis.
Former Florida state Rep. George Moraitis is hoping that a bipartisan approach and his background in the Statehouse and as a military veteran will make him a formidable candidate to take on Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) in South Florida in November.
Moraitis is running in the Republican primary in Florida’s 25th Congressional District against former Boca Raton Mayor Scott Singer, who is Jewish, and businessman Dan Franzese. In the general election, the winner will face Moskowitz — or his socialist primary challenger — in the district redrawn to favor Republicans.
Republicans are also seeking to block a Libertarian candidate from making it onto the ballot in November, fearing that a third-party candidate could strip away some of the GOP vote and hand a victory to Moskowitz.
Moraitis trails Singer and Franceze in fundraising — Singer has raised nearly $2 million to Franzese’s $1.5 million and Moraitis’ $840,000 — but recently picked up the endorsement of the Sun Sentinel, the largest newspaper in the area.
Moraitis told Jewish Insider he spent his “whole life in public service,” serving in the Navy on submarines and as a state representative. He said he wants to work to “restore the American dream,” protect U.S. national security and defend “our God-given freedoms” of worship, speech and assembly, including combating rising antisemitism, as well as what he described as efforts to shut down churches and Christian prayer.
During his time in the Navy, Moraitis was stationed with the 6th Fleet in Naples, Italy, a role that included helping to defend allies such as Israel, which was at the time part of the U.S.’ European Command. He never had the opportunity to travel to Israel while in the Navy but said he would plan to do so as a member of Congress.
He said that Israel is an important part of both Jewish and Christian “shared spiritual heritage.”
“I appreciate that the Israeli government has done so much to protect religious minorities, particularly the Christians,” Moraitis said. “In addition to having a Jewish state, they’ve done more than anyone in history has done, frankly, to protect the Christians.”
He said he’s seeing challenges on the left and “to some extent on the right” to Israel’s status as a Jewish state. He argued that many of those opposing Israel’s right to exist fail to understand Israel’s creation in the aftermath of the Holocaust and centuries of antisemitism.
“I am committed to the Jewish people having a homeland in the nation of Israel. I mean, I think there’s a spiritual component to that. We definitely have a national component … our own national security is tied to being strong in the Middle East. Israel has been our strongest ally in the world,” Moraitis said. “I am 100% committed to Israel existing as a Jewish homeland and being a strong and important ally of the United States.”
Moraitis said he also supports continued U.S. military aid to Israel — increasingly a hot-button issue on both sides of the aisle.
He said he was supportive of the administration’s efforts to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, adding that it was an “open question” whether that goal could be accomplished diplomatically.
He acknowledged that polling has shown the American people would not support an expanded war with Iran but said he supports U.S. efforts to control the Strait of Hormuz and impose a blockade on Iranian ports.
“I do want to give peace a chance. We can’t make this about regime change because we really can’t ultimately control that without huge numbers of casualties and a much bigger effort than what we’re putting into it, and I don’t think the American people are prepared for that,” Moraitis continued.
“I do want to see us get to a peace where Iran gives up their nuclear weapons,” he said. “I do feel that we’ve had to do this. I also feel that we need to move this to a place where we do stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, whether or not this regime continues on.”
He warned that the United States will regret if it fails to take the opportunity to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and continuing to spread terrorism around the region, warning that Iran could attack the United States or Israel if it obtained a nuclear bomb.
In a stance that’s becoming increasingly unpopular among Republicans, Moraitis said he still believes that there will ultimately need to be some form of a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians, while emphasizing that neither Hamas nor the Palestinian Authority are equipped to run a Palestinian state and that such a state would need to be demilitarized and might take decades to bring to fruition.
“Israel has to have the right to defend itself. They can’t give up their security to do it, the way they tried to do it … pulling out of Gaza [in 2005]. Obviously it didn’t work because ultimately the vacuum was created and Hamas stepped into it. And so, I think this next effort would have to be something a lot more supervised,” Moraitis said. “But I do ultimately support a transition to an autonomous state.”
In the long run, he said that resolving the continued conflict would be beneficial for both sides.
Asked about addressing antisemitism at home, Moraitis touted the hearings and other efforts by congressional Republicans over the past four years to address antisemitism on college campuses, which he said should continue. He said that the federal government should leverage federal funding to compel schools to take action on antisemitism.
“I just think we need to take a stronger stand on it,” Moraitis continued, specifically raising concerns about Florida Republican gubernatorial candidate James Fishback, who has campaigned on an openly antisemitic line. “There’s just really no place for that in our party or really even in America.”
He also emphasized the need to call out antisemitism when it appears and to continue to fund security grants for communal institutions.
Moraitis argued that he’d be the best-positioned Republican to win the seat in November given his status as a veteran and his experience in the Statehouse. He also argued that he has a “track record of winning — I’ve never lost an election,” arguing that some of his competitors have underperformed the GOP ticket in the past.
“I do feel like if I get up there, I’m doing this for the right reasons. I want to get things done. I have a record of reaching across the aisle to get things done,” he continued. “There’s a lot of things we can do on a bipartisan basis. I think Washington’s gotten too polarized, and I think some of the candidates, the way they’re running is going to make it difficult to govern with these small majorities that we have.”
And he emphasized that, while he’s not Jewish himself, “there’s really not going to be any daylight between myself and [the Jewish candidates running in the seat] on supporting Israel and fighting antisemitism.”
He also said that the Republican Party is “better positioned to support Israel and fight antisemitism” — a pitch to pro-Israel Jewish voters who have been a strong base of support for Moskowitz in the past.
‘They are talking to us right now. They’d love to make a deal. … I don’t think it’s time yet, but I’m willing to listen,’ the president said at the White House Correspondents' Dinner
Mandel NGAN/AFP via Getty Images
President Donald Trump speaks during the 2026 White House Correspondents' Association Dinner at the Waldorf Astoria in Washington, D.C., on July 24, 2026.
President Donald Trump said in remarks at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner on Friday that the U.S. is continuing to negotiate with Tehran even amid U.S. strikes on Iran, but added that he didn’t think that Iranian leaders were ready to make a deal.
“They are talking to us right now. They’d love to make a deal. I don’t think they’re ready to. I don’t think it’s time yet, but I’m willing to listen,” Trump said at the dinner, held at Washington’s Waldorf Astoria after being rescheduled following a shootout at the annual April dinner between a lone gunman and Secret Service agents at the Washington Hilton.
Trump added that if Iran were to obtain a nuclear weapon, the country “would use it,” potentially targeting the U.S., Israel or elsewhere in the Middle East.
Hours later, the Senate rejected a similar measure
Kevin Carter/Getty Images
The U.S. Capitol Building is seen at sunset on May 31, 2025 in Washington, DC.
The House passed a second Iran war powers resolution on Thursday following the resumption of hostilities between the U.S. and Iran, with a handful of Republicans who have argued that continued operations violate the War Powers Act again siding with Democrats on the measure.
But hours later, the Senate blocked a separate resolution, also along narrow margins.
Reps. Tom Barrett (R-MI), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Warren Davidson (R-OH) again sided with all House Democrats to pass the resolution by a 214-208 vote.
Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) said prior to the vote that she planned to support the war powers resolution but ultimately did not.
The Senate resolution was blocked by a 49-47 vote, with Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) voting with most Democrats in support of the resolution and Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) voting against it.
The House and Senate previously passed a similar resolution attempting to end the war, which Democrats have cited to describe the renewed hostilities as illegal.
The measure passed in the House on Thursday was in the form of a concurrent resolution — as was the previous resolution passed by Congress — which is not presented to the president and is generally not seen as carrying the force of law, though Democrats have been working to explore avenues to enforce it.
Also on Thursday, Rep. Greg Meeks (D-NY), the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, introduced a resolution demanding that House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) initiate civil action in federal courts to enforce the previously passed war powers resolution directing the removal of U.S. forces from the Iran war.
Matt Maasdam is gaining late momentum running on his national security credentials, but Bernie Sanders-backed William Lawrence is winning over the base
Campaign website
Matt Maasdam
The Democratic primary in Michigan’s 7th Congressional District — a Lansing-area swing seat key to Democrats’ hopes for taking back the House — has turned into a three-way battle between two moderate Democrats with national security backgrounds and a far-left activist who has emerged as a contender for the nomination despite repeated controversies over extremist comments.
On the campaign trail, Matt Maasdam, a former Navy SEAL, has leaned into his background as a veteran and a military aide to former President Barack Obama who carried the nuclear football. Bridget Brink, a career foreign service officer, is highlighting her service as U.S. ambassador to Ukraine from 2022 to 2025.
William Lawrence, the progressive backed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), is a former organizer with the Sunrise Movement, which bills itself as leading “the climate revolution” but also embraces other left-wing causes.
Adrian Hemond, a Michigan political strategist, said he expects the race to be close, predicting that the three candidates could all finish within several points of each other.
He previously told JI that Lawrence holds the progressive lane to himself, which could be an asset if Maasdam and Brink split the moderate vote — but he could lose out on young, progressive-leaning Michigan State University students who won’t return to campus until after the Aug. 4 primary. Lawrence has also struggled with Black and older voters.
The race initially appeared to be a contest between Maasdam and Brink. Lawrence gained momentum and attention by scoring a series of prominent endorsements from Sanders and other progressive leaders.
But Lawrence’s rise hit a stumbling block with the re-emergence of past comments disparaging Black political leadership, which prompted condemnations from Michigan leaders and the Congressional Black Caucus. After those initial revelations, Lawrence subsequently came under fire for past comments disparaging Obama and his administration.
In past comments on the “Hegemonicon” podcast he hosted, first uncovered by Jewish Insider, Lawrence repeatedly argued, for the sake of climate and economic goals, Americans would have to abandon the idea of the American dream and their way of life.
Discussing whether and how ideas of “abundance” or “degrowth” could or should be part of an agenda to fight climate change, Lawrence said on an episode of the podcast release in January 2024, “we’ve experienced the last several years of how that got filtered through the lens of American global competitiveness and geoeconomic dominance and, some of these questions about the role of the American consumer on a global stage and and whether or not we are proposing the continuation of the American consumer way of life and its translation into China and presumably the rest of the globe, is really viable in a climate-changing world.”
“We made that move, and now we need to reckon with the contradictions inherent even in that move,” Lawrence said. “I’m wondering how we can inspire a sense of abundance for people in the United States while, frankly, destroying the American way of life and the negative connotations, and material realities that has come to mean.”
In a statement, Lawrence defended the comments.
“We’ve been told that we would achieve happiness by buying more TVs and taking on a bigger mortgage,” Lawrence said. “Instead, the cost of housing, healthcare, and education is skyrocketing, while Michigan’s land and water is under threat. We need a new version of the American dream in which we can all have economic security while leaving a healthy environment for our kids and grandkids.”
In another episode, released in December 2023, Lawrence said that “there are certain aspects of the American dream that need to die — but maybe that’s another episode,” arguing that most people would not be able to have “the McMansion in the suburbs.”
A senior political advisor close to the Maasdam team said that the endorsements from Sanders and other top progressives catapulted Lawrence toward the front of the field, but the recent revelations of his past comments have stunted that growth.
The advisor said the endorsements from Sanders and others likely earned Lawrence the votes of around a third of the Democratic electorate who will likely vote for the most-left candidate in the race, leaving around two-thirds up for grabs.
Last week, Maasdam picked up an endorsement from Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), who subsequently filmed an advertisement supporting him. The freshman senator represented the Lansing-area district before being elected to the Senate.
The advisor close to the Maasdam campaign said that they see the race now largely as a contest between Maasdam and Lawrence, but said they believe Maasdam is well-positioned going into the final weeks of the race and peaking at the right time.
He has been the beneficiary of more than $1.6 million in outside spending by VoteVets, with another outside group, Crush MAGA PAC, spending nearly $1 million to attack Lawrence, and a third group, Michigan Values PAC, spending around $1 million to attack Brink. A nursing union group has spent $400,000 boosting Lawrence.
At the same time, they also acknowledged a real concern that Maasdam and Brink could split the moderate vote, allowing Lawrence to win with a plurality.
Brink has faced criticism from primary rivals for her service under and praise of President Donald Trump — though she ultimately resigned in protest of the administration’s efforts to pressure Ukraine.
The advisor argued that, compared to Brink, Maasdam has a better resume and background as a fighter, and said Maasdam plans to highlight his links to Obama in the wake of the revelation of Lawrence’s comments disparaging the former president.
Maasdam posted an X video on Monday highlighting his support for and ties to Obama, while calling out Lawrence’s criticism of him.
In spite of their moderate and national security focused backgrounds, neither Maasdam nor Brink appears to have spoken much about Israel policy during the campaign, and neither campaign provided comment to JI on their stances.
Lawrence has attacked the two for declining to describe the war in Gaza as a genocide, and has made cutting off arms sales to Israel a major plank of his campaign.
All three have been critical of the war with Iran.
The three-week-old poll describes the memorandum of understanding as a ‘peace deal to end the war,’ purportedly garnering 60% support from American voters
Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu via Getty Images
Smoke rises after airstrikes in Tehran, Iran on March 13, 2026.
Amid its escalating conflict with Iran, the White House’s social media feed posted a three-week-old poll on Monday from a right-wing polling firm indicating Americans support the U.S.-Iran memorandum of understanding established last month.
The poll was posted on both President Donald Trump’s Truth Social account and tweeted by the White House’s X account.
The June 29 survey from the firm Big Data Poll, whose methodology has drawn scrutiny from non-partisan pollsters, showed 60% of registered voters supporting the “Iran Peace Deal,” with just under one-quarter opposed and 15% undecided.
The poll’s loaded wording characterizes the MOU as a “peace deal to end the war with Iran,” though the signed agreement only launched talks to negotiate a permanent end to the conflict.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Jewish Insider regarding the timing of the poll being posted.
The statement came after the New York congressman voted to cut off all U.S. aid to Israel
Photo by Stephanie Keith/Getty Images
Rep. Pat Ryan (D-NY) visits the Purple Heart Museum during a campaign event on November 2, 2022 in New Windsor, New York.
Rep. Pat Ryan (D-NY) said that he no longer wants AIPAC’s endorsement and would be “returning the funds” the group’s PAC had sent his campaign, following his vote on Wednesday, along with 102 other Democrats, to cut off all aid to Israel. The New York Democrat also said he would refund individual donors who had previously supported his campaign if they made the request.
“I expect groups like AIPAC will not support me in my future elections and frankly, I don’t want their support,” he wrote in a social media post explaining his vote, saying he would no longer back $3.3 billion in annual military aid to “a corrupt and increasingly dangerous Netanyahu regime.”
In a separate post responding to a question from AIPAC Tracker, an extremist account accused of fomenting antisemitism, Ryan confirmed he did not want AIPAC’s endorsement and would be “returning the funds” sent to his campaign.
A spokesperson for Ryan clarified that Ryan is returning AIPAC’s “PAC funds.” Ryan added, “I am grateful for any individual donor who has supported my campaign. My position is clear and if an individual requests a refund, I will happily provide it.”
Ryan, a mainstream Democrat who holds a swing seat in New York’s Hudson Valley home to a sizable Jewish voting constituency, has cultivated a profile as a moderate economic populist. At the same time, he has been building ties to a growing range of leading left-wing Israel detractors such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and congressional nominee Brad Lander, who last month defeated a pro-Israel House Democrat in a district spanning Brooklyn and Lower Manhattan.
Ryan’s about-face, and his broader recent evolution on Middle East policy, illustrates the extent to which even moderate Democrats are now spurning Israel as well as AIPAC amid a marked shift in voter sentiment against the Jewish state in the wake of the Gaza war. It also demonstrates the rising popularity of the far-left flank of the Democratic Party scoring several notable victories in a string of congressional primaries this election cycle.
Deryn Sousa, a spokesperson for AIPAC, said on Thursday it was “unfortunate” that “Ryan has turned his disagreement with this Israeli government into an attack on American citizens, vilifying their beliefs and participation in our democracy.”
“We trust he’ll uphold his word and immediately refund all the support he has received from many individual AIPAC members since he first ran for Congress,” she told Jewish Insider in a statement.
In a statement to JI, Ryan said his vote “does not represent an abandonment of the state of Israel or the Jewish people. It does not deny the fact that Hamas is a terrorist organization. It does not neglect the profound grief of Oct. 7, nor the devastation in the years that followed.”
“What this vote does represent is a reset,” he continued. “An opportunity to step back and rebuild towards a better future for Israelis, Palestinians and the Middle East and to send a message to Netanyahu’s government that the status quo is unacceptable. I stand ready to work with an allied Israeli government that recommits itself to democratic values and meaningful progress toward a two-state solution.”
Ryan was still listed as an AIPAC endorsee on the group’s online political portal as of Thursday night, but the option to donate to his campaign had been deactivated.
