A group of eight Jewish House Democrats called for action to advance the Antisemitism Awareness Act and increase Nonprofit Security Grant Program funding, in advance of votes on the House floor on a pair of resolutions condemning recent antisemitic attacks.

The statement highlights the recent string of antisemitic violence across the country and argues, “The Jewish community needs real action, not just resolutions.”

The lawmakers said that, “While the House will vote on two non-binding resolutions this week condemning the antisemitic attacks in Washington D.C., and Boulder, Colorado, the Jewish community is reeling, and we need Congressional leaders to come together and support real policy change.”

The statement was signed by Reps. Brad Sherman (D-CA), Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), Kim Schrier (D-WA), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), Greg Landsman (D-OH), Brad Schneider (D-IL) and Lois Frankel (D-FL).

“In just the last two weeks, our country has witnessed two back-to-back antisemitic terror attacks that have left two dead and 15 seriously wounded,” the lawmakers said. “These events are an escalation of ongoing antisemitic violence that has become more and more common since Hamas’s October 7th massacre.”

The statement calls on Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) to bring a clean, unamended version of the Antisemitism Awareness Act to the Senate floor and for House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) to bring the bill up for a vote in the House.

“Codifying the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism is long overdue, and is more urgent now than ever as we see one violent anti-Zionist terror attack after another,” the statement reads. “You cannot fight antisemitism if you are unwilling to define it.”

It also calls for President Donald Trump and members of the Appropriations Committees to provide “long-requested levels of $500 million” for the NSGP, arguing, “it will help [Jewish institutions] put in place additional security measures like security cameras, locked doors, security guards, and more that could thwart terror attacks like the one that transpired at the Capital Jewish Museum.”

The statement outlines a series of violent antisemitic incidents in the past year and a half, including the Capital Jewish Museum murders and the Boulder, Colo., attack, as well as the attempted arson of Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro’s home during Passover; the death of Paul Kessler, who was killed in November 2023 in Los Angeles by an anti-Israel demonstrator who hit him on the head; and the stabbing of a Jewish barber in Yonkers, N.Y. in August 2024, which the lawmakers say “underlie the need for urgent, serious action.”

The statement’s neutral tone on the two antisemitism resolutions reflects the fact that many House Democrats are condemning one of the resolutions, led by Republicans, which focuses heavily on immigration issues. Controversial language describing “Free Palestine” as an antisemitic slogan was pulled from the resolution ahead of the vote.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) said Monday that the resolution is a “desperate attempt to distract,” an “embarassment” and a “joke.”

The statement was also endorsed by Democratic Majority for Israel.

A group of pro-Israel Jewish House Democrats wrote to Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff on Thursday warning that Iran must restore International Atomic Energy Agency access to its nuclear sites before any deal can move forward in earnest.

Under a reported proposal put forward by Iran, Iran would not allow such inspections to resume until well into the implementation of a nuclear agreement.

“Absent verifiable data on Iran’s current nuclear activities, it is not possible to conduct meaningful, comprehensive negotiations or assess compliance with any potential future agreement,” Reps. Brad Schneider (D-IL), Dan Goldman (D-NY) and Greg Landsman (D-OH) wrote, in a letter obtained by Jewish Insider. “The failure to establish a true baseline undermines the credibility of the negotiating process and exposes the United States and its partners to strategic miscalculation.”

They said that international inspectors must regain “full, unfettered access to Iran’s nuclear facilities, before establishing final parameters of a possible agreement.”

The lawmakers argued that, because inspectors have been blocked from key sites in recent years as Iran has significantly increased its enrichment and stockpile of nuclear materials, the U.S. and its partners “lack reliable visibility into the scope and status of Iran’s nuclear program.”

“Restoring inspector access is the necessary foundation for any serious diplomatic effort,” the lawmakers wrote. “Without verified insight into Iran’s current nuclear activities, the United States cannot credibly assess risks, define objectives, or safeguard the interests of our allies.”

The three Democrats said that better knowledge of Iran’s current activities and stockpiles is “particularly urgent” given recent assessments that Iran could quickly have sufficient fissile material for multiple nuclear weapons, its missile program continues to advance and it continues to support regional terrorism.

The letter is the latest in a series of signs in recent days that pro-Israel Democrats are alarmed by the Trump administration’s apparent interest in moving quickly toward a nuclear agreement with the Islamic Republic.

Asked on Thursday about a New York Times report that the U.S. had rejected an Israeli plan to strike Iran, Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) told JI, “We should never play public footsie with the parent company of terror and one of our top adversaries. We should take the hardest line against Iran’s terror and nuclear programs.”

Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) similarly expressed alarm a day prior about the Times story.

Iran International reported on Thursday the alleged parameters of a deal that Iran had put forward — a proposal similar to the original 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

Under the deal, Iran would “temporarily” halt its enrichment to 3.67% in exchange for access to frozen assets and the ability to export oil. It would not restore IAEA inspections or “end high-level uranium enrichment” until the second stage of the deal, at which point the U.S. would be required to lift some sanctions and prevent the implementation of U.N. snapback sanctions on Iran.

Under the third phase of the proposed deal, Iran would move its stockpile of highly enriched uranium to a third country, while the U.S. would lift all sanctions on Iran. Iran would not be required to curtail its missile program or support for terrorism — which have prompted some of the sanctions in question. Iran is also demanding that Congress approve the deal. 

Iran International reported that Witkoff “welcomed the proposals,” to the surprise of Iranian negotiators. Some in the U.S. have worried that Witkoff, who has delivered mixed messages publicly on the U.S. position, would negotiate a weak deal.

The proposal saw immediate backlash from Iran hawks.

“Terrible proposal. Iran has no reason to enrich ANY uranium. 3.67% enriched is just a few weeks away from weapons grade. And Iran is proposing to only TEMPORARILY limit enrichment to this level,” Fred Fleitz, the vice chair of the America First Policy Institute’s Center for American Security, a pro-Trump think tank, said. “This is a Iranian cynical ploy to buy time and continue its weaponization program.”

Fleitz served for several months as chief of staff of the National Security Council in Trump’s first administration.

“The regime wants a return to the failed JCPOA, which President Trump rightly rejected. The U.S. response must be firm: dismantle your nuclear program completely and verifiably — or face consequences,” FDD Action, an advocacy group affiliated with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said. “Congress must reject any deal that leaves Iran’s nuclear infrastructure intact.”

Jason Brodsky, the policy director of United Against Nuclear Iran, said the proposal is “unserious and should be dead on arrival.”