The Pennsylvania senator heavily criticized the normalization of anti-Israel platforms and the validation of extreme views among Democratic voters
Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images
Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) talks with reporters after the Senate luncheons in the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday, March 11, 2025.
Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA), a stalwart ally of Israel and the Jewish community who has become increasingly isolated within a Democratic Party facing internal friction over its Middle East policy, warned on Wednesday that the outlook for Jewish voters within his party has become “bleak.”
“I’m not a member of the Jewish community, but if I was one, it would be bleak as a Jewish voter in the Democratic Party,” Fetterman said, speaking at a conference hosted by the Culture for Peace Institute, a nonprofit organization focused on advancing “sustainable peace” by bringing together political leaders and researchers, in Washington. “If [Democratic voters are] willing to support these kinds of candidates across the map — look in Michigan [Abdul El-Sayed], look at the one in Maine [Graham Platner], look at New York City [Mayor Zohran Mamdani], look across the map — these are defined by how much anti-Israel rhetoric you can cram into your platform.”
Fetterman expressed concern that the trajectory of the party will continue to “deteriorate,” noting that he “refuses to be part” of what he claims to have predicted would occur within the Democratic ranks. He added that he is “constantly disappointed but not surprised by the way things have drifted within the party.”
“I expect that it’s going to continue to deteriorate,” Fetterman said. “A lot of these extreme views were validated during the midterms. It’s stunning, astonishing to me, the kind of people with these views who [Democratic voters] will now choose to be their representatives. It’s heartbreaking to me, but unsurprising, and that’s what history would have predicted will happen.”
The Pennsylvania senator pointed specifically to Platner’s victory in the Maine Democratic Senate primary on Tuesday, calling it a “capstone” example of deterioration within the party, taking concern with the amount of people “defending” the scandal-plagued candidate.
“I think the capstone of that recently was where you have the kind of garbage candidate like Platner — like full-on Nazi ink on his body — and now you have people defending it,” Fetterman said. “I read an interview with a Maine voter where [a woman said] she would not vote or support someone if they have an Israeli flag tattoo, but it’s OK that [Platner has a Nazi tattoo] on his body. That’s how insidious it’s become within the party, and the calculus where it’s OK to have these views.”
Fetterman stated that the problem is most acute among the “young generation,” arguing that the environment on college campuses and behavior of certain Democratic candidates have contributed to the alarming shift.
“The young generation’s been lost, and that’s 100% on social media,” Fetterman said. “If the Democratic Party is convinced that Hamas or Hezbollah or Iran were the wronged party, that’s absurdity.”
“If you are angry, blame Iran — don’t blame America, or don’t blame Israel for demanding that they turn over their nuclear dust,” he continued. “Don’t keep hostages, don’t attack Israel, don’t fire thousands of rockets into northern Israel. This response was entirely appropriate.”
On the war in Iran, Fetterman discussed his decision to be the sole Senate Democrat to vote against multiple war powers resolutions, clarifying that it was a “pro-no-nuclear-weapons-for-Iran” vote rather than a pro-war stance. Despite his isolation in the caucus on that specific measure, Fetterman insisted he stood on the “right side” of history.
“Can’t we just agree that every single Democrat in the caucus would agree that we can never let Iran build a nuclear bomb?” Fetterman said. “When someone [the Trump administration] actually tries to make sure that doesn’t happen, why can’t you support that?”
Fetterman recalled that Democrats once stood firmly and unanimously against Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon. However, he argued that a policy position that used to be mainstream for Democrats has now “become a controversial one.”
Fetterman further asserted that support for Israeli military objectives has also become “controversial” within the Democratic Party. Nonetheless, he emphasized that he will continue to back Jerusalem’s operational goals regardless of the shifting political tides.
“This might be controversial for Democrats now, but I’ll say it again. I think it’s magnificent the way Israel continues to this day to eliminate people in Hamas and everyone that is tied to [the Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attacks],” Fetterman said. “Everyone should be held accountable and pick off the new leaders before the new business cards even come in.”
Ultimately, he warned that an Iranian nuclear breakout would carry severe consequences for the Middle East and economic fallout globally.
“I can’t imagine the circumstances in the Middle East if that happened,” Fetterman said. “If you think gas is too expensive today, let Iran become a nuclear power because they could do anything and charge any kind of toll once they’re nuclear. They would be truly untouchable, and this is why as a Democrat I’m willing to embrace perhaps the most toxic thing a Democrat can do right now.”
The Pennsylvania Democrat, the most hawkish member of his party on Iran, told JI that failing to eliminate Tehran's nuclear threat would undermine the president's legacy
Andrew Harnik/Getty Images
Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) speaks at a rally for Democratic vice presidential nominee Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz at York Exposition Center UPMC Arena on October 2, 2024 in York, Pennsylvania.
Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) said on Tuesday that he is growing increasingly concerned that President Donald Trump may agree to a deal with Iran that does not ensure the retrieval of Tehran’s stockpile of enriched uranium or that the regime will never acquire a nuclear weapon.
Fetterman, who has become the most hawkish Democrat in Congress on Iran and the sole member of his party to vote against every Iran war powers resolution in recent months, spoke with Jewish Insider in Washington about the possible outcomes of the ongoing peace talks. The Pennsylvania senator acknowledged that he and Trump had taken political heat from their respective parties over their stances on the conflict, but argued that solving the Iranian nuclear issue would be legacy-defining for the president.
“Nuclear dust, that’s the reason why we’re here. This is why I was reasoned and OK with setting myself politically on fire to be the only Democrat for the last 90 days voting against these war powers acts,” Fetterman told JI. “Presidents always talk about their legacy. At this point, if you cave just for political convenience, what kind of legacy is that?”
“I appreciate every now and then when Trump will say, ‘Well, it [the war in Iran] is only going to be about that nuclear dust,’ but Israel is never allowed to fully pulverize their enemies,” he continued. “They’re fighting a nation where they like martyrdom and that’s what they celebrate. It’s so dumb.”
The Pennsylvania senator addressed the negative U.S. public perception of the war, arguing that the president was acting in a “Churchillian” manner by taking on the Iranian regime, and expressing concern that reversing course in Iran could indicate the Trump administration’s lack of commitment to Taiwan, in the event of a Chinese invasion.
“I hope after that silly visit to China that they [the Trump administration] aren’t now like, ‘Well, we’re going to turn our back to Taiwan,’” he added, referencing the president’s summit in Beijing last month with Chinese President Xi Jinping. “These are all fights for civilization and democracy. I don’t care if it’s in Gaza or Iran, Taiwan against Chinese communism or Russia and Ukraine, it’s the same fight, and that’s why it’s our special responsibility, it’s America’s, to stand with these allies.”
Fetterman pointed to the pressure Democrats faced during the 2024 election to take a firmer stance in opposition to Israel’s war in Gaza due to the high death toll of Palestinians. He argued that those of his Democratic colleagues who had worked to restrain Israel since Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks on the Jewish state had damaged their credibility.
“How can you trust these people?” he asked of those Democrats. “Two years ago they were all demanding and pushing for a ceasefire. Can you believe where we would be now if we had a ceasefire? Can you imagine if Israel had to grovel to get their people back? Can you imagine if Iran could be a nuclear power by now?”
“If [there was] a ceasefire in July [2024] based on the pressures from the election in ‘24, [former Hamas chief Yahya] Sinwar would be alive. Hezbollah would be intact. They could launch thousands of rockets at will — and think of the capabilities that Iran could be at now,” he added. “Where’s the outrage? They pretended to be so worried about it. It was politically convenient to try to push Israel into a position that would put Iran on the path to nuclear power, and [leave] their proxies fully intact.”
Despite the three Republican defections, the measure still failed to pass
Kevin Carter/Getty Images
U.S. Capitol Building on January 18, 2025 in Washington, DC.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) became the latest of a small number of Senate Republicans to break ranks and vote with the majority of Democrats in favor of an effort to force an end to the war in Iran on Wednesday.
She joined Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), who voted for the second time for such an effort, and Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), who has consistently voted with Democrats on the issue. Nevertheless, the effort still fell short of a majority of the Senate, or of the 60 vote threshold needed for passage, with a final vote of 49 in favor to 50 against.
Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) remained the only Democrat to vote against the war powers effort.
Murkowski has been working with other Senate Republicans on an Authorization for Use of Military Force to set limits on the U.S. operations against Iran, but it remains unclear when she plans to introduce it or what its scope will be.
Murkowski and Collins’ votes suggest they’re unconvinced by the administration’s assertions that the military operations that began in late February have now concluded. The War Powers Act sets a 60-day deadline for military action without congressional approval.
“You’ve got a timeline that has taken us beyond the 60 days,” Murkowski told reporters. “I thought that perhaps we would get … more clarity from the administration in terms of where we are, and I haven’t received it. So I felt that it was now time to advance a discharge so that we can discuss our responsibilities as Congress under the War Powers Act.”
Collins said following the prior vote, two weeks ago, that she had voted for the resolution in order to enforce the War Powers Act.
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO), who previously said his position might change after the 60-day mark and has been urging the administration not to restart military operations, again voted against the war powers effort.
“I think the administration’s in compliance, the president’s [in] compliance with the war powers statute given his certification to Congress … saying that he had terminated hostilities under Operation Epic Fury,” Hawley told Jewish Insider, echoing comments he made earlier this week. “I welcome the termination of hostilities … I’m glad [Trump] has resisted some of my colleagues’ calls to return to large-scale bombing and is pursuing an end to the conflict. I think that’s good.”