The leading House Democrat said U.S. policy in the Middle East ‘has to change’ and is ‘unsustainable’ but would be ‘broadly inclusive’ in its new iteration
Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) speaks during a news conference at the U.S. Capitol Building on July 13, 2026 in Washington, DC.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) said on Thursday that should Democrats regain control of the House in the upcoming midterm elections, the party will adopt a “broadly inclusive” but fundamentally new approach to policy on Israel.
Jeffries’ comments follow a historic, highly divisive floor vote on Wednesday where nearly half of House Democrats broke with him to support an amendment cutting off $3.3 billion in U.S. foreign military aid to Israel. The amendment to the 2027 State Department appropriations bill, introduced by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), ultimately failed, but laid bare a continuing erosion of support for Israel within the Democratic caucus.
“The situation relative to the United States’ relationship with Israel, the Palestinian people and policy in the Middle East has to change because the current status quo is unsustainable,” Jeffries said at a press conference. “Our approach will be one that is broadly inclusive … [and will include] dialogue across the entire spectrum of the House Democratic Caucus and then be able to land on the highest common denominator, but being guided by the effort to actually create a just and lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinian people.”
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said that should Democrats retake the House, the party will adopt a “broadly inclusive” but fundamentally new approach to policy on Israel.
— Jewish Insider (@jewishinsider) July 16, 2026
"The situation relative to the United States' relationship with Israel, the Palestinian people and… pic.twitter.com/AELh50as7i
Jeffries outlined that the future Democratic approach will be “anchored in several different principles,” including a renewed commitment to a two-state solution.
“[It will include] Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish and democratic state and homeland for the Jewish people, and at the same time, pressing the urgent need to establish an independent Palestinian state that allows the Palestinian people to live with dignity, respect, and self-determination — and that needs to be dealt with urgently.”
Jeffries also noted that the Democratic Party under his leadership will support all necessary measures to allow for the “prosperity” of the Palestinian people and the alleviation of “suffering,” including calling for a surge of humanitarian assistance into Gaza.
“It means not just the reconstruction of Gaza, but the modernization of Gaza and investing, along with our partners in the Gulf states and moderate Arab nations, in a path toward prosperity for the Palestinian people,” Jeffries said. “Hamas needs to be disarmed and completely removed from power, and we need to deal with the out-of-control settler violence that the Netanyahu administration has allowed to take place in the West Bank, and perpetrators of that violence should be sanctioned and criminally prosecuted.”
Still, Jeffries noted that Israel remains a valuable ally.
“[The Democratic policy approach also includes] recognizing that Israel is an ally of the United States of America in the fight against terrorism, whether that’s Iranian-backed proxies, Hezbollah, Hamas or the Houthis,” Jeffries said.
Even as the amendment was overwhelmingly rejected, the vote underscores the anti-Israel mood within the Democratic Party is growing
Kevin Carter/Getty Images
U.S. Capitol building on July 12, 2026 in Washington, DC.
The House voted 314-104 on Wednesday to reject an amendment to the 2027 State Department appropriations bill that would have cut all $3.3 billion in annual U.S. aid to Israel. However, 103 Democrats, a near-majority of the caucus, voted in favor of the measure, with 98 others voting no and 10 voting present.
The record number of Democrats voting in favor of cutting off U.S. aid to Israel highlights the extent to which Democratic support for the Jewish state has eroded, and comes months after a vote in which 40 Senate Democrats backed blocking some weapons sales to Israel.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) introduced the amendment last month to eliminate the $3.3 billion in annual foreign military financing provided by the U.S. to Israel as laid out in the 2016 memorandum of understanding between the two countries. The Kentucky lawmaker, who was defeated in his GOP primary this year, was the only Republican member to support the amendment.
Some Democratic officials — on both sides of the issue — described Massie’s amendment as poorly drafted and overly broad, warning that it would also impact non-military aid as well as U.S. Embassy operations in Israel. Democratic leadership ultimately did not whip members for or against the vote.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) said in a letter on Tuesday that he planned to oppose the amendment and efforts to strip all U.S. aid to Israel, despite also noting that the relationship between the two countries requires “urgent change.”
House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-CA) also voted no on the amendment. Aguilar told Jewish Insider last month that support for Israel’s right to exist in safety and security should continue to be a policy position of the Democratic Party, but cautioned that support for Israeli government policies would not be unconditional.
Meanwhile, House Minority Whip Rep. Katherine Clark (D-MA), in announcing she would vote yes, noted that the measure was “overly broad” and “not an attempt to have a serious and necessary debate about offensive military aid to Israel.” Despite her criticisms, she said her vote was a signal that the relationship needs to change.
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), once a reliable supporter of Israel, supported the Massie amendment, but called it an “unfortunate choice.”
“The United States must be a force for security and stability. The American people are rightly demanding an end to a perpetual cycle of war, and the Netanyahu government cannot maintain its current course,” Pelosi said. “Therefore, while this amendment is ill-conceived, I vote yes for the message that it sends.”
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), a critic of Israel who is a potential Democratic candidate for president in 2028, called the vote a “very important moment.”
“A majority of Democrats voted in favor of this Massie amendment. To me what this says is that the majority of the Democratic party is most in touch with the American electorate writ large … and the Republicans are not,” Cortez said. “This has been an issue where both parties have been resistant to change.”
Ocasio-Cortez said lawmakers who voted against the amendment are “stuck in the past.”
Rep. Greg Casar (D-TX), who chairs the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said in a statement on Tuesday that he would support the amendment because the “American people are crying out for an end to U.S. tax dollars subsidizing Israel’s military.” Casar and the CPC whipped Democrats to support the amendment.
“At a time when millions are struggling to make ends meet, we are sending billions of dollars to a military that has killed tens of thousands of civilians in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon,” Casar wrote. “I am aware House Democratic leadership has a different position on this amendment … I respect their leadership.”
Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), the former No. 2 House Democrat and a staunch supporter of Israel, opposed the amendment and argued it would “dangerously undermine America’s national security,” limit the U.S.’ ability to counter terrorist organizations and make it harder to leverage the U.S. relationship with Israel toward peace.
“I understand the frustration many members feel with some of the policies and actions of the current Israeli government — as well as their concerns about its commitment to the peace process and a two-state solution,” Hoyer said. “However, this amendment would embolden the enemies of peace, those who seek the complete elimination of Israel, and those looking for an excuse to murder Jews. It is a vote to weaken our ability to engage in the region, and it is a vote against American security, against American interests, and against Americans’ safety.”
Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL), who voted no, lambasted the amendment as having no legislative impact or role in helping the prospects for Middle East peace.
“This cynical Republican amendment was put forward to stoke division and divide people here in the United States, not end the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians or provide a path forward,” Schneider said. “I will seek to understand how such a flawed legislative proposal — one that would hurt Israelis and Palestinians, as well as America’s standing in the world — generated support.”
He said that supporters of Israel must work to “rebuild a bipartisan consensus” in support of Israel as well as Palestinian self-determination.
Rep. Eugene Vindman (D-VA), who ultimately voted against the amendment, said that under Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, “Israel has lost its way,” suggesting that Netanyahu had undermined Israeli security and damaged the U.S.-Israel alliance.
“Yet, as a Jewish refugee who fled oppression in the Soviet Union, I have long believed that Israel is a refuge for many families like mine,” Vindman said. “These convictions made this one of the most difficult votes I’ve cast because Israel needs to change course. However, I could not support an amendment as poorly written as this one that would eliminate key funding provisions that support Palestinian security forces, humanitarian aid, and defensive systems to protect innocent civilians.”
Key Democratic committee leaders, including the ranking members of the Appropriations, Foreign Affairs and Intelligence committees, all voted against the amendment, while Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), the ranking member on the Armed Services Committee, voted in favor.
Several pro-Israel House Democrats who are facing contentious primary challenges in which Israel has become a key issue — including Reps. Wesley Bell (D-MO), Shri Thanedar (D-MI) and Ed Case (D-HI) — voted against the amendment.
Reps. Haley Stevens (D-MI) and Angie Craig (D-MN) also voted against the amendment, while Rep. Chris Pappas (D-NH) voted present. All three are running for the Senate.
But Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA), who is running against Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) in Massachusetts and has tried to tack to the progressive Markey’s left, said in a statement released prior to the vote that he would support the amendment, writing, “We simply cannot continue to condone Netanyahu’s actions that are against our moral conscience and our own national security interests by perpetuating the status quo.”
Other lawmakers who have generally been reliable supporters of Israel — including Reps. Jake Auchincloss (D-MA), Glenn Ivey (D-MD), Pat Ryan (D-NY), Laura Friedman (D-CA) and Brittany Pettersen (D-CO) — voted for the amendment.
“I just voted to block sending $3.3 billion of our taxpayer dollars to Netanyahu’s government. It’s wrong on every level,” Ryan said. “I expect groups like AIPAC will not support me in my future elections and frankly, I don’t want their support. Hardline stances that refuse to stand up to a corrupt and increasingly dangerous Netanyahu regime have no place in our politics.”
Auchincloss said that his vote to cut funding to Israel was designed to send a message to both President Donald Trump and Netanyahu.
“With their disastrous war against Iran, their empowerment of settler violence in the West Bank, and their strategic incoherence against Islamist terrorism, both President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu have sacrificed [Congress’] trust,” Auchincloss said.
He said that the amendment is “not the ideal mechanism of action,” and raised concerns about Massie’s use of antisemitic tropes in his reelection campaign.
“I have weighed these problems against the central thrust of the amendment: there must be consequences for Trump and Netanyahu,” Auchincloss continued. “Those consequences should not impair the State of Israel’s right to defend itself against the atrocities of the terrorist regimes that threaten it. Israel and the United States have common interests, shared values, and a long history. Israel and the United States are allies.”
He also said that upcoming Israeli elections, the next memorandum of understanding with Israel and the long-term impacts of the Iran war offer “an opportunity to renew the U.S.-Israel alliance on shared principles and a bipartisan basis going into the 2027 appropriations process.”
Groups including AIPAC, J Street, the Jewish Democratic Council of America, Democratic Majority for Israel and the American Jewish Committee all opposed the amendment, though J Street said the result sent a “strong message” that Democrats agree that the party should pursue a “fundamentally different American approach to the U.S.-Israel relationship and the region.”
Over a dozen Democrats previously endorsed by AIPAC, including Auchincloss, Clark, Friedman, Pelosi, Pettersen, Ryan, Smith and Reps. Gabe Amo (D-RI), Maggie Goodlander (D-NH), Julia Brownley (D-CA), Josh Harder (D-CA), Steven Horsford (D-NV), Julie Johnson (D-TX), Bill Keating (D-MA), Seth Magaziner (D-RI), Richard Neal (D-MA) and Joe Neguse (D-CO), voted for the amendment.
Orthodox Jewish groups that have long warned that such a move would have negative impacts for Jewish morning prayer and raise dangers for school children
CHRIS DELMAS/AFP via Getty Images
This illustration photo shows a clock in the background of a smartphone showing the time after daylight saving time was implemented in Los Angeles, California, on March 15, 2022.
In a bipartisan vote pushed in part by President Donald Trump, the House passed the Sunshine Protection Act, making daylight saving time permanent, a situation that raises concerns for Orthodox Jewish groups that have long warned that such a move would have negative impacts for Jewish morning prayer and potentially raise dangers for school children who have to travel to school before daybreak.
The bill passed the House by a 308-117 vote, with 95 Democrats and 22 Republicans voting no. The issue has been a priority for Trump, and lawmakers have also included the same legislation in a must-pass transportation bill, with near unanimous support in committee.
Rabbi AD Motzen, the national director of government affairs at Agudath Israel of America, said that, in spite of the popular desire to eliminate time changes, “We are concerned, however, that by choosing permanent daylight saving time for the entire country it will put children at risk and affect our religious practices.”
Motzen emphasized that permanent daylight saving time would set up post-9 a.m. sunrises in parts of the country for several weeks a year, posing potential dangers to students who would have to travel to school in the dark. He also warned that extending daylight saving time “will create an extreme hardship on observant Jews,” making it “extraordinarily difficult — if not impossible — to arrive on time for a job and [effecting] the start time of our schools.”
Nathan Diament, the executive director of the Orthodox Union Advocacy Center, said that making daylight saving time permanent would “raise safety issues for children who would be going to school in the pitch dark for many weeks of the year,” about which health experts have expressed concern.
He said that it would also “interfere with the ability of members of our community to engage in congregational prayers and get to their places of work on time.”
Motzen also emphasized that a previous change to permanent daylight saving time was quickly reversed after Americans experienced its actual impacts.
Attention for the bill’s opponents now turns to the Senate, where the bill has some vocal opponents.
Diament noted that some Senate lawmakers, including Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), expressed “firm opposition to this measure,” offering his thanks for their efforts.
Motzen also placed his hopes on the Senate blocking passage of the legislation.
“We are hopeful that the Senate will consider all of the effects of DST and compare them to the effects of permanent standard time or maintaining the status quo before rushing into this major change,” Motzen said.
Members from both parties warned lifting penalties would reward Erdoğan's destabilizing actions, while senators at NATO summit said Turkey could rejoin F-35 program if concerns over Russian S-400 system are resolved
Burak Kara/Getty Images
Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan speaks to supporters at his party’s Istanbul mayoral candidate Murat Kurum's campaign rally on March 29, 2024 in Istanbul, Turkey.
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle remain deeply skeptical of President Donald Trump’s plans to lift sanctions on Turkey and revive its participation in the F-35 fighter jet program, but members of a bipartisan Senate delegation attending the NATO summit said Wednesday they could support the move if Ankara resolves longstanding security concerns over its Russian-made S-400 missile defense system.
Trump said at the NATO summit on Tuesday that he’s preparing to remove sanctions under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA), explaining, “We don’t want to sanction friends.” The CAASTA sanctions block the administration from selling Turkey F-35s until it disposes of an S-400 missile defense system it purchased from Russia.
“Selling one of America’s most advanced fighter jets to Turkey is not in the best interest of the United States,” Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) told Jewish Insider. “It risks compromising critical technology and sends the wrong message to our allies in Europe and the Middle East. Restrictions on the sale of F-35s to Turkey should absolutely remain in place while Erdogan continues to operate Russian S-400s, in accordance with existing U.S. law.”
Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY) also called on the administration not to allow the F-35 sale to proceed.
“Erdogan has aligned himself with Iran and Russia, harbored Hamas, refused to sanction Russia, undermined American counter-ISIS operations, continues to illegally occupy part of Cyprus, has repeatedly directed illegal military jet overflights above the Greek Islands, and called for the destruction of Israel,” Malliotakis said in a statement to JI. “Additionally, he continues to jail his political opponents and has denied dozens of journalists access to the NATO Summit.”
“Providing Turkey with our most advanced fighter jet would jeopardize U.S. national security, risk sensitive technology falling into the wrong hands, and endanger our allies in the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East,” she continued.
Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) said that lifting CAATSA sanctions or reopening the possibility of F-35 sales would be a “profound mistake” that “would reward Erdogan’s actions toward Israel as well as his domestic strongman behavior, and it would be tantamount to handing [Russian President Vladimir] Putin the blueprints to our technology.”
“Congress imposed these sanctions because Turkey’s acquisition of the S-400 posed an unacceptable threat to U.S. and NATO security, and those concerns remain every bit as valid today,” Sherman said. “Until Turkey permanently disposes of the S-400 system, we should not consider lifting sanctions or returning Turkey to the F-35 program.”
He emphasized Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s repeated hostile language toward Israel as well as the threat that operating the S-400 in proximity to the F-35 would pose to sensitive U.S. stealth technology.
“Trump cannot unilaterally authorize the sale of F-35s to Turkey,” Sherman added. The legal process by which the White House could lift the sanctions unilaterally remains unclear.
Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL) emphasized that Turkey remains in breach of CAATSA and the sale should not proceed.
“Congress passed CAATSA in 2017, and the law is very clear: it’s illegal to bring Turkey back into the F-35 program so long as it has the Russian S-400 air defense system. This violates the law,” Schneider told JI. “We cannot let President Trump give Putin a backdoor to one of our most technologically advanced aircrafts, just because an authoritarian leader who hosts Hamas flatters him.”
Speaking on the sidelines of the NATO summit at a press conference on Wednesday morning, members of a bipartisan delegation sounded a more positive note toward Trump’s effort.
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and co-chair of the NATO observer group, noted that “[Sen.] Thom Tillis [R-NC] and I wrote the legislation that prohibited, that kicked Turkey out of the F-35 program because of their acquisition of the S-400.”
“If there is an acceptable way to deal with the S-400 and the threat that that poses to the technology and the F-35 and there is satisfactory agreement on the part of all parties about that, then I think having Türkiye back in the F-35 program would be a positive development, both for Türkiye and for the United States,” Shaheen added. “But we still have questions to answer with respect to what’s being proposed, and we haven’t gotten those answers, so we will wait to see what happens.”
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD), also participating in the press conference, agreed with Shaheen on the matter, saying, “Hopefully it can be resolved. Türkiye is a major NATO contributor, and anything that we can do to provide them with the resources to be an even stronger adversary with regard to incurrences by Russia in Europe, the better off we all are, and one of those is to have that tool of the F-35.”
Asked about the U.S.-Turkey relationship, Shaheen said, “I think Congress views the relationship with Türkiye as positive, and particularly with respect to Türkiye’s role in NATO, there are some concerns about the commitment to democracy and how that is playing out in Türkiye with respect to elections, but I think that there is an appreciation for the importance of the defense industrial base in Türkiye, and how that contributes to NATO, and that that will continue in Congress.”
Rounds added, “we really need to re-energize” the industrial base “among all of the NATO countries.”
“We need what each of our NATO allies can offer with regard to that industrial base, and Türkiye does not stand alone, they stand with everyone else, but they have some real opportunities here for advancements,” Rounds continued. “They were one of the countries selected to participate originally in the manufacturing of the F-35 fighters and that shows a strong competency in technological areas that provided that award to them in the first place, and so we want Türkiye, along with all of our NATO allies, to be able to participate in this growth of an industrial base that makes it easier for us to respond to areas of aggression by Mr. [Russian President Vladimir] Putin.…”
Rep. Mike Turner (R-OH) said during the press conference that “the details that have been shared with us do appear to be promising,” with regard to the F-35 and S-400 issues.
Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) added that “the legitimate national security concerns that drove the actions led by Sen. Shaheen … would continue if the S-400 were to be deployed somewhere else, so concerns about the possibility of critical American technology related to the F-35 being misappropriated or sent to Russia would also pertain if there were some resolution.”
Rep. George Latimer (D-NY), however, said that Congress should push to block the sale of F-35s if Trump insists on moving ahead with it.
“President Trump’s inclination for deal-making with dictators like President Erdoğan is grossly neglectful of our national security interests at home and abroad,” Latimer told JI. “This Congress — both houses and both sides of the aisle — needs to speak out against this situation and remain adamant for a Joint Resolution of Disapproval should this administration move to readmit Turkey back into the United States F-35 program.”
Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV) and 17 other House Democrats sent a letter to House leaders on Monday urging them to “stand ready to exercise your authority under statute to prevent” the administration from allowing Turkey back into the F-35 program by introducing a joint resolution of disapproval to block the move.
The letter emphasizes that the administration is required to maintain the CAATSA sanctions until such time as Turkey disposes of the S-400 — which Turkey has not. “Beyond the legal question, we are also concerned about the strategic message this decision would send to U.S. partners in the Eastern Mediterranean and beyond,” the letter continues, noting Turkey’s aggression against Greece, Cyprus, Armenia and Israel.
“CAATSA was passed by overwhelming bipartisan margins in both chambers precisely to ensure that Congress, not any individual president, retains a meaningful check on decisions to reward adversary-aligned conduct with American military technology,” the lawmakers wrote. “The integrity of that framework and the signal it sends to every country weighing whether to purchase Russian arms depend on Congress being willing to enforce it.”
Actually waiving or lifting the CAATSA sanctions is likely easier said than done, and could spark conflict with Congress. The original legislation provides little wiggle-room, requiring sanctions on anyone or any country that engages in business with the Russian defense or intelligence sectors.
Congress added a modified waiver provision in 2018 that requires the administration to certify that the waiver would not endanger U.S. alliances or adversely affect U.S. operations and that the waiver recipient is actively working to decrease its use of Russian military equipment or is otherwise cooperating with the U.S. on critical matters.
Updated certifications and reports to Congress are required every 90 days.
Under CAATSA, Congress can advance a joint resolution of disapproval to overturn the administration’s decisions on sanctions relief or arms sales, though it’s unlikely that the Republican-controlled Congress would publicly buck Trump on the issue.
Matt Zweig, the managing director for policy at FDD Action and a former congressional staffer who helped craft the original CAATSA bill, told JI, “Lifting these sanctions is generally easy to announce but will likely be hard to execute. The sanctions and the congressional review mechanism are embedded in the law, unwinding them runs straight through the Hill,”
Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) said on X that he hoped that a report about Trump’s move was “wrong,” following up by sharing information about CAATSA sanctions.
Rep. Chris Pappas (D-NH) said in a separate statement, “It’s outrageous for Trump to even consider readmitting Turkey to the F-35 program while Erdogan’s government continues to violate U.S. law and threaten our allies. We cannot reward Erdogan’s aggressive and destabilizing activity across the region.”
Reached for comment, a spokesperson for Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R-FL) referred JI to a statement that Bilirakis and other Greek-American Republican House members previously released opposing the sale of military jet engines and F-35s to Turkey.
“As Greek American Members of Congress, we are deeply concerned about reports of a proposed military sale of jet engines to Turkey. Turkey continues to be a destabilizing force in the region through its expansive and disputed maritime claims, continued illegal occupation of Cyprus, and rhetorical demonization of Israel,” the lawmakers said, also raising concerns about Ankara’s decision to harbor Hamas leaders and refusal to sanction Russia.
“We are actively engaging with the Administration and House leadership to obtain additional information regarding this reported sale and to express our strong opposition to any prospect of Turkey’s reintegration into the F-35 program without complete compliance with CAATSA requirements,” the statement continued.
Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC), one of the most vocal supporters of Turkey in the House, offered the most unqualified support for Trump’s effort to roll back sanctions.
“President Trump and [U.S.] Ambassador [to Turkey] Tom Barrack have displayed visionary leadership and pragmatism alongside valued NATO ally Türkiye,” Wilson said. “Türkiye has played an instrumental role in assisting Syria’s stabilization after over a decade of mass murder under butcher [Bashar al-]Assad, who correctly fled to Moscow. We don’t sanction friends. We work together for a better future.”
The group identified four bills in the House’s online safety push that it felt could play a role in addressing online antisemitism, which were ultimately packaged into the KIDS Act
Getty Images
Illustrative
In a bid to protect Jewish children from rampant antisemitism on the internet, the Jewish Federations of North America is pushing lawmakers to support the KIDS Act, a major bipartisan package of legislation focused on children’s safety online that passed the House late last month by a 267-117 vote.
Omer Yarden-Oppenheim, director of government relations at JFNA, told Jewish Insider that online antisemitism has been a major conversation and challenge for Jewish families, especially since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel. He said the group identified four bills in the House’s online safety push that it felt could play a role in addressing online antisemitism, which were ultimately packaged into the KIDS Act.
“No single bill will solve these challenges right away, but we know that the KIDS Act is a meaningful bipartisan step towards making these platforms safer and more accountable for protecting young users, which includes Jewish users,” Yarden-Oppenheim said.
The four bills include the AWARE Act, which would develop educational resources on the safe and responsible use of AI chatbots; the Protecting a Safe Internet for Minors Act, which would create a public awareness campaign on safe internet use and best practices for minors; the Assessing Safety Tools for Parents and Minors Act, which would assess the effectiveness of existing safety tools; and the Kids Internet Safety Partnership Act, which would help identify online risks to children and develop recommendations for best practices.
The group endorsed the four pieces of legislation when they were first released several months ago and urged local federations to contact their members to support the bills, as well as advocate for them on fly-ins to Washington. Yarden-Oppenheim said he believes that work helped ensure the bills were included in the final KIDS Act package.
“There’s a lack of understanding of a lot of things that are happening online, and for Jewish families it’s the same. Parents feel like maybe they’re losing control a little bit of the things that their kids are being exposed to online,” Yarden-Oppenheim said. “These will give parents [and] educators the tools and more clarity and information on how to deal with these things in the future.”
Yet there’s still plenty of work ahead for supporters of the legislation, as Congress has struggled for years to reach a consensus on children’s online safety legislation, and the Senate and House have been advancing competing versions of the legislation.
“There’s still a meaningful divide on policy and approach between the House and the Senate, but we look forward to working with our partners, and we’ve already had those meetings, and we continue to have them,” Yarden-Oppenheim said. “We need to work with our partners in both chambers to elevate the importance of online safety and the need to ensure that Jewish families remain part of the national conversation, and be a willing partner along the way.”
JFNA and a coalition of other Jewish groups are also making a separate push to address online antisemitism through the Jewish American Security Act, which addresses online antisemitism, campus antisemitism and security threats to Jewish institutions.
Niv Elis, the associate vice president of external communications at JNFA, said that “there’s a huge question” of how society and the country should deal with social media, the internet and AI, and the KIDS Act is “just the tip of the iceberg.”
“What we’re seeing is that this is an excellent entry point to make sure … that the antisemitism piece isn’t left out, and a recognition that the tools that we need to protect the children are going to have extra levels of meaning for Jewish children who are facing different kinds of harm online because they’re not just facing the same bullying as everybody but they’re also facing an additional level through through the antisemitism,” Elis said.
Yarden-Oppenheim added that there are other threats that the Jewish community also aims to counter, including foreign influence, AI deep fakes and other issues that have impacted the Jewish community. The group is working with lawmakers to introduce legislation next year to study how algorithms and other platform features can spread hate, harassment and radicalization.
The White House said Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner will participate in the talks, which Iran has denied
Nathan Howard-Pool/Getty Images
Delegation staff members meet in the lobby during a quadrilateral meeting between the U.S., Iran, Pakistan, and Qatar at the Lake Lucerne Summit, aimed at advancing a deal to end the Middle East conflict at the Buergenstock Resort, Lake Lucerne on June 21, 2026 near Stansstad, Switzerland.
President Donald Trump confirmed on Monday that the U.S. and Iran will meet in Qatar on Tuesday to continue negotiations, as both nations attempt to step back from a weekend exchange of military strikes that threatened to derail the fragile ceasefire agreement.
“IRAN HAS REQUESTED A MEETING. IT WILL TAKE PLACE TOMORROW IN DOHA!” Trump posted on Truth Social.
White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said on Fox News that White House Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner would be attending the talks. “On the sidelines of those high-level talks, there will be the technical talks” to move forward the memorandum of understanding, she said.
Tehran, however, has indicated that no meeting is scheduled to take place. Iran’s deputy foreign minister and senior negotiator Kazem Gharibabadi dismissed the reports, telling Iranian state news agency IRNA that the technical talks in the Qatari capital “are not confirmed.” Esmaeil Baghaei, a spokesperson for Iran’s foreign ministry, later said Iran has no discussions scheduled with the U.S. and that an Iranian technical delegation heading to Qatar this week will not be meeting with U.S. officials.
Over the weekend, the U.S. launched targeted strikes against multiple military sites in Iran after Iran struck two oil tankers, first on Thursday and again on Saturday. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps responded by firing a volley of missiles and drones at U.S. military infrastructure in Kuwait and Bahrain on Sunday.
The renewed fighting stemmed from Iran’s insistence that commercial vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz do so within a lane under its jurisdiction, rather than Oman’s, and obtain permits to do so. Meanwhile, Trump has insisted that the ceasefire terms dictate the critical shipping lane immediately be reopened to international transit without restrictions.
Underscoring the high stakes of the breakdown, Trump warned on Truth Social following Saturday’s strikes that Iran may “never learn.”
“There may come a point when we are no longer able to be reasonable, and will be forced to militarily complete the job that we very successfully started,” Trump wrote. “If that happens, the Islamic Republic of Iran will no longer exist!”
The resolution passed 50-48 with GOP Sens. Paul, Murkowski, Collins and Cassidy voting with Democrats in favor
Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images
U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) speaks to reporters after the weekly Senate policy luncheons at the U.S. Capitol on June 23, 2026 in Washington. Schumer spoke out against President Trump's Iran deal and a the need for the Senate to pass a War Powers Resolution regarding Iran.
The Senate voted on Tuesday to pass a House-passed war powers resolution directing the administration to withdraw U.S. forces from Iran — a congressional rebuke of the administration over the war in Iran — though legally its effects are likely to be largely symbolic.
The resolution passed by a 50-48 vote, with Republican Sens. Rand Paul (R-KY), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Susan Collins (R-ME) and Bill Cassidy (R-LA) again voting in favor and Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) voting against it. Ultimately, GOP absences enabled the resolution to go forward.
But the resolution, now passed by both chambers, came in the form of a concurrent resolution, which is not submitted to the president and, based on past court precedent, is not seen as carrying the force of law — though a House Democratic aide argued to CNN that the measure would be binding.
Rep. Greg Meeks (D-NY), the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and lead Democratic sponsor of the war powers resolution, insisted in a statement, “Regardless of what President Trump says, this measure is binding under the War Powers Resolution, and I will explore all legal avenues to ensure the Executive complies with the will of Congress.”
Unlike previous efforts, however, the concurrent resolution did not require other procedural votes by the Senate, allowing Democrats to take advantage of the Republican absences and move directly toward final passage to deliver a message of rebuke to the administration.
The Senate still has other war powers resolutions pending, including one which passed an initial procedural hurdle, but currently lacks the support to pass through an additional procedural vote and final passage with full attendance. That legislation, which comes in a different form as joint resolutions, would be presented to the president if passed and set up a potential veto or other legal fight.
Republicans warned that adopting the resolution would send a further signal to Iran that it does not need to negotiate or make any compromises with the U.S. as part of ongoing talks.
Brad Lander, Claire Valdez, and Darializa Avila Chevalier are all demonizing the Jewish state in the runup to Tuesday’s primary
Congressional candidate Claire Valdez, Congressional candidate Brad Lander, Mayor Zohran Mamdani, and Congressional candidate Darializa Avila Chevalier raise their hands during a Get Out the Vote (GOTV) rally at King's Theater on June 18, 2026 in New York City (Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)
The battle for three Democratic congressional primaries in New York City has been defined by a conflict more than 5,000 miles away, with candidates spending the final days before Tuesday’s primary echoing the fiercely anti-Israel rhetoric that helped elevate Mayor Zohran Mamdani to power.
All three of the mayor’s favored contenders for the House — former City Comptroller Brad Lander, Assemblymember Claire Valdez and doctoral student Darializa Avila Chevalier — underscored their criticism of Israel and its U.S. supporters as early voting began in the contested districts.
Avila Chevalier took time in a televised debate on Tuesday to accuse the country of “apartheid” while seeming to compare the actions of Jewish settlers in the West Bank and the IDF in the Gaza Strip to gentrification in the district where she hopes to unseat Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-NY) and other majority-minority areas.
“I saw so many connections between what was happening to Palestinians there in Palestine and what was happening to so many communities across the U.S., particularly Black and Latino communities, who have been priced out and pushed out of our homes,” said Avila Chevalier, who — like most candidates affiliated with the Democratic Socialists of America — draws her strongest support from predominantly white and highly educated residents of the district.
“When we talk about displacement in the West Bank and Gaza, it is a very similar, visually similar situation, where people who have been in a place for generations, are being displaced because of corporate interests, because of folks who are coming in, claiming the land over, and buying it up and kicking the people who live there out.”
Avila Chevalier, who has come under fire for attending an anti-Israel demonstration one day after the Oct. 7 attacks, added during the debate that the “very institutions” involved in both the Holy Land and urban America are the same.
Valdez, vying against Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso for the seat of retiring Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-NY), has similarly brought Middle Eastern issues into the race for the district spanning parts of Brooklyn and Queens. As a new PAC, Real Fight NYC, began spending hundreds of thousands on ads attacking her record and boosting that of her opponent, the sculptor-turned-socialist lawmaker inaccurately suggested pro-Israel interests were behind the effort.
“Is it actually AIPAC?” Valdez speculated in a thread on X. “This is a well-established pattern from AIPAC and its affiliates, especially when there’s only one candidate who’s been clear and consistent against the genocide.”
Reynoso in fact has been a fierce critic of Israeli policy during the race, and the American Federation of Teachers subsequently identified itself as the main sponsor of the ad campaign. Valdez has neither apologized for nor retracted her remarks.
Even former City Comptroller Brad Lander, the lone self-described progressive Zionist among the mayor’s endorsees, spent his final TV face-off against Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) on Monday criticizing the incumbent for his past support for aid packages to Israel and his refusal to call the military campaign in the Gaza Strip “a genocide.” The day before, Lander held a rally with Mamdani and a bevy of left-wing Jewish and Muslim activist groups, which he took as another occasion to condemn Israel.
“We’re united around a belief that a better world is possible — one in which we don’t compromise on anyone’s humanity. One in which we are not complicit in occupation and genocide,” he wrote on X. “One in which everyone has a home they can afford, with no bombs falling on it, in a place where they are both safe and free.”
Mamdani, for his part, vowed at a rally for the trio Thursday evening that they would help combat “monsters” that he claimed dominate the political process. The only such quarry he called out by name, though, was AIPAC.
“AIPAC, for whom the only thing more frightening than democracy being allowed to run its course is an end to genocide and [Israeli Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu’s wars,” the mayor told the roaring crowd.
‘Does getting a deal with Israel help him become king or not?’ Ortagus posited at an event hosted by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies
John Lamparski/Getty Images for Concordia Summit
Morgan Ortagus speaks onstage during 2024 Concordia Annual Summit at Sheraton New York Times Square on September 25, 2024 in New York City.
Morgan Ortagus, the former deputy presidential envoy for Middle East peace, suggested on Thursday that normalizing relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel was not a top priority for Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, citing security concerns and his focus on ensuring he becomes king.
Ortagus made the comments while participating in an event at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies with Hussain Abdul-Hussain, a research fellow at FDD, discussing his book, The Arab Case for Israel: And Other Essays from a Distant Conflict, for which Ortagus wrote the forward.
Ortagus served under White House Special Envoy Steve Witkoff before joining the U.S. mission to the United Nations as a senior advisor last June. She quietly departed the Trump administration in February of this year.
Ortagus said that the Saudi crown prince’s top priority is becoming king and ensuring a peaceful transition from his father, King Salman, explaining that conversations about Riyadh normalizing relations with Israel should be viewed through that lens.
“When you look at it from the lens of MBS, everybody is a politician of some sort. What’s the most important thing that he has to do in the next few years? Actually become king,” Ortagus said. “Does getting a deal with Israel help him become king or not? Does it help that peaceful transition?”
“He got there in a very interesting manner and took out a lot of his family members in order to get where he is, but he still has that hurdle of becoming king and getting through the Shura Council and having that peaceful transition,” she continued. “I think, as for most politicians around the world, certainly here in America, that transition is more important to him than a peace deal in Israel.”
Following publication of this story, a representative for Ortagus reached out to note that her comments were not a suggestion that Saudi-Israeli normalization was unlikely and that she believes “a deal between Saudi Arabia and Israel will happen under the Trump administration.” They added that her comments “were meant to explain why it’s hard and will take time, not to question whether it happens.”
Evangelical leader Mike Evans recently claimed that the crown prince told him that he was prepared to recognize Israel but for the opposition of his father. Saudi officials have publicly rejected the idea of normalization without a path to a Palestinian state.
Abdul-Hussain noted that he had broadly been supportive of MBS’ approach to regional security and economic issues since rising to power in 2015, but criticized what he described as a pivot on the issue of normalization with Israel. He said that he did not know the reason for the shift by the Saudis, but surmised that economic factors were at play.
While Ortagus concurred that economic issues did play a role, she argued that security concerns after Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks on Israel prompted the crown prince’s reversal.
“The threats to MBS and to the king and to the whole government in Saudi Arabia went up exponentially after Oct. 7,” Ortagus said. “It was very low before, so I think it’s also very much a security situation.”
Turning to the possibility of Israel and Lebanon normalizing ties and working together to disarm Hezbollah, Ortagus and Abdul-Hussain expressed doubt that the warnings from senior Lebanese officials of a possible civil war if Hezbollah is disarmed and the Lebanese Armed Forces’ decision to keep Gen. Rodolphe Haykal in charge of the LAF — despite Haykal being sympathetic to Hezbollah — were obstacles to reaching a deal.
“I think it comes down to the capabilities, not just the capabilities of the LAF, but the institutional will to actually do the disarmament of Hezbollah, which just fundamentally is not there,” Ortagus said.
Abdul-Hussain shared Ortagus’ skepticism about the Lebanese government’s commitment to reaching a deal.
“Knowing Lebanese politicians, I expect President [Joseph] Aoun to run for the exit. He’s thinking, ‘Well, if they’re talking to Hezbollah too, then talking to me doesn’t mean much,’” Abdul-Hussain said of the Lebanese president. “I think we in this town are not really resolved on which direction we’re going, and I want us to go in the direction of: We will not do the ceasefire the way Hezbollah wants it to be.”
Both Abdul-Hussain and Ortagus rejected the idea that Israel and Lebanon could successfully normalize relations without Hezbollah being disarmed. Ortagus also said that all parties involved in the U.S.-led peace talks between Israel and Lebanon “have to do a better job of making the argument, specifically to the Shia from the south … that you will have a better life” if the two countries normalize relations and disarm Hezbollah.
Ortagus and her partner, Antoun Sehanaoui, a Lebanese banker and producer, also hosted a book party in Georgetown for Abdul-Hussain on Thursday evening, where she praised Abdul-Husain and Sehanaoui for speaking out in favor of peace with Israel, a stance she said puts their lives, livelihoods and families in Lebanon at risk.
Abdul-Husain said his book came about through his own personal story, growing up in a Hezbollah stronghold in Lebanon and being educated that Israel was evil and aimed to conquer Lebanon. But he said that as he learned Hebrew and came to understand Israel and its true goals, his views continued to evolve, “until I reached the point I thought what they had taught us was not really correct.”
“I came up with my own ideas, and I thought that Israel is a successful story, whether we like it or not, whether we think it caused us injustice or not, it’s still a successful story,” Abdul-Hussain said. “If you are Arab or Palestinian, and you think that Israel caused you injustice, or is still causing you injustice, then moving on and forgetting about and taking this injustice is much more to your interest than trying to wind the clock back to a time when Israel did not exist and start building from there.”
He said that evidence shows that the stronger the relations an Arab state has with Israel, the more successful it is, economically and otherwise.
On Iran, at the FDD event, Ortagus argued that the U.S. is winning the war despite it still being unfinished more than 100 days since its launch, citing Iran’s heavily degraded military capabilities and what she described as the weak status of the current regime.
“Nothing about war now is easy and simple. No one’s going on a ship anymore to sign a declaration of the end of the war, it’s just not how it happens,” Ortagus said. “So you have to look at the president’s and the administration’s goals, and as much as people like to critique every single thing this president and administration does, he is the only president in 47 years of the Islamic Republic to be willing to take kinetic action in order to coerce the regime back to the negotiating table.”
“His negotiators, by the way, should be able to get a great deal because of the amount of leverage that he’s given them. The president talks about this all the time. He talks about what he’s done to destroy their nuclear facilities, their military capabilities, their Navy, their Air Force. We fly with impunity over their skies,” she continued. “To everyone sort of prognosticating that this has somehow been a failure. Look at the metrics, look at the facts, look at the capabilities, look at the regime strength today and look at their economy. … I just think it’s a matter of time before this regime falls.”
She suggested that the mass pro-democracy protests in Iran earlier this year forced President Donald Trump to expedite his plans to target the regime and what remains of its nuclear program while defending the extended length of the conflict.”
“All of these protestations by Europeans and other feckless individuals who never get in the fight are wrong,” Ortagus said. “Obviously, I think, we had a moment of opportunity after the protest earlier this year where we had to decide on action probably a little bit earlier than we had planned on, because it was the moment when we, when the president clearly told the people of Iran, the protesters that we were going to stand by them, and that help is on the way, so help had to get on the way.”
Ortagus described the president as “the leading hawk at the White House,” saying he “has fundamentally understood this issue since his very first campaign in 2016, of how destabilizing it would be for the region if Iran were to obtain a nuclear weapon. He set red lines for himself and said it will never happen on my watch, and I think he very much understands that any deal cannot be like the JCPOA [the 2015 nuclear deal] has to make sure that they can’t actually obtain a nuclear weapon. I think he’s very clear on that, and I know that his negotiators are.”
Ortagus said she believed both the president and U.S. negotiators are of the view that not reaching a deal with Iran, because the regime would not make necessary concessions, “is somewhat better than a bad deal.”
She suggested that the White House was also aware of the logistical hurdles involved in getting any agreement approved by the Senate, warning that Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX), Tom Cotton (R-AR) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) will not vote to approve a deal that does not address key concerns about the regime, its terror financing network and its nuclear and ballistic missile programs.
“Anybody who’s not a freshman senator was around during JCPOA, and Republican senators have been very on the record for what they would accept in any deal with Iran, certainly even during the Biden years,” Ortagus said. “Republican senators are going to get a say in whatever the final deal looks like. The beauty of our democracy is this comes down to not only what the president is willing to sign, and I happen to think that he’s one of the most hawkish people in the room on this issue, it also comes down to what the U.S. Senate and what Republicans in the Senate are going to abide by.”
This story was updated on June 12 to reflect clarifications from Ortagus’ representative about her comments on Saudi-Israel normalization.
House Democratic leadership opposed Tlaib’s resolution, but said they’ll support a different effort of hers to block U.S. support for Israeli operations against Hezbollah
Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) attends the House Financial Services Committee on Wednesday, March 29, 2023.
The House rejected a war powers resolution by Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) on Thursday that aimed to block U.S. support for Israeli operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon, after House Democratic leaders publicly came out against the effort.
But the Democratic leaders said they would support a future effort by Tlaib along similar lines that will include carveouts for other U.S. operations inside Lebanon, indicating that Tlaib’s next effort is likely to pick up greater Democratic support.
The resolution failed by a vote of 324-92, with most votes in favor of the resolution coming from progressive House Democrats, though several more moderate lawmakers also voted in favor. The Congressional Progressive Caucus whipped in favor of the resolution. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) was the only Republican who supported the effort, and 117 Democrats — a majority of the caucus — voted against it.
Reps. Betty McCollum (D-MN) and Derek Tran (D-CA) voted present.
Tlaib’s resolution, which directed the administration to “remove the United States Armed Forces from Lebanon” within seven days, aimed to cut off U.S. logistical and intelligence support for Israeli operations against Hezbollah. Tlaib has consistently ignored or downplayed Hezbollah’s role in the conflict, describing Israel’s operations as being against Lebanon and the Lebanese people writ large.
Democratic critics said that the legislation would also require the U.S. to remove military guards from its diplomatic facilities and U.S. servicemembers that train and advise the Lebanese Armed Forces. Tlaib insisted that other U.S. operations would be able to continue, in spite of the strict wording in her legislation that indicated they would be impacted.
House Democratic leaders Reps. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), Katherine Clark (D-MA) and Pete Aguilar (D-CA) said in a joint statement that they support efforts by the LAF to defeat Hezbollah — making no mention of Israel — and said that they “do not support any effort by the Trump administration to entangle the United States in a war in Lebanon or other parts of the Middle East.”
They said that, since there are no U.S. troops involved in hostilities in Lebanon, a more prudent path would be to pursue an alternative resolution Tlaib introduced, with support from Rep. Greg Meeks (D-NY), the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
The statement came after multiple days of behind-the-scenes wrangling and negotiations over the legislation.
Tlaib’s alternative resolution directs the administration to remove U.S. forces “from any hostilities in Lebanon” within seven days, and includes a specific carveout for diplomatic protection and cooperation with the LAF.
Despite introducing the alternative resolution herself, Tlaib said on X, “The people of Lebanon can’t wait another month for Congress to act.”
Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL), who said Tlaib denied him the opportunity to speak on the House floor on the legislation, emphasized in a video statement that the legislation might impact U.S. support for the LAF and U.S. diplomatic security and highlighted that Hezbollah is a threat to the Lebanese people, in addition to attacking Israel since early February.
“We need to find a path where Lebanon and Israel can live in peace, and this resolution doesn’t help us. It doesn’t send a message to the president or the Trump administration. It doesn’t send a message to the Netanyahu government,” Schneider said. “It sends a message to Lebanon and Hezbollah that what they’re doing is acceptable. It sends a message to the Lebanese people that once more they’re pawns in someone else’s fight.”
Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) told Jewish Insider, “The United States is not at war with Lebanon nor is there any indication that we’re going to war with Lebanon. So it’s an unnecessary war powers vote.”
Debate over the resolution on Tuesday turned heated when Rep. Max Miller (R-OH) accused Tlaib of “advocat[ing] for terrorists on a daily basis” and of “hang[ing] out with” with Hezbollah “butchers.”
His remarks were struck from the congressional record with an objection from Tlaib, but he said in a statement read out on the House floor by a colleague that he stood by his remarks.
Jewish groups called the proposal, which is a slight increase from 2026 funding levels, appreciated but vastly inadequate
Brandon Bell/Getty Images
A police vehicle and crime scene tape.
Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee proposed providing $315 million for the Nonprofit Security Grant Program in 2027, a slight increase from 2026 funding levels but far below the $1 billion that supporters of the program in the House and Jewish and other faith communities have called for.
The 2026 funding bill contains $300 million for the program, a marginal increase from 2025 levels. But the program has been subject to significant procedural delays — funding from the 2025 tranche has still not yet been disbursed, and the timeline for 2026 applications remains uncertain.
In 2024 — the most recent year for which data is publicly available — applicants requested $978 million in federal funding, and less than half of applications were funded with a pool of $454.5 million available.
“Any increase in Nonprofit Security Grant Program funding is welcome, but this proposed appropriation is not enough,” Rep. Gabe Amo (D-RI), who led a letter to appropriators calling for $1 billion in funding, told JI. “I’ll keep pushing to fund the NSGP at $1 billion so Americans can worship, gather, and serve their communities in safety.”
Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) said that the “math doesn’t add up” for the committee’s proposal. “When houses of worship are under threat, this is not the time to lowball our safety.”
Jewish groups also called the proposal appreciated, but vastly inadequate.
“This is a modest increase from last year, but we need more to keep our community safe in the face of the explosion in antisemitic threats,” Nathan Diament, the executive director of the Orthodox Union Advocacy Center, said. “We will be working with our allies on the Appropriations Committee to increase this funding level.”
“We appreciate the House proposal to provide $315 million for NSGP, but the reality is that demand continues to far outpace available funding,” Dan Granot, senior director of government relations and community engagement for the Anti-Defamation League, said. “At a time of record antisemitism and heightened security concerns, Congress should fund NSGP at no less than $1 billion, reflecting the urgent needs of vulnerable communities across the country.”
Eric Fingerhut, the CEO of the Jewish Federations of North America, said, “We are grateful for the support of the committee thus far but we will not be able to adequately address these threats until the Nonprofit Security Grant Program, which is unable to cover even half of requests at current levels, reaches $1 billion.”
He said that JFNA will work with DHS and Congress to “fully fund” the program.
In recent appropriations cycles, the House has approved modest funding increases for the program as the funding bills have worked their way through committee and the House floor.
The Appropriations Committee released a separate bill on Thursday proposing a $1.5 million increase to the Holocaust Survivor Assistance Program, to $10 million.
“We commend the House for proposing $10 million for the Holocaust Survivor Assistance Program,” Fingerhut said. “This increased investment will help ensure that survivors, many of whom continue to face significant physical, emotional, and financial challenges, receive the specialized care and support they deserve.”
‘Anybody that's tied to that should never be elected to Congress, and if he is, I think should never serve on a national security committee,’ Rep. Michael McCaul told JI
DREW ANGERER/AFP via Getty Images
Dr. Adam Hamawy speaks during an AFP interview after meetings on Capitol Hill, in Washington DC, on June 14, 2024.
Some lawmakers are warning that the past terrorist ties of Adam Hamawy, the Democratic nominee in New Jersey’s 12th Congressional District expected to be elected to the House in November, could pose a national security risk and that he should be barred from serving on sensitive committees working on national security issues.
Hamawy was an associate of convicted terrorist mastermind Omar Abdel-Rahman, known as the Blind Sheikh, and testified in Abdel-Rahman’s defense when he was on trial for his involvement in a series of terrorist attacks in New York City. Hamawy also volunteered for the Benevolence International Foundation, a charity operating in Bosnia that was later shuttered as an al-Qaida front.
He also volunteered at the European Hospital in Gaza during Israel’s war with Hamas, denying when he returned that there was any terrorist activity at the hospital or any tunnels underneath it. Israel killed Hamas leader Mohammed Sinwar in a tunnel system under the hospital.
Members of Congress are exempt from usual security clearance vetting procedures applied to other federal officials, and all members are able to access certain House-wide classified briefings.
But members serving on several key committees touching on national security and foreign policy, such as the Foreign Affairs, Armed Services and Intelligence Committees, have more regular access to a much wider range of classified briefings and information. Caucus leadership is responsible for assigning committee posts.
Some of Hamawy’s potential future colleagues — largely Republicans — say that Hamawy should be barred from those committee postings if he’s elected. As a military veteran and having focused much of his campaign on foreign policy issues, Hamawy would ordinarily be a likely candidate for such committee assignments.
Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), the former chair of the Foreign Affairs and Homeland Security committees and a former U.S. attorney focused on counterterrorism and national security, told Jewish Insider that Hamawy “should be barred from any national security committee.”
“The Blind Sheikh, Ramsey Youssef, the ‘93 World Trade Center bombing — the original plot was to hit 12 Jewish synagogues simultaneously, symbolic of the 12 tribes of Israel,” McCaul said, “and so anybody that’s tied to that should never be elected to Congress, and if he is, I think should never serve on a national security committee — because then you get access to classified information.”
In a statement to JI, a campaign spokesperson said, “Hamawy’s entire career and life have been defined by his patriotism and deep love of this country,” and emphasized that he was in the military during the time of the Blind Sheikh trial.
“As a witness, he performed his civic and legal duty to testify truthfully under oath and contribute to the system of laws and justice he defended while serving our country in the Army,” the statement, similar to ones the campaign has provided in the past, continued. “At the time, the man in question was one of very few religious figures in what was then a very small Muslim community in New Jersey — he saw him speak in religious settings in his early 20s. Dr. Hamawy condemns that man’s violent rhetoric and actions, and all violence, hatred, and terrorism — and he will always. Dr. Hamawy had no contact with this person after they were arrested.”
The campaign also dismissed reporting on his relationship with the Blind Sheikh as “bad-faith, guilt-by-association attacks” started by a “designated hate [group].”
Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) said that Hamawy’s eligibility for national security posts “obviously … has to be a conversation we’ll have to have once we get past the general election.”
He also referenced his concerns about state Rep. Chris Rabb, a Democratic nominee in Philadelphia, and said that Democrats should hold Rabb to the same standard as former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) — after she shared “false flag” theories about the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School mass shooting — for sharing a false flag conspiracy theory about the mass shooting at a Hanukkah gathering at Sydney’s Bondi Beach last December.
Rabb has disavowed and condemned the Bondi Beach post shared by his Instagram account, attributing it to a campaign contractor who has since been dismissed.
“We want to win elections, we want to win the House, we want to win the Senate,” Moskowitz said. “But expanding the tent to the point where we’re taking people in that don’t really share our values, I think, is a long-term mistake.”
Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) told reporters he has “significant concerns when you have somebody who affirmatively testified for the defense in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and volunteered for an organization that was a front for al-Qaida.”
He said that Hamawy’s past “raises significant questions that, frankly, I think he has not adequately addressed,” and that if Hamawy is elected, “there needs to be an investigation into his ties to these incidents and organizations, and that’s something that I don’t think people should take likely.”
Lawler stopped short of saying that Hamawy should be disqualified from service on any national security committee, saying again that there should be a “thorough investigation” and that he “certainly would have significant concerns about him serving on any committee, let alone in Congress.”
Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) said on X that “there is no way [Hamawy] can have a security clearance. National security risk.”
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who congratulated Hamawy on Tuesday evening for his victory — as he traditionally does for Democratic House nominees around the country — told The Free Press on Wednesday that he hasn’t yet had a conversation with Hamawy about his past affiliations, but planned to speak to him some time on Wednesday.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) said on X, “Not even ties to terrorists are too extreme for the modern day Democrat Party.”
The resolution passed 215-208, with four Republicans breaking ranks to vote for the resolution, and all present Democrats remaining united on the issue for the first time since the war began
Kevin Carter/Getty Images
U.S. Capitol Building on January 18, 2025 in Washington, DC.
The House passed a war powers resolution on Wednesday that would halt U.S. military operations against Iran, after House Republicans postponed an expected vote on the resolution for more than a week, in an ultimately futile effort to stave off defeat.
The resolution passed 215-208, with four Republicans breaking ranks to vote for the resolution, and all present Democrats remaining united on the issue for the first time since the war began. Six Republicans and one Democrat were absent for the vote — so the resolution likely still would have passed even with full attendance.
The vote comes after the Senate advanced a procedural vote on a similar resolution, and is a notable signal of opposition from Congress to the war in Iran, even if President Donald Trump can veto such a resolution if it passes the Senate. Some Republicans have suggested that the underlying 1973 War Powers Act is unconstitutional or invalid, and should be challenged in court or ignored by the administration.
A final Senate vote on the war powers resolution that advanced last month is still pending.
Republican Reps. Warren Davidson (R-OH), Thomas Massie (R-KY), Tom Barrett (R-MI) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) broke ranks to support the resolution. Davidson and Massie are libertarian-leaning isolationists, while Barrett and Fitzpatrick represent hotly contested swing districts.
Davidson voted for a war powers resolution at the outset of the conflict, but voted present and then against subsequent resolutions, before flipping his vote back to yes on the latest vote.
Fitzpatrick told reporters his vote was an issue of the law. The War Powers Act gives the administration 60 days to conduct military operations without congressional approval.
“We’re past the 60 days, so you have two choices: you either follow the law or you change the law,” Fitzpatrick said. “You can’t violate the law, that’s not an option. … I don’t see what’s complicated about it. Bring it to Congress, debate it on the merits and have us vote. That’s the way the system’s supposed to work.”
The administration has claimed that its military operations against Iran that began in February have concluded, and that its continued limited strikes against Iranian targets do not qualify as warfare.
Barrett, who introduced a limited Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iran, offered a similar stance in a statement.
“Congress has the exclusive authority under the Constitution to declare war and authorize the use of force,” Barrett said. “The War Powers Act of 1973 delegates some of that authority to the president for a limited period of time. That authority has expired, so my consistent belief is that it is time for Congress to decide the scope of the mission and the appropriate limits on the use of force in Iran.”
Other Republicans argue the legislation sends a message of weakness and division and strips the U.S. of leverage in the midst of negotiations.
“I think what it signals to Iran is that, especially from the Democratic standpoint, it gives them confidence to try and drag these negotiations out. So I think it undermines the position of the United States of America,” Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY), who chairs the Foreign Affairs Committee’s Middle East subcommittee, told reporters. “They’re actively undermining the United States position in these negotiations, so, from my standpoint, I think it’s foolish, and that’s why I voted no.”
Rep. Jared Golden (D-ME), the sole Democratic holdout on previous votes, also flipped his vote to support the resolution in Wednesday’s vote.
Golden said that, after the 60-day mark of the Iran war passed, the statutory cutoff for military operations undertaken without congressional authorization, he believed the war could not continue without such approval. But he described a war powers resolution the House voted on last month as textually flawed and outdated.
“The passage of my War Powers Resolution is a significant bipartisan rebuke of President Trump’s illegal and costly war in Iran, and the first step toward ending it once and for all,” House Foreign Affairs Committee Ranking Member Greg Meeks (D-NY) said in a statement. “The passage of this WPR today signals a significant turning point: more and more Republicans are listening to their constituents who do not want another open-ended war in the Middle East. Now the Senate must take up this measure and make clear to the President that enough is enough.”
The New Jersey Democrat returned from visiting the United Arab Emirates last week
AJC
Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) and Mike Lawler (R-NY) speak at the American Jewish Committee's Global Forum on June 2, 2026.
Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) revealed on Tuesday that senior Emirati leaders expressed concern to him about rising antisemitism in the United States during his trip to the United Arab Emirates last week.
Gottheimer made the comments while appearing alongside Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) at the American Jewish Committee’s Global Forum in Washington, where the two delivered remarks to the crowd about their work combating antisemitism.
“I returned from the UAE a couple days ago, and one of the most shocking parts of my meeting with some of their senior leadership was when they said to me in the middle of the meeting, ‘What is going on with antisemitism in your country?’” said Gottheimer, who visited the Gulf nation in his capacity as a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
“Think about that: You have a leader of a Gulf nation saying to us, ‘What is going on with antisemitism in your country?’” he continued. “This is not who we are as a country, it’s not our values, it’s not what we’re based on, but it is the reality right now. We can beat this back, I know we can, and we must.”
The duo warned in their remarks that antisemitism has been normalized in U.S. politics, with both lawmakers referencing a recent incident involving Lawler being verbally accosted by William Paul, the adult son of Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), at a bar on Capitol Hill last month.
“When you look at the challenges we are facing today politically in an ever-divided country, it is the Jewish Americans who are under attack — whether you talk about antisemitism, the fact that people are under attack simply for going to shul, going to Yeshiva, being physically violated. Hate crimes are on the rise when it comes to Jewish Americans,” Lawler said. “Sadly, this has been normalized in the halls of Congress. People are being elected to public office on both sides of the aisle that think it is okay to traffic in antisemitic tropes.”
Gottheimer noted that, “The good news about this moment in history is we can see the field clearly. We know who’s with us and who’s against us. We see the challenges, whether they’re in the halls of Congress or online, the massive disinformation being put out there, whether it’s by our foreign adversaries or people in the United States. We see what they’re doing and what their intentions are and what their tactics are.”
About the incident with Paul, Lawler told the crowd that he is “no stranger to experiencing antisemitism firsthand.”
Gottheimer also took a dig at the younger Paul while discussing “how shocking it is, of how blatantly naked it is, to be an antisemite right now in this country.”
“When you see the numbers — and it’s not just in a bar when Rand Paul’s son is accusing Mike of being a Jew, it’s in every corner of our country — those numbers are astounding,” Gottheimer said. “As we saw, antisemitic incidents are up 75% since the 7th [of October 2023]. There’s not a single Jew in America who can avoid this right now.”
The congressional frontrunner bashed Israel’s campaign against Hezbollah in an address at the Al Khoie Islamic Center in Queens
Ryan Murphy/Getty Images
Former New York City Comptroller Brad Lander speaks to members of the media, alongside supporters, before appearing in court on February 12, 2026 in New York City.
Former New York City Comptroller Brad Lander — favored to defeat Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) in next month’s Democratic primary — broadened his already sweeping criticism of Israel in a speech to a Queens mosque earlier this month, suggesting the country’s actions against Hezbollah in Lebanon could constitute genocide.
As shown in a video of May 15 services posted to the Al-Khoei Islamic Center’s YouTube page, Lander told worshippers that he is “a very proud Jewish New Yorker,” quoted a Quranic verse on unity and recalled his cross-endorsement in the 2025 election with now-New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.
He drew a parallel with the Jewish concept of B’tzelem Elohim, or the creation of humanity in the divine image — and pivoted then to a topic that has animated his campaign: what he called “Israel’s genocide in Gaza,” which Lander described as “a Jewish requirement” to denounce.
He also repeated a pledge to vote against further military aid to Israel in Congress, but went even farther in his criticism of the country than he has in the past.
“I will not vote for any more U.S. military aid to Israel, not the bombs that are destroying the hospitals and schools in Gaza, not the occupation in Lebanon which is now I believe on its way potentially to being a genocide as well,” he said from the pulpit. “I pray for the day when Palestinians and Lebanese and Israelis can come to know one another, recognize each other’s equal humanity, the spark of divine image, the need for safety and peace and not for occupation and apartheid and genocide and oppression and war.”
He further vowed to work closely with anti-Israel Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) and Ilhan Omar (D-MN) if elected to Congress.
The comments mark an even further swing leftward for Lander, who has long identified as a “progressive Zionist” and once drew fire from now-allies like Jewish Voice for Peace for participating in a City Council delegation to Israel.
Goldman, who has been a reliable supporter of Israel in Congress, has also grown increasingly critical of the Jewish state but remains supportive of continued U.S. military aid.
Al Khoei, a Shi’ite mosque named for a rival to late Iranian Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, sits well outside the Brooklyn-Manhattan House district Lander hopes to represent but has been a common stop for politicians, including former Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
The Jewish American Security Act addresses security threats, antisemitism on campus and online antisemitism
U.S. Senate
Sens. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) and James Lankford (R-OK)
Sens. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) and James Lankford (R-OK) on Tuesday introduced the Jewish American Security Act, a broad new effort by the lawmakers, who co-chair the Senate antisemitism task force, to address antisemitism across multiple sectors of American society.
Similar legislation is also expected to be introduced in the House.
The bill, which has widespread support from all corners of Jewish leadership, including all major religious denominations and political organizations on both sides of the aisle, contains various provisions aimed at increasing security for Jewish communities through additional funding and federal resources.
Key provisions include: additional security assistance and improvements to security grant programs for Jewish communities; addressing antisemitism on college campuses through new federal oversight measures including a federal official to handle campus antisemitism; and addressing the spread of antisemitism online by requiring new transparency reports from social media companies, among a range of related steps in each category.
Rosen, leaders from the Anti-Defamation League, American Jewish Committee and BBYO International and local leaders whose communities have been impacted by antisemitic violence in recent years spoke in favor of the bill at a Jewish Federations of North America press conference on Capitol Hill on Tuesday. JFNA activists are on Capitol Hill this week meeting with more than 200 lawmakers to advocate for the bill and other legislation.
Rosen called the bill an “aggressive and comprehensive” response to antisemitism in the U.S. which will “help keep Jewish students safe, will help secure Jewish community institutions and we will help fight antisemitism online.”
She acknowledged that the path ahead is “not going to be easy” but emphasized that “it’s not an option for our government to not do more to fight antisemitism.”
Lankford emphasized the impacts of antisemitic violence on individual Jews and communities in a statement on the bill.
“These are not just numbers, these are real stories impacting real people. Jewish students being targeted on campuses. Synagogues being vandalized. People being attacked in the streets simply because of their faith and heritage,” Lankford said. “That is not who we are as a nation, and we unequivocally condemn antisemitism in all its forms. Every American deserves to live their faith freely. That is worth fighting for.”
Rosen told Jewish Insider later in the day that she and Lankford had been working to craft the bill for the past year, and had taken a range of input on the legislation. She said she and Lankford had learned from past legislative fights that to garner strong bipartisan support “you have to be very specific” and targeted in how legislation is crafted.
She said the new bill is focused on combating domestic antisemitism across three of the areas that have been epicenters of the recent rise in antisemitism since Oct. 7.
“I think it’s a good, solid bill and I believe that we crafted it in a way to get that good bipartisan support,” Rosen said. “We’re not going to solve every problem, but you have to start with something and work from there, and hopefully we build on that success.”
“Antisemitism we know is a canary in the coal mine. It starts with the Jews, it doesn’t end with the Jews,” she said.
“This bill that we wrote, we meant it to not be so prescriptive,” Rosen continued.” When we do things on college campuses, it’s going to help all students. When we do things in houses of worship, it’s not just for synagogues, it’s for all houses of worship. And when we start looking and analyze some of these algorithms online, it will probably inform us about some of the other algorithms, probably the same algorithms that are taking people down that hateful rabbit hole.”
Asked after the press conference about the path forward for the bill, and how advocates could avoid the same pitfalls that befell other efforts to combat antisemitism since Oct. 7, JFNA CEO Eric Fingerhut said that Jewish community groups took lessons from previous fights, particularly over the Antisemitism Awareness Act, which would codify the federal government’s use of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism in evaluating campus antisemitism cases, but has failed to pass in several congressional sessions.
“We learned a lot from the experience with the Antisemitism Awareness Act. Of course we still support the IHRA definition, but we made a collective communal decision that there’s a separate bill that covers the IHRA definition, and that we hope that will continue to move through the process, but this is a separate issue,” Fingerhut told JI.
The bill does not explicitly endorse the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism, which has proven a hurdle to previous efforts to combat antisemitism, but it notes that the Trump administration in 2019 implemented an executive order enforcing the IHRA definition on college campuses.
“This is the security of the Jewish community, and it has to be something that can be embraced on a bipartisan basis across the aisle,” he continued.
Fingerhut said that Rosen and other advocates made specific efforts to ensure the bill would not contain elements that would “turn it into a partisan effort” or “alienate people who have strong feelings about some of the issues that were in the Antisemitism Awareness Act, and so we hope we’ve accomplished that.”
Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY), who co-chairs the House antisemitism task force and also spoke at the press conference, said that he and his House co-chairs are moving toward introducing companion legislation.
“This was a labor of … unquestionabl[e] importance and it has taken us quite some time to come together in a bipartisan, bicameral way,” Goldman acknowledged. “We worked for several months to fine tune this bill, so that it can be a targeted, productive, and effective concrete step to fighting antisemitism and rooting it out on the ground. We have worked very hard in a bipartisan way because none of these bills matter unless they become law.”
Goldman highlighted the “dramatic escalation” in antisemitic incidents in New York City in recent weeks, and said that simple condemnation after -the -fact is “too little, too late.”
The bill has widespread support among Jewish community groups and across all major religious denominations, including from the American Jewish Committee, Anti-Defamation League, Jewish Council for Public Affairs, Orthodox Union, JFNA, Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, Secure Community Network, The Rabbinical Assembly, Hadassah, Jewish Women International, Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, the Blue Square Alliance Against Hate, JCC Association of North America, the Nexus Project, Union for Reform Judaism, the Central Conference of American Rabbis and Agudath Israel of America.
The Republican Jewish Coalition and Jewish Democratic Council of America are also both endorsing the bill, JI has learned.
The legislation follows a previous effort by Rosen and Lankford, and counterparts in the House, to introduce a comprehensive package of antisemitism legislation in the past Congress, the Countering Antisemitism Act, which faced opposition from senior lawmakers on both sides of the aisle and ultimately did not advance.
The new bill is somewhat more limited than that prior effort, and builds on or combines other efforts that lawmakers have advanced individually, though certain provisions could still face objections from various corners.
Mirroring efforts currently underway in the 2027 government funding process, the legislation would authorize $1 billion annually for the Nonprofit Security Grant Program — though that funding would still have to be approved annually through the appropriations process even if this bill passes.
It also includes various provisions aimed at reforming NSGP management, including requiring that the Federal Emergency Management Agency provide sufficient staffing to “streamline the application process and post-approval process for a grant,” provide additional technical assistance to grantees and quickly disburse funds under the program, within 90 days of when grantees submit reimbursement requests.
At the outset of the Trump administration, grant reimbursements were paused for a significant period as the administration reviewed all Department of Homeland Security grant programs.
It requires that applications for the program open no later than 90 days after Congress passes funding for the program, and that each state publicize a timeline to submit applications, both of which were issues during the 2025 grant cycle.
Addressing repeated congressional complaints during the second Trump term that lawmakers have not received adequate information about or communication from the administration about the grant program, the legislation would codify a requirement that FEMA provide Congress with a list of grant awards and amounts at least a week before such grants are publicized. It would also release to the public information about grant acceptances and rejections and the criteria for such decisions.
Responding to concerns about new conditions imposed on applicants relating to cooperation with immigration authorities and Diversity, Equity and Inclusion programming, the bill bars any conditions or terms that would disadvantage applicants or grant recipients based on their “religious, political, or ideological affiliation.”
The bill would modify current grant rules to allow nonprofits to use NSGP funding to pay for contracted or in-house security personnel.
At the press conference, Rosen called the provisions “comprehensive and long overdue reforms to this program that will actually make sure that it works for our at-risk institutions.”
And it would require the intelligence community to produce annual assessments on domestic and transnational antisemitic violent extremism.
The legislation would additionally codify a version of a program established in the 2026 Department of Justice funding bill that would allow the DOJ to provide grants to state and local law enforcement for the purpose of protecting religious institutions and addressing religious-based hate crimes.
In the education space, the bill would establish an antisemitism coordinator within the Department of Education, whose responsibilities would include working to ensure that antisemitism complaints that have been pending with the department’s Office for Civil Rights for more than 180 days are resolved promptly.
It would also mandate that any schools receiving federal funding designate a coordinator for addressing discrimination complaints under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and establish a uniform grievance procedure and provide support mechanisms for such complaints. The effort mirrors policies currently in place for sex-based discrimination, under Title IX.
To improve visibility into the volume of antisemitic activity on college campuses, the legislation would change federal reporting procedures for hate crimes on college campuses, requiring that annual public campus crime reports disaggregate such offenses based on the bias category, such as antisemitism, that motivated them.
It also requires the Department of Education to offer trainings for schools on their Title VI responsibilities and to create an online database on Title VI best practices and recommendations. It requires schools to publicize educational materials about students’ Title VI rights both online and in person.
Rosen told JI that existing mechanisms have been “woefully inadequate to protect our students.”
Addressing antisemitism online, the bill requires platforms with more than 50 million unique monthly American users to submit to the Federal Trade Commission and to share publicly a transparency report on their “content moderation practices and efforts to detect, remove, limit the visibility of, and prevent the amplification of antisemitic content” on their platform, twice each year.
That report would include details on the specific review mechanisms and content moderation tools the platforms use; the total number of pieces of content on the platform that were determined to violate their policies on antisemitism and what action the platforms took; the amount of antisemitic content that reached more than 100 viewers or was promoted by the platform’s algorithms; the percentage of antisemitic content that violated the platforms’ policies but remained online; and details on accounts that were suspended or removed for sharing antisemitic content.
Platforms that do not comply with these reporting requirements would be subject to penalties by the FTC.
The administration would also be required to report to Congress on antisemitism online that has been linked to offline violence.
Goldman said that such transparency provisions would serve as a “tremendous deterrent.”
“If these social media companies need to disclose how much money they’re making off of antisemitic content, that’s going to be a deterrent. That is bad PR. And so it is critically important that we take this first step,” Goldman said. “It doesn’t violate the First Amendment, it doesn’t violate Section 230. It is purely bringing some transparency.”
Rosen emphasized that social media has been an “accelerant” and driver of antisemitism, making such content easier to access. She said the legislation would not compel speech or action by the platforms, but would provide transparency into how algorithms may be driving people toward hate and violence, and allow better analysis and understanding of the problem.
Fingerhut told JI that recent antisemitic attacks may also play a role in demonstrating to lawmakers the need for the legislation to address antisemitism and protect the Jewish community.
Several speakers also made note at the press conference of the attack on Monday at the Islamic Center in San Diego, highlighting the threats to religious communities broadly which can benefit from the NSGP funding.
Cohen voiced his frustration with the redistricting process at a recent ADL event, blaming the ‘mamzers in the Tennessee General Assembly,’ using the Hebrew word for bastard
Andrew Harnik/Getty Images
U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) speaks during a Congressional briefing on Iran held by the Organization of Iranian American Communities on Capitol Hill on April 16, 2024 in Washington, DC.
Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) will retire from the House after 20 years, following a redistricting push by Tennessee Republicans that carved up his Memphis district, ending his re-election campaign, Cohen announced on Friday.
Cohen, 76, was the first Jewish person to represent Tennessee in Congress, and long stood out as a white, Jewish lawmaker representing a majority-Black district in the South, a rare profile in Congress. Prior to the redistricting move, which was fueled by a recent Supreme Court decision allowing states to eliminate some majority-minority districts, Cohen faced a challenge from far-left state Rep. Justin Pearson.
The longtime congressman voiced his frustration with the redistricting process, finalized just a week ago, at an Anti-Defamation League event in Washington, D.C. earlier this week.
“I was the first Jewish congressman elected in Tennessee. Served 20 years in Congress, and I was redistricted out of my seat, which was a majority African American seat, by the mamzers in the Tennessee General Assembly,” Cohen said, using the Hebrew word for bastard. “And there are a whole bunch of ‘em.”
He went on to recount the prejudice he faced earlier in his career as a Jewish candidate.
“In 1994, I ran for governor. I went to a little radio station in Dixon, Tenn. One-person radio station. Gravel road. Came in, talked to the man for a while and he said, ‘Son, you Jewish?’ I said, ‘Yes sir.’ He said, ‘Goooood luck!’” Cohen continued. “It ain’t changed a lot since then. Be careful. There’s a lot of mamzers out there. They don’t know us, but they don’t like us.”
Cohen told reporters in an emotional press conference on Friday that the decision to drop out of the race was “by far the most difficult moment I’ve had as an elected official.” He said he had considered running for one of the newly drawn districts, but that none of the seats were similar to his current Memphis-based district.
He said that if state courts block the redistricting process until 2028, he would run again in his current seat.
Cohen said that the new maps were drawn specifically to defeat him, the only Democratic member of the state’s delegation and that he did not feel he could properly represent the far-flung, GOP-friendly areas now incorporated into Memphis-area seats.
The veteran lawmaker has long been a voice on Capitol Hill against antisemitism and in support of Israel, though he took some stances more critical of Israel during the war in Gaza, including signing a letter accusing Israel of violating U.S. arms sales law. He told Jewish Insider he had considered but resisted pressure to back cutting off weapons sales to the Jewish state.
Cohen reiterated in his press conference on Friday that he was confident that he would be able to fend off the challenge from Pearson under the original district lines — as he has beaten numerous Black challengers over his time in office.
Cohen joins several other prominent Jewish and non-Jewish Democrats strongly supportive of Israel whose political futures have been thrown into question by the ongoing mid-decade redistricting wave across the country.
Fellow Jewish Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) and Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) are also facing uncertain re-election campaigns after Republicans redrew the Florida Congressional map in a more partisan manner.
The vote ended in a 212-212 tie, with two new House Republicans voting to force an end to the war
Kevin Carter/Getty Images
The U.S. Capitol Building is seen at sunset on May 31, 2025 in Washington, DC.
The House voted by the narrowest possible margin to reject Democrats’ latest effort to force an end to the war in Iran, with a final tied vote of 212-212.
Reps. Tom Barrett (R-MI) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) both voted with Democrats and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) for the war powers resolution, while Rep. Jared Golden (D-ME) again voted against it.
Following the vote, an angry shout about Golden could be heard from a lawmaker on the Democratic side of the chamber. Golden said in a statement on Wednesday that he would vote for a “‘clean’ war powers resolution to remove the United States from hostilities against Iran,” pointing to a potential upcoming vote next week on a resolution by Rep. Greg Meeks (D-NY), but said that the resolution that came up for a vote on Thursday was flawed.
Wednesday’s resolution, of which Golden was an original co-sponsor, set a 30-day timeline for the war operations in Iran, a deadline which has long since passed.
“I supported this resolution when it was introduced, but unfortunately its proposed 30-day deadline lacks any real meaning now that we are more than 70 days into this conflict,” Golden said. “It no longer passes the straight-face test. I look forward to voting for a clean, relevant resolution as soon as possible.”
But, Golden continued, the “law is clear” and the administration’s “window for unilateral military engagement has closed. Hostilities, including the use of the U.S. fleet to impose a blockade of Iranian ports, cannot legally continue unless the president seeks, and wins, Congressional approval.”
Barrett and Fitzpatrick both represent swing districts, and Barrett recently introduced an Authorization for Use of Military Force to limit the U.S. operations in Iran. Should Barrett and Fitzpatrick maintain their positions and attendance otherwise remain the same, a war powers resolution could pass as early as next week.
Barrett, when he introduced the AUMF, said that he believes operations in Iran are ongoing in spite of claims to the contrary by the administration and that Congress needs to reclaim its constitutional authority over war powers.
Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH), who voted for the first Democratic war powers resolution earlier this year and “present” on a second one in April, flipped his vote to “no” on this third effort. Davidson said he wanted to allow President Donald Trump space to negotiate and that any vote before the 90-day mark of the war would be “political.”
House progressives have gradually introduced a barrage of war powers resolutions, with the goal of potentially forcing votes as frequently as every day, meaning many more such votes are on the horizon.
‘I would say the ceasefire is on massive life support,’ the president said on Monday after rejecting Iran’s latest proposal
Aaron Schwartz/Sipa/Bloomberg via Getty Images
President Donald Trump speaks during a maternal healthcare event in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, US, on Monday, May 11, 2026.
President Donald Trump said on Monday that the U.S. ceasefire in Iran is “unbelievably weak” and on “massive life support” after rejecting the regime’s latest proposal to end the war.
Trump made the comments while speaking to reporters from the Oval Office on Monday during an event on expanding maternal healthcare access. Asked about the status of the ongoing ceasefire, Trump described it as being at its “weakest” point and criticized the last offer sent by the Iranians in ongoing peace talks as “a piece of garbage.”
“It is unbelievably weak, I would say. I would call it the weakest right now,” Trump said of the ceasefire. “After reading that piece of garbage they sent us, I didn’t even finish reading it. I said, ‘I’m not gonna waste my time reading it.’ I would say it’s one of the weakest, right now. … I would say the ceasefire is on massive life support, where the doctors walks in and says, ‘Sir, your loved one has approximately a one percent chance of living.’”
The comments come ahead of the president’s reported Monday afternoon meeting with his national security team, including Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff.
The group is set to discuss next steps in Iran, according to Axios, including a potential return to military action and possibly resuming Project Freedom, the operation aimed at reopening the Strait of Hormuz to commercial traffic, after Trump suspended it last week.
Several Republican lawmakers have begun to urge the president to return to military operations, including Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker (R-MS), who told Trump on X that he’s “been generously patient with the murderous Iranian Islamist regime” but it’s time to “get back to business” and “restart Project Freedom.”
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said on Sunday it’s “time to consider changing course” from the diplomatic route. “Project Freedom Plus sounds pretty good right now,” he added, referencing a plan by Trump to involve other countries in the mission to open the strait. Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-WI) said bluntly in response to a post from the White House, “Start bombing again. It is the only thing they understand.”
Trump also said on Monday that he was “disappointed” with Kurdish leaders in Iraq for not following through with supporting an armed offensive against the Iranian regime, accusing them of not providing arms to the Iranian people in an effort to spark a popular uprising.
The Iranian people, Trump said, “have no weapons, they have no guns. We thought the Kurds were going to give them weapons, but the Kurds disappointed us. The Kurds take, take, take, and they have a great reputation in Congress. Congress says: ‘Oh, they fight so hard.’ They fight hard when they get paid. So I’m very disappointed in the Kurds.”
“I said it wasn’t going to work,” he continued, referencing reported U.S. and Israeli efforts to convince Kurdish leaders to launch a ground invasion of Iran. “I said they’ll never get there and I was right. I like to be right, in this case [it’s] too bad, but we sent some guns with ammunition and they were supposed to be delivered, but they kept it. I said they’re gonna keep it, but what do I know?”
Kurdish leaders have denied U.S. claims that they held on to weapons that American forces provided to them to pass along to the Iranian people, or that they received any arms from the U.S. in the first place.
One X-factor keeping Republicans competitive is the Democratic Party’s lurch leftward in the last year, leading to the emergence of extreme, exotic and out-of-the-mainstream candidates in pivotal battleground races
Graham Platner campaign/Travellers & Tinkers/Wikimedia Commons/Kenneth C. Zirkel/Wikmedia Commons
Graham Platner/ Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan/Abdul El-Sayed
The combination of history and polling is pointing to the likelihood of a Democratic wave election in the 2026 midterms, which would give Democrats control of the House and a fighting chance to claw back a Senate majority.
Polls show Democrats holding a sizable edge on the generic ballot, their favored candidates are running competitively even in red states and congressional districts, all while President Donald Trump’s approval rating is sagging amid high gas prices, executive overreach and an uncertain outcome in the aftermath of the war in Iran.
But the one X-factor keeping Republicans competitive is the Democratic Party’s lurch leftward in the last year, leading to the emergence of extreme, exotic and out-of-the-mainstream candidates in pivotal battleground races.
Indeed, a new poll commissioned by The Argument magazine finds that the generic ballot shows Democrats have been stuck with a six-point lead for a while even as Trump’s job approval has declined precipitously in the last several months. They’re voting to put a check on the GOP’s dominance of Washington, without endorsing the direction of the Democratic party.
“Democrats still have tangible policy misalignments with many voters who dislike Trump,” The Argument concluded in its polling analysis.
All told, the question becomes: Will the anticipated Democratic wave closely resemble the Democrats’ version of the GOP Tea Party election of 2010? In that election, Republicans swept into power in the House but far-right and extreme Senate candidates in key races blew golden opportunities, costing Republicans the upper chamber.
That dynamic repeated itself in 2022, when many experts anticipated a Republican wave election, but the party’s nomination of hard-line MAGA candidates in battleground contests led to a marked underperformance.
The alternative outcome is that partisanship and tribalism now run so deeply that an individual candidate’s flaws — even seemingly disqualifying ones — don’t mean what they used to. Right now, Democratic primary voters look like they’re ignoring personal baggage in favor of candidates that are the most ideologically progressive, personally authentic and who are burning hot with rage against Trump and the leadership class.
On the Senate side, Maine Democrat Graham Platner fits that profile to a tee, and is all but locking down a primary victory against longtime Gov. Janet Mills, the favorite of the party establishment. If he’s the nominee, he’d then face Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), who has a record of winning tough races even in dismal environments for her party.
In Michigan, Abdul El-Sayed holds both a radical record and support from a dedicated progressive base of young voters and Arab Americans. That has put him in contention for the Democratic nomination, but many Democrats fear he’d lose the seat to former Rep. Mike Rogers, the expected Republican nominee.
And in Minnesota, Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan holds lots of left-wing baggage but that’s not hurting her insurgent primary campaign against Rep. Angie Craig (D-MN), a more traditional and moderate Democratic contender. Former sportscaster Michele Tafoya is the GOP favorite in this race.
There are even more House races where problematic candidates are in contention in swing districts — like Ammar Campa-Najjar in the race of retiring Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Colorado state Rep. Manny Rutinel, running to unseat Rep. Gabe Evans (R-CO).
If 2010 offered any lessons, it’s that ideologically extreme, problematic candidates typically underperform expectations. That often makes the difference in a battleground state or district, where the margin of victory is typically close. It’s easy to get nostalgic for a time when a candidate like Christine O’Donnell (who notoriously proclaimed she was not a witch!) was as exotic as it got in politics. Now one of the Democrats’ leading Senate candidates is known for proclaiming he’s “not a secret Nazi.”
But given the tribalism of the current environment and the intense anti-Trump sentiment among Democrats and independents, do voters care about candidate quality anymore? Last November, Virginia voters elected an attorney general who survived revelations that he wished violence on a political opponent, only mildly underperforming the rest of the Democratic ticket.
This year’s midterm elections will put that proposition to the test. With strong battle-tested moderate recruits — like former North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper and former Alaska Rep. Mary Peltola — in purple and red states, Democrats are expanding the Senate map and giving themselves a fighting chance for a clean sweep.
But they risk jeopardizing those gains with some (potentially) not-ready-for-primetime players in the biggest battlegrounds of all: Maine and Michigan.
Two thoughts ran through my head. The main one: I’m getting married in six days. I can’t die now. The second: I can’t believe this is happening to me again
Nathan Howard/Getty Images
Guests take cover after a shooting attack took place as President Donald Trump was to speak to attendees of the annual White House Correspondents Association Dinner April 25, 2026 in Washington, DC.
The White House Correspondents’ Dinner began normally enough — a bustle of reporters, administration officials and members of Congress among other A-listers streaming from the packed lobby of the Washington Hilton down into the basement ballroom.
White House Correspondents’ Association President Weija Jiang, a CBS News White House reporter, finished her introductory remarks, and the thousands of guests packed into the ballroom tucked into their salads.
Then, a loud, shattering bang rang out from the other side of the ballroom. Initially, I didn’t think anything of it — I thought someone had dropped a large tray of food (as President Donald Trump said later, he thought the same thing).
Videos and other accounts of the evening indicate that someone from the security staff shouted from the front of the room that guests should get down. I didn’t hear it. My first indication that something was wrong was when I started seeing other guests ducking under the tables and security officers drawing their guns.
I tried to duck under the tablecloth, but no luck — another occupant of the table was already underneath, and there was no room. My heart pounding, I was forced to do my best to stay low — but I was in the backmost row of tables, right by a door, sitting directly in the aisle.
If a shooter came into the ballroom from behind me, I was a sitting duck. I was completely helpless and exposed.
Two thoughts ran through my head. The main one: I’m getting married in six days. I can’t die now. The second: I can’t believe this is happening to me again. (For those readers who are newer to Jewish Insider — I was also on scene for the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.)
Just a few yards away from me, a Secret Service agent stood, gun drawn, surveying the room. She kept yelling for us to stay down.
Perhaps foolishly, I poked my head above the table. I saw a group of agents in suits, slowly trying to pick their way across the enormous ballroom toward the Cabinet secretaries and other VIPs in the center of the room. Even before the chaos broke out, it had been nearly impossible to traverse the crowded room. Chairs were literally back-to-back, completely blocking the aisles, to say nothing of the people now crouching and lying all over the floor.
It struck me at the time as a fire hazard. Now, it seemed all the more ominous. The most senior officials in the country could easily have been trapped in the line of fire with no real way to escape.
And then I looked up to the head table. The president and the other guests — including Jiang, First Lady Melania Trump, Vice President JD Vance, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt and others — were gone. In their place was a group of Secret Service officers in heavy body armor, assault rifles at the ready, surveying the room.
For a venue chock full of journalists, information was strikingly hard to come by. X, once a reliable source of information in breaking news situations, had nothing. I was left asking my fiancée, who was at home, to send me information, because I could find nothing.
The first indication of the unfolding situation was a White House press pool report email, which said that an apparent shooter was in custody — but the reporter also said he’d seen Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. limping, which only increased our panic.
The pool report said that the shooter was in custody. My family told me that CNN was reporting that he was dead.
I’m sure we were only on the floor for a few minutes. But with no idea of what was happening, beyond the developing clarity that we’d just heard shots ring out, it felt like an eternity. My colleague, on the ground next to me, was in tears, near hyperventilating. I struggled to comfort her, not knowing what was going on, or if we were safe.
There were no announcements, at least that I heard, made to the group. My first indications that the situation might be safe were when the Secret Service officer nearby holstered her weapon, and when we saw a U.S. senator wandering toward an exit.
But we still had no real idea of what was going on.
Then, a door to the ballroom opened, and guests began to file out, first in a trickle then in a stream, pushing aside curtains that had been set up as security barriers, up the stairs and ultimately out the door of the hotel. Security kept telling us to keep moving, pushing us further and further from the scene.
On the way out, I saw C-SPAN CEO Sam Feist huddling with one of the cable network’s cameramen, positioned next to our table, who had kept filming through the entire event.
We ran into Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) at the exit of the hotel and shook his hand in the glow of the red and blue lights from armored SUVs for top officials still idling in the turnaround at the hotel’s entrance — perhaps the most surreal interaction I’ve had with a member of Congress as we shared our relief that we were all safe.
My colleague and I finally reconnected with her partner, who had been in the upstairs bar, watching the events play out on TV. They embraced tearfully, a simultaneously heartwarming and heartbreaking sight.
We kept walking hurriedly, calling family to let them know we were OK, pushed further and further away from the venue. I was completely lost, teeth starting to chatter and my body shaking from an excess of adrenaline.
Much has been said over the past days about the security at the event — some say it was too lax, some say there was none at all, some describe the event as among the best-secured in the city. There’s a kernel of truth in all of them.
My experience, after having attended three previous dinners, is that security was unchanged from previous years. Entering the event, a block from the hotel, we were asked to flash our tickets, but plenty of people dressed in evening wear are regularly waved through the cordon. Protesters from the group Code Pink hassled guests as they entered the secured zone, having lined up along Connecticut Avenue outside the fenced-off area to chant and wave signs.
At no point during or before the evening were IDs checked. Tickets were assigned and sold by the WHCA to news outlets, rather than to individuals, and it’s up to the outlets to decide how to distribute the tickets. It’s a massive event — thousands of people in attendance. That’s significantly more than could reportedly be accommodated in the planned White House ballroom, which Trump and others have trumpeted as the solution to prevent future incidents like this.
At the top of the hotel’s driveway, we were again asked to present our tickets — either a ticket to the dinner itself, or an emailed invitation to one of the pre-dinner cocktail receptions hosted by various news outlets. With just a ticket or a screenshot of one of those invitations — or as a guest of the hotel, in the case of the shooter — one could gain access to the hotel. The hotel does not shut down for the event and hosts thousands of guests who are unrelated and can come and go as they please.
The ballroom is several floors below the lobby. To get on the escalator downstairs, I again had to flash my ticket to hotel staff. This is, seemingly, the only security checkpoint that did not perform as it was supposed to on Saturday evening. As a guest of the hotel, the shooter would have had access to all other areas of the hotel.
After making my way through a tangle of lines for red carpet photos, I finally came to the metal detectors, staffed by Secret Service and Transportation Security Administration staff.
Bags and pocket items were manually checked by security here — not in an X-ray machine — and I know at least one person who was allowed to proceed through with her bag unopened.
It was near this barrier that the shooter pulled out his weapons, and was ultimately subdued by law enforcement. The gunman did not reach the ballroom and there was seemingly only one injury — a Secret Service agent who was shot in his bulletproof vest and has reportedly since recovered.
The dinner itself is a short flight of stairs below the security checkpoint — the shooter seems to have been tackled at the top of those stairs, based on photos released by the White House, perilously close to the ballroom entrance. But there is also a large atrium area on the upper level, where hundreds of guests pack in for a cocktail reception before doors open to the ballroom, not to mention the long lines that formed as guests were waiting to clear security. If the shooter had decided to open fire a few hours earlier, he would have had no shortage of targets.
One final note: When I finally made it home, I was, perhaps unwisely, scrolling X and saw a quickly proliferating set of conspiracy theories about the night, from both sides of the aisle — it was staged, the entertainer was in on it, security was purposely loosened, and more. I experienced the same in the midst of the Jan. 6 attack. There are few things more surreal, or more infuriating, than seeing people pretend an event you lived through wasn’t real. And there are few things more poisonous to our collective political discourse.
Now, in the wake of at least the third thwarted assassination attempt on this president, we’re all left to grapple with many questions. How could security let this keep happening? And what does this mean for the state of our country and our civic bonds?
The Jewish community has become sadly familiar with politically motivated violence, having faced deadly attacks and attempted attacks across the country. But increasingly, it seems to be a society-wide problem — and one without a clear path back.
An apparent manifesto by the gunman says he was targeting administration officials because he didn’t want their ‘crimes’ to ‘coat [his] hands’
Patrick T. Fallon / AFP via Getty Images
An FBI tactical team arrives in armored vehicles outside a house associated with the suspected White House Correspondents' Dinner shooter in Torrance, California, on April 25, 2026.
A gunman who attacked the White House Correspondents’ Dinner in Washington on Saturday night appears to have been acting alone, but is not currently cooperating with authorities, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said Sunday morning.
President Donald Trump, First Lady Melania Trump, Vice President JD Vance, FBI Director Kash Patel, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin and other Cabinet officials were rushed out of the Washington Hilton ballroom, where Trump was attending the WHCD for his first time as president, after shots were fired around 8:40 p.m. on Saturday.
The gunman had rushed a security checkpoint one floor above the ballroom armed with a shotgun, handgun and multiple knives and was tackled by law enforcement, D.C. police chief Jeffery Carroll said at a press briefing hours after the incident.
Trump released images and security camera video of the moment on Truth Social, where the attacker is seen running past security, who react quickly. He did not reach the ballroom.
The gunman was arrested and taken to a local hospital, though officials say he was not shot during the altercation. One Secret Service officer was shot but was saved by his bulletproof vest, Trump said, and no other injuries were reported.
The suspect has not been named publicly but anonymous law enforcement officials identified him to The New York Times as 31-year-old Cole Tomas Allen of Torrance, Calif. Federal authorities swarmed his home in the Los Angeles area hours after the attack. A LinkedIn account appearing to be connected to Allen indicates he was a video game developer and a part-time teacher.
Blanche said the gunman took a train from Los Angeles to Chicago and from Chicago to Washington where he checked into the Hilton as a guest a day or two before the event. It appears from the initial investigation that the suspect “set out to target folks that work in the administration, likely including the president,” Blanche added.
An apparent manifesto by the shooter sent to his family members and obtained by CBS News said he was targeting administration officials, “prioritized from highest-ranking to lowest,” because he didn’t want their “crimes” to “coat [his] hands.” He said he would not target “Mr. Patel” — referring to the FBI director — Secret Service, Capitol Police or National Guard troops. “In order to minimize casualties, I will also be using buckshot rather than slugs (less penetration through walls),” he added.
He further criticized what he called the lack of security at the hotel and apologized to his parents “for saying I had an interview without specifying it was for ‘Most Wanted,’” as well as to his colleagues and students for saying he had a personal emergency.
Jeanine Pirro, U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, said Sunday that the suspect was being charged with using a firearm during a crime of violence and with assault of a federal officer, among other charges, and would be arraigned on Monday.
Trump, speaking from the White House briefing room shortly after the incident, praised law enforcement and members of the media for their response — a change in the president’s usual acrimonious tone with the press. He insisted that the WHCD be rescheduled shortly, and further used the incident to justify the construction of his White House ballroom.
This year is being treated inside the Beltway as the most high-profile WHCD weekend in at least a decade, the result of Trump’s decision to participate in this year’s dinner after boycotting it for his entire presidency
Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images
U.S. President Donald Trump waves to the media after walking off of Air Force One at Miami International Airport on April 11, 2026 in Miami, Florida.
A who’s who of the leading names in media, tech and global and domestic politics are flocking to the nation’s capital for the scores of exclusive parties surrounding the annual White House Correspondents’ Dinner this Saturday — where President Donald Trump will make his first-ever appearance as president and deliver a roast of the political press corps.
The correspondents’ dinner, and the parties thrown in its honor, have always generated enough fanfare to maintain its status as the biggest weekend of the social calendar in Washington. This year, however, is being treated inside the Beltway as the most high-profile WHCD weekend in at least a decade, the result of Trump’s decision to participate in this year’s dinner after boycotting it for his entire presidency.
In addition to Trump’s roast, guests will be entertained by Oz Pearlman, a famed mentalist known for his mind-reading tricks. Pearlman, who is Jewish and was born in Israel, marks a shift from the traditional entertainment choice at the dinner, which is usually a monologue delivered by a comedian. Those comedians’ jokes about Trump were a factor in why the president has skipped previous dinners, and the White House Correspondents’ Association canceled its planned entertainer last year over backlash to her past comments.
The dinner could make for some awkward moments: one of the WHCA’s award winners this year is a team from The Wall Street Journal, for reporting on Trump’s ties to disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein — an article that led Trump to sue the Journal. And that’s not to mention Trump’s routine hostility toward and criticisms of the media more broadly. It is unclear if the president will be present for the award ceremony.
Celebrities have historically flocked to Washington for WHCD weekend, though the number of famous names willing to appear for the dinner or other events dwindled during the first Trump administration. That trend began to reverse during the Biden administration, though it picked up again last year when Trump returned to office.
Nicki Minaj, the rap superstar who has become an advocate for the Trump administration, will be attending the dinner as a guest of the Washington Times. No other media organizations have announced celebrity guests for their respective tables at the dinner.
Regardless of a diminished turnout of famous faces, this weekend will be jam-packed with nonstop events, and it has already begun.
Trump’s announcement in early March that he would attend Saturday’s dinner — leading many senior administration officials to also make plans to attend the festivities and Donald Trump Jr. to organize an ultra-exclusive event at his Executive Branch Club in Georgetown on Friday night — prompted an avalanche of interest from major companies, U.S. officials, foreign diplomats and dignitaries, top corporate powerbrokers and domestic political firms.
Boeing, Meta and Amazon swiftly organized intimate, invite-only gatherings for this weekend or became lead sponsors for events being hosted by D.C.-area embassies, media outlets, political operatives and high-profile consulting groups. Foreign ambassadors stationed in the U.S. and others looking to connect with the president’s circle or the broader Washington political orbit began calling in favors to get on the guest lists for all of the weekend’s events, making invitations all-the-more difficult to secure for those who have attended in the last decade.
The parties start early on Friday with Axios Live’s annual WHCD weekend kickoff brunch at 9:00 a.m., followed by MS NOW’s brunch at 11:00 a.m. and Punchbowl News’ WHCD weekend kickoff gathering the publication’s townhouse in Capitol Hill at noon.
Meghan McCain’s “Renegade Women’s Cocktail Party” at The Graham in Georgetown starts at 4 p.m. while YouTube’s official WHCD party at Floreria Atlantico in Georgetown and the Motion Picture Association’s reception at the Downtown headquarters begin at 5:30.
Later that night, Semafor is hosting a “house party” at the private residence of its founder, Justin B. Smith, starting at 8 p.m.; Creative Artists Agency’s annual Friday evening party, sponsored by Vanity Fair, will take place this year at 7:30 p.m. at the Belgian ambassador’s residence near Georgetown; and United Talent Agency will host their annual “Celebration of American Journalists” at 9:00 p.m. at Osteria Mozza in Georgetown.
The Qataris are once again hosting a Friday evening correspondents bash with Washingtonian magazine, which starts at 8 p.m. at the Georgetown Four Seasons, which Qatari Ambassador Meshal Al Thani is slated to attend. At 7 p.m., doors will open for the Daily Mail’s party with Brunswick Review Business Magazine at the British ambassador’s residence.
Saturday’s festivities start at 11 a.m. with the annual White House Correspondents’ garden brunch, hosted by Tammy Haddad at the Beall-Washington House in Georgetown. Ahead of the dinner, Puck is hosting a “penthouse pre-party” on the rooftop of The Hepburn, located next to the Washington Hilton. At the Hilton, where the dinner is taking place, The Wall Street Journal and ABC News have their respective annual pre-dinner receptions at 5:30 p.m. The Washington Post has a cocktail reception at the Hilton starting at 6 p.m., the same time that Politico’s pre-dinner event with CBS News — featuring new CBS News honcho Bari Weiss — takes place just down the hall.
Alongside the dinner, Substack is hosting its “New Media Party” at 8 p.m. at the Renwick Gallery, located blocks from the White House; afterward, MS NOW and NBC News have dueling parties starting at 11:30 p.m., with the former hosting theirs at Dupont Underground in Dupont Circle and the latter hosting theirs at the French ambassador’s residence in Kalorama. Time’s WHCD afterparty at the Swiss ambassador’s residence in Woodley Park begins at 11 p.m.
On Sunday, NOTUS and Politico are hosting a brunch at the home of Robert Allbritton starting at 11:00 a.m., and CNN’s “WHCD Weekend Finale” brunch reception starts at 12:30 p.m.
Vance has struggled to appease a coalition of anti-war critics on the populist right who feel his alignment with Trump’s foreign policy agenda represents not only a betrayal of their values but also the noninterventionist views he long espoused
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
U.S. Vice President JD Vance speaks during a Turning Point USA event at Akins Ford Arena at the Classic Center on April 14, 2026 in Athens, Georgia.
As Vice President JD Vance has recently found himself navigating tenuous negotiations between the United States and Iran, his central role in the talks to end the war is highlighting his own vulnerabilities on the domestic front — where he is facing pushback from the isolationist right that is seen as part of his coalition.
In many ways, Vance’s political troubles recall his predecessor, former Vice President Kamala Harris, who in her 2024 presidential campaign drew fierce protests from far-left activists who objected to former President Joe Biden’s support for Israel amid the war in Gaza.
Harris, who has grown more openly critical of Israel since losing the race and leaving office, strained both to articulate a consistent message on Gaza that would satisfy the far and center left and to distance her campaign from an aging, unpopular president whose approach to Israel, according to her recent memoir, was not fully aligned with her own.
Anti-Israel activists continue to insist, even years after the election, that Harris’ association with Biden while he supported Israel’s war against Hamas cost her votes that contributed to her defeat, while pro-Israel Democrats claim she failed to draw red lines around growing extremism within the party that alienated moderates, and is now inflecting the midterm elections. More recently, the former vice president faced anti-Israel hecklers during a book tour last year.
In recent weeks, Vance, who is widely seen as a top 2028 presidential prospect, has likewise struggled to appease a restive coalition of anti-war critics on the populist right who feel his alignment with President Donald Trump’s robust foreign policy agenda represents not only a betrayal of their values but also the noninterventionist views he himself had long espoused.