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) had urged Republicans not to break ranks on the issue while President Donald Trump is in China on a state visit this week.
“Right now, the president’s overseas,” Thune said. “He’s negotiating with the Chinese on a whole range of issues, some of which bear on national security, and I think it would be best if everybody hung together and supported the president.”
Sen. John Curtis (R-UT), who had previously expressed opposition to any military operations beyond the 60-day deadline, also voted against the resolution. He suggested to reporters that the efforts from Democrats were not “serious.”
“I’ve yet to see a serious war powers vote. Let’s admit it, all this is a poke at the president,” Curtis said.
Curtis told reporters later in the day that the situation and the path forward is not simple, and that many questions including whether the U.S. is in a ceasefire, whether hostilities have actually stopped and whether the U.S. is drawing down from operations in Iran need to be answered to shape his approach to the issue.
He said that there is not “any question in my mind” that the 60-day period has expired. He reiterated that he would not fund the war beyond 60 days without congressional authorization.
Asked by JI whether he would introduce his own war powers resolution or AUMF as an alternative to those pushed by Democrats, Curtis indicated he does not plan to do so. “Ever since 1973,” when the War Powers Act was first passed, “Congress has struggled with what the answer is.”
He said he wants to ensure the administration maintains freedom to act in an emergency scenario. He said that drawing the proper boundaries is “not easy, and there’s a reason nothing’s been done on it. It’s not a matter of will, it’s a matter of where do you draw that line? I do think it’s time to have that conversation and count me in, in a group that would try to define that.”
Asked about the potential for renewed military action, he said he would have to evaluate it and the requirements for notifying Congress based on events as they occur.
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) told reporters he wants to work with the administration on an AUMF, dismissing comments by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth yesterday indicating that the administration feels it does not need and does not plan to seek an AUMF if it returns to combat.
The House is set to vote on a war powers resolution on Thursday, which stands a greater chance of passage. However, Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH), who voted for the first war powers resolution that came before the House earlier this year, said he plans to vote “present” tomorrow, as he did on the second House vote.
Jewish Insider Washington reporter Matthew Shea contributed reporting.
‘The guy that’s going to win the primary in Maine has a Nazi tattoo on his chest and now that’s no problem for a lot of voters. … That’s crazy,’ Fetterman told CNN
Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images
Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) is seen after the Senate luncheons in the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday, April 14, 2026.
Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) said on Friday that the Democratic Party “absolutely” has an issue with rising antisemitism, calling out the party’s embrace of candidates including Graham Platner in Maine and Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan while criticizing the recent progressive push to cut off defensive aid to Israel.
The Pennsylvania senator made the comments after being asked on CNN’s “The Arena with Kasie Hunt” if he believed the Democratic Party has a problem with antisemitism. Fetterman argued that the growing support for both candidates in their respective primaries was indicative of a tolerance for antisemitism within the party.
He pointed to Platner surviving the controversy surrounding his Nazi tattoo and Jewish Insider’s reporting in recent days that the first-time candidate repeatedly praised Hamas’ tactics in a 2014 Reddit forum that shared video of the terrorist group killing several Israeli soldiers.
“I mean, the guy that’s going to win the primary in Maine has a Nazi tattoo on his chest and now that’s no problem for a lot of voters,” Fetterman said. “I don’t know why. That’s crazy. And now, I mean, we know he knows, he knew what that was. I mean, if you’re back over 12, 13 years, cheering about the death of Israeli soldiers, I mean, you clearly have a serious issue, and the left has a serious issue with antisemitism.”
“It was just released that he was praising and celebrating a video online where Hamas was beating and torturing Israeli soldiers to death,” Fetterman said, referring to Platner.
Fetterman also made note of El-Sayed’s lead in one recent primary poll despite his decision to campaign alongside antisemitic streamer Hasan Piker.
“The guy in Michigan, he’s leading now in that race, as my party becomes more and more hostile to Israel,” Fetterman said. “They’re just palling around someone like Hasan Piker, you know the guy that, absolutely, I mean, he absolutely is proud to cheer for Hamas, loves Hamas.”
“The Democrats are proud to stand with him and campaign with him,” he added. “Go ahead, try to win Pennsylvania and campaign around Hasan Piker, or saying, ‘Yeah, America deserved 9/11’ or ‘Hamas is 1,000% better than Israel’ or ‘I don’t care about the rapes and for all this other things.’ We have a serious problem with my party.”
Fetterman, one of most vocal pro-Israel Democrats in the Senate, told Hunt that Israel is “becoming more and more toxic for a Democrat to support,” pointing out that “80% of Democrats view Israel in a negative way.” He specifically condemned the uptick in progressive and far-left voices coming out against continued defensive aid to Israel.