Last week, in a disruption reminiscent of Harris’ campaign experience, Vance was notably heckled during a speaking appearance at a Turning Point USA event held at the University of Georgia, where an attendee interrupted his comments to accuse the Trump administration of supporting “genocide” in Gaza and “killing children.”
“If you want to complain about what happened in Gaza, why don’t you complain about Joe Biden and the last administration? We’re the administration that solved that problem,” Vance said in response to the heckler, after defending what he called Trump’s “peace agreement in Gaza.”
He also touted his so far unsuccessful efforts to broker a resolution to the Iran war — about which he reportedly voiced resistance behind the scenes before Trump greenlit the campaign in late February — saying he is pursuing the president’s goal to achieve an ambiguously outlined “grand bargain” on nuclear enrichment.
“The United States had never had meetings at that level with the Iranian government in 49 years,” Vance said at the event, days after returning from talks with Iran in Islamabad where he tried and failed to reach a diplomatic agreement.
The vice president was expected on Tuesday to leave for resumed negotiations in the Pakistani capital as a two-week ceasefire was set to soon expire, but his trip was put on hold and the ceasefire extended, raising questions about the prospect of a swift settlement.
While Vance had sought to keep the war at arm’s length in the initial days after the attack on Iran, his high-profile position in the negotiation process has now forced him to identify more closely with the sort of foreign military conflict he had built his political career on opposing.
As a junior senator from Ohio, Vance even wrote in a January 2023 opinion piece that he was supporting Trump’s reelection campaign because the president “started no wars” in his first four years in the White House.
With Trump’s approval ratings trending downward — and as Republicans fret that the war in Iran as well as rising gasoline prices could undercut their chances of holding the House and Senate in the midterms — much is riding on Vance’s efforts to put an end to the conflict as he lays the groundwork for a potential White House bid.
While polling has shown that Trump’s war aims continue to garner widespread backing within his party, including the MAGA wing, independent voters who were a key part of his winning coalition in 2024 are divided, as are younger voters whom Vance has targeted.
In Georgia last week, Vance seemed to acknowledge disappointment among audience members over the war. “I recognize that young voters do not love the policy we have in the Middle East, OK,” he said. “I understand.”
“I’m not saying you have to agree with me on every issue,” he said at the Turning Point event. “What I am saying is: Don’t get disengaged because you disagree with the administration on one topic. Get more involved, make your voice heard even more. That is how we ultimately take the country back.”
Ahead of 2028, Vance is no doubt hoping that his involvement in the Iran negotiations will help yield a deal that satisfies the president and that he can wave before the far-right base he has continued to indulge, even as it has grown increasingly hostile to Jews and Israel.
Meanwhile, Vance has at the same time made some overtures to pro-Israel Republican donors skeptical of his close relationship with Tucker Carlson, a vocal detractor of Israel whose commentary regularly veers into antisemitic rhetoric that the vice president has ignored or downplayed.
But as Harris’ problems demonstrated two years ago, Vance may ultimately find it is not possible to have it both ways.
The judge said the 17-year-old assailant must not enter any synagogue; three Jewish institutions were targeted in arson attacks within a week
James Manning/PA Images via Getty Images
Rabbi Yehuda Black (C) identifies himself to a police officer as he enters the restricted zone outside the Kenton United Synagogue in Harrow, north-west London, after an attempted arson attack overnight on April 19, 2026.
The arsonist who pleaded guilty to attacking a North London synagogue on Saturday night was released on bail by the Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Tuesday.
The 17-year-old boy, whose name has not been disclosed due to his age, threw a bottle containing accelerant through the window of Kenton United Synagogue, according to the Metropolitan Police. The Community Security Trust, U.K.’s Jewish security organization, said that the building faced minor smoke damage but no injuries. It was the third such attack on a Jewish institution in London within a week.
District Judge Nina Tempia granted the arsonist bail under the conditions that he live and sleep at his home address and not enter any synagogue, or he will be re-arrested, The Independent reported.
A second suspect, a 19-year-old male, was also arrested after the attack and had been released on bail earlier this week, the Met Police said.
Shortly before the arrests of the two teenagers, U.K. Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis condemned the “sustained campaign of violence and intimidation” targeting British Jews.
Two suspects in an arson attack on London’s Finchley Reform Synagogue last Wednesday were also released on bail. On Friday, a building that used to house the Jewish Futures charity which still bears its name on the side was targeted in another arson attack. Also last week, police launched an investigation into a video posted to social media claiming the Israeli Embassy was going to be attacked with drones carrying “dangerous substances” — the embassy said it was not ultimately attacked and police said suspicious items found nearby were “non-hazardous.”
In addition, four ambulances belonging to a Jewish volunteer emergency service in the heavily Jewish London suburb Golders Green were set on fire last month. Four people have been charged in that attack, which the Met Police said they were investigating as an antisemitic hate crime.
British authorities are investigating whether the recent surge of attacks targeting Jewish institutions in the country is linked to Iran.
The swing-district Republican is the first GOP lawmaker other than isolationist Thomas Massie to support constraining the administration’s military operations in Iran
Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images
Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) talks with a reporter in the U.S. Capitol's Statuary Hall on Friday, March 27, 2026.
Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), a moderate Republican and co-chair of the House Problem Solvers Caucus, introduced a war powers resolution on Thursday that aims to enforce the deadlines for the war in Iran laid out in the 1973 War Powers Act.
Fitzpatrick is the first Republican — other than isolationist Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) — to introduce legislation that would constrain the administration’s ability to act in Iran. The move is a signal that GOP support for the effort could begin to erode if the administration disregards legal limitations on the length of its operation in Iran.
The War Powers Act limits any military operation initiated unilaterally by the executive branch to 60 days, with an additional 30-day drawdown period, unless the operations are subsequently authorized by Congress. The 60-day period will expire at the end of April.
“The War Powers Act of 1973 is the law of the land,” Fitzpatrick said. “This consistent standard must be applied to all past, current, and future administrations when it comes to military hostilities abroad. … This is the law that has applied to past administrations, and it is the law that will apply to current and future administrations. This is the law and, until it is changed, it will be consistently applied and consistently enforced across all administrations and all conflicts.”
Other Republicans, including moderates, have also indicated that they would be uncomfortable with or unable to support any military operations in Iran past the 60-day deadline without additional congressional authorization — though some have said they would support such an authorization.
Yet, others have argued that the limitations in the War Powers Act are not legally binding and say Republicans on the Hill will disregard them.
Running in a highly competitive district, Fitzpatrick’s move could also be a sign of discomfort with the continued war effort among swing-district Republicans ahead of the midterm elections.
The viral Instagram account with 1.4 million followers was taken offline, but similar accounts abound
Screenshot
AI Rabbi Goldman copycat accounts appear on Instagram after original is taken down.
An AI-generated Instagram account, which featured a fake Orthodox rabbi spreading antisemitic conspiracies to its more than 1.4 million followers, was taken offline over the weekend following major backlash from Jewish groups and one Democratic lawmaker — yet several similar, hate-peddling accounts have emerged with little to no public action from Meta.
An account called “Rabbi Goldman” “uses fake, AI-created authority figures to spread hate” in “a troubling and growing tactic,” according to a report published last week by Combat Antisemitism Movement.
The account, which was taken offline after the report was released, featured videos such as one in which the “rabbi,” wearing a tuxedo and seemingly seated in a luxury airplane, claims that Jews utilize empty private jets to evade taxes. A community note attached to the clip reads, “This is an AI generated rabbi who is trying to scam you by selling a fake 9$ get rich handbook. This account is ran by scammers based in south India.”
Several new Rabbi Goldman accounts started posting similar videos within the past two weeks — two already have followings of 18,500 and 10,000. Both remain active on Instagram and their bios state, “only Backup account for @rabbigoldman” and “old account got banned.”
The CAM report identified 12 AI-generated “rabbis” with a combined following of 2.1 million Instagram users, all of which promote classic antisemitic stereotypes. Many of the accounts remain active on the platform even after the Rabbi Goldman account was removed.
One account called “Rabbi Rothstein,” for example, with more than 57,000 followers, has posted more than 100 videos since February. In one video, “Rabbi Rothstein” states that “us Jews teach our children that being liked is expensive but being respected is profitable,” an apparent reference to the antisemitic trope that Jews are money obsessed. Another video also claims that Jews evade taxes, by purchasing expensive art.
Lawmakers have been pushing for more oversight regarding online antisemitism from Meta — which is the parent company of Instagram, as well as Facebook and WhatsApp — for years. In 2024, a bipartisan group of House lawmakers condemned Meta, and its oversight board, for ruling that the phrase “From the river to the sea” does not violate the social media company’s rules against hate speech, violence and incitement.
In response to Jewish Insider’s coverage of the Instagram accounts, Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) called for oversight. “This is disgusting, dangerous, and exactly why we need increased accountability online to prevent the spread of misinformation and pure, flat-out hate,” he wrote on X. “These AI-generated rabbis and their antisemitic BS have real consequences.”
Meta did not respond to several requests for comment from JI asking about its decision to take the Rabbi Goldman account offline — whether it was shut down or suspended — and whether there will be a crackdown on similar accounts.
Last year, Meta received pushback from Jewish leaders when it introduced a new community-driven fact-checking system, ending its third-party fact-checking program and replacing it with a system modeled after the community notes feature on Elon Musk’s X. Some Jewish leaders expressed concern that the move would “open the floodgates to content” that could target Jewish communities and individuals, and called the decision a “step back” in the fight against rising antisemitism.
Stephen Spencer Pittman called Beth Israel Congregation the ‘synagogue of Satan’ in an interview with the Jackson Fire Department
Beth Israel Congregation
Beth Israel Congregation in Jackson, Miss., targeted in an arson attack on Jan. 10, 2026.
The suspect in an arson attack that destroyed Mississippi’s largest synagogue early Saturday morning confessed to targeting the building because of its “Jewish ties,” the FBI announced on Monday.
In an affidavit filed in U.S. District Court in Mississippi more than 48 hours after the attack, the FBI said the suspect, Stephen Spencer Pittman, 19, admitted to starting the blaze at Beth Israel Congregation in Jackson, Miss., due to “the building’s Jewish ties.” In an interview with the Jackson Fire Department, he referred to the institution as the “synagogue of Satan,” a historically antisemitic phrase that has been re-popularized by far-right commentator Candace Owens.
Pittman appeared in court Monday to face arson charges, according to a statement from the U.S. Attorney’s Office, which made no mention of hate crime charges. If convicted, Pittman faces a minimum penalty of 5 years and a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s field office in Jackson told Jewish Insider on Monday that no press conference providing further details is planned.
According to the affidavit, Pittman told investigators he stopped at a gas station on his way to the synagogue to purchase the gasoline used in the fire. At the station, he removed his license plate. He broke into a window of the synagogue shortly after 3 a.m. on Saturday using an ax, doused the inside in gas and used a torch lighter to start the fire. No congregants were injured in the blaze.
According to the complaint, Pittman also admitted to committing arson in text messages to his father, who told authorities.
Pittman texted a photo of the synagogue, accompanied by messages that said, “There’s a furnace in the back,” “BTW my plate is off,” “Hoodie is on” and, “And they have the best cameras.”
Pittman posted a link on what appears to be his Instagram account to One Purpose, a website with the description, “Scripture-backed fitness. Brotherhood accountability. Life-expectancy-maxxing.” The top of the site has the Hebrew four-letter name for God and the words “Build Your Temple for His Glory.”
In one recent Instagram post, Pittman shared a list of foods suggested for a “Christian Diet/Testosterone Optimization” which included the Hebrew words for “butter” and “olive oil” under “only God-made fats.”
Pittman primarily posted about baseball, but one day before the attack shared a repost of a “Jew in Backyard” cartoon in which a character with horns and a large nose, wearing a Star of David, is holding two moneybags. “A Jew in our backyard. I can’t believe my Jewcrow didn’t work,” a woman says, pointing to a waiter with a sign asking for tips.
Beth Israel is the only synagogue in Jackson, the state’s capital and most populous city. The historic building also houses the offices of the Institute of Southern Jewish Life, which supports Jewish life in the region.
Located in a major hub of the Civil Rights Movement, Beth Israel was bombed in 1967 by the Ku Klux Klan over the rabbi’s support for racial justice — including providing chaplain services to activists incarcerated for challenging segregated bussing in the state.
Two Torah scrolls were destroyed in the fire, and five more were damaged. A Torah that survived the Holocaust, which was kept in a glass case, was unharmed. The congregation’s library and administrative office were ruined, and the congregation has canceled services indefinitely.
Other passed amendments aimed to counter the BDS movement, strengthen the U.S.-Israel defense partnership and counter the Iranian regime
GETTY IMAGES
A general view of the U.S. Capitol Building from the National Mall, in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, May 29, 2025.
The House passed its version of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act on Wednesday, including an amendment that would repeal the Authorizations for Use of Military Force that allowed for the Iraq war and the Gulf War.
The House also passed a series of amendments aimed at countering the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement targeting Israel and enhancing defense cooperation with Israel.
An effort to repeal the Authorization for Use of Military Force passed by a bipartisan 261-167 vote, with 49 Republicans voting with 212 Democrats in favor of the amendment.
Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL), the chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said he agreed that there should be sunsets on AUMFs, but said that changes should not be made without discussions with key U.S. military leaders about how the repeal would impact U.S. activities and counterterrorism efforts and whether additional authorities would be needed to re-authorize ongoing U.S. operations.
“These are questions that were not asked, and the answers were not given,” Mast said. “We have, I think, probably large agreement on reasons to sunset things, but it should not be done in absence of doing something of this gravity in the proper way.”
Rep. Greg Meeks (D-NY), the ranking member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, said that the AUMFs are “long obsolete” and that keeping them effective “only risk[s] abuse by administrations of either party to sanction military force that Congress has not consented or approved.”
He said he’s committed to ensuring that the provision remains in the final version of the NDAA agreed to in negotiation with the Senate.
Repeal efforts for the AUMFs have seen substantial momentum in recent previous years.
Other amendments approved by voice votes as part of broader amendment packages aimed to counter international targeting of Israel, including banning the Defense Department from contracting with entities boycotting Israel, instructing the administration to monitor the impact of global arms embargoes, and other sanctions imposed on Israel, and determine how the U.S. can mitigate such issues. They also urged the administration to engage with allies to ensure they do not enforce International Criminal Court arrest warrants against Israeli officials and called on the Pentagon not to participate in defense exhibitions that exclude Israel.
To further reinforce U.S.-Israel defensive cooperation, other amendments would order the creation of a Defense Innovation Unit field office in Israel to engage with the government and private sector there on technological development and mandate that the U.S. and Israel study the possibility of integrating Israel into the U.S. defense industrial base.
Additionally, the House added requirements that the Pentagon report to Congress on the status of integrated air and missile defense cooperation in the Middle East, including lessons learned from recent attacks in the region; on joint U.S.-Israel efforts to increase production of Arrow missile defense interceptors, stockpiles of which were significantly depleted during the Israel-Iran war, including whether further authorizations or funding are needed; on U.S.-Israel joint military exercises, the missions rehearsed and how regional partners can be invited to join; and on the status of pending deliveries of military aircraft and air-launched munitions, including the reasons for any delays and how they can be resolved.
Other amendments would require the U.S, Egypt and Israel to study steps that they can take to block smuggling into Gaza from tunnels in Egypt or via the Mediterranean Sea and the Pentagon to report to Congress on the U.S.-Bahrain partnership agreement and possibilities for expanding it to include other regional allies.
Additional amendments seek to support Iranian dissidents and counter the Iranian regime: requiring a strategy on encouraging and enticing top Iranian officials to defect; requiring the Pentagon to help develop technologies to counter internet blockages imposed by Iran and other adversaries; requiring a strategy to counter Iran and Hezbollah’s operations in South America; and expanding reporting requirements regarding Iran’s terrorism strategy, proxies, relationship with Russia, supply chains and weapons production capabilities.
Another amendment would require the Pentagon to quickly release all files on the Iranian proxy attack on the Tower 22 facility in Jordan that killed U.S. service members in January 2024.
An additional amendment would award a medal to servicemembers involved in the U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Two amendments by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), which aimed to block U.S. support for Ukraine and Taiwan, were resoundingly defeated 372-60 and 422-9, respectively. An amendment proposed by Greene to strip out programs supporting Israel from the bill did not receive consideration or a vote on the floor.
Greene made similar efforts to block funding for Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan during consideration earlier this year of 2026 Pentagon funding, which were defeated along similar lines.
The amended NDAA passed the House by a 231-196 vote, with just 17 Democrats voting for the bill as most voiced objections to provisions relating to transgender medical care and renewable energy, among other issues. The Senate is considering its own version of the NDAA this week as well.
Among a slew of other issues, a series of proposed amendments aimed at cracking down on Turkey were not approved for consideration on the House floor.
Please log in if you already have a subscription, or subscribe to access the latest updates.
Continue with Google
Continue with Apple