“You have people like [Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] voting against Iron Dome, the technology that prevents tens and tens of [thousands] of Israeli deaths from the rockets that those cowards fire at civilians,” he said.
Fetterman went on to criticize members of his party for opposing the war in Iran, saying that there were other Democrats who felt the same as him in supporting the effort but were not speaking out because doing so would be “politically toxic.”
“Every single Democrat has already been on record saying, ‘We can‘t ever allow Iran to acquire a nuclear bomb,’” Fetterman said, specifically naming former Vice President Kamala Harris and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and “everyone that’s run for president” who said “we can’t ever allow that to happen.”
“Then, [President Donald] Trump happened to do something about that to prevent that. That’s why I support that,” he continued. “I’m not the only Democrat who supports this, but I’m the only Democrat that’s willing to stand up and say it’s the right thing because I know how politically toxic it is as a Democrat to support this.”
Fetterman surmised that he is the “only Democrat … perhaps left in the entire Congress” who will say publicly that recent U.S. military action in Iran “was necessary” because doing so “contradicts every single thing that every Democrat has said” about how “we can’t ever allow Iran to acquire a nuclear bomb.”
Fetterman went on to criticize the Democratic lawmakers who voted for the recent war powers resolutions in the House and Senate, arguing that their opposition to the war has been “celebrated” by Iranian leadership and calling their response to the conflict “absurd.”
“Iran has celebrated this,” Fetterman said of the broad Democratic opposition. “A lot of people in my party and a lot of people in the media has turned Iran into the underdog. They’re like Rudy” — making a reference to the 1993 sports movie — “and putting them up on their shoulders and cheering for Iran at this point.”
Asked to respond to Sen. Elissa Slotkin’s (D-MI) statement that “being pro-Israel today is not about simply supporting the political or military agenda of Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu, just like being pro-American should not be equated with loyalty to President Trump,” Fetterman argued that her comments on her votes for Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) measures on Thursday blocking military sales to Israel were similarly “absurd.”
“She’s a Democratic senator. Why aren’t you criticizing Iran? Why aren’t you criticizing Hamas or Hezbollah or these other kinds of forces? If you have to pick a side here, criticize that. So that’s where we are as a Democratic Party, and you’re going to vote against the kinds of critical aid that Israel requires and needs in order to beat back and destroy an organization like Hezbollah. Like I said, if you have to pick a side in a war, and clearly we have a side, I’m proud to stand on the side of Israel and America.”
Pressed on if he was still committed to being a Democrat given that his comments marked his harshest criticism yet of his party, Fetterman responded affirmatively.
“Well, of course. Yeah, I am absolutely committed to [remaining a] Democrat, absolutely,” Fetterman said. “I vote 91, 92 percent the Democratic line, but I am the only Democrat now that’s proud to consistently stand with Israel, and I’m going to do that, and that’s been very damaging with my standing as a Democrat.”
“If it’s what’s necessary, I’ll be the last Democrat standing with Israel through this,” he later added.
Fetterman also predicted that the war in Iran would not go on much longer, noting that “things kind of continue to wind down,” and said it’s “important to support” the U.S. securing an outcome in which Iranian leadership “surrenders.”
“I think these are very positive developments,” he said of Israel and the U.S. targeting Iran and their leading proxies.
“I think it seems like it’s going to wind down,” Fetterman said. “And we’re heading to a strong end at this point.”
The Pennsylvania senator told JI about the U.S. military operation’s successes: ‘Why can’t a single Democrat agree that this is a good thing for the world and the region?’
Lev Radin/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images
Senator John Fetterman speaks during the grand opening of The Altneu synagogue.
Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) is criticizing his fellow Democrats over their opposition to President Donald Trump’s decision to launch the U.S. war in Iran, arguing that his party should celebrate efforts to bring down the Iranian regime and its military and nuclear capabilities as a “positive development.”
Fetterman, the most vocal pro-Israel Democrat in the Senate, has been one of the leading advocates for striking Iran directly since Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks on Israel. He backed Trump’s decision to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities amid the 12-day war with Israel last year, criticizing Democrats at the time for speaking out against the operation, and has since emerged as one of the staunchest Iran hawks in the Democratic Party.
The Pennsylvania senator said, since leading Democrats have long argued that Iran should never have the ability to get a nuclear weapon, criticism from the party of the joint U.S.-Israel efforts to degrade their military capabilities is hypocritical.
“First, let’s get to history. Every single Democratic presidential candidate or Democratic president all agreed, we can never allow Iran to acquire a nuclear bomb. Everyone has run the gamut: sanctions, treaties, proxies, other kinds of negotiations. It never worked,” Fetterman told Jewish Insider in an interview on Tuesday. “But you know what it actually produced? Nine hundred pounds of just pure, weapons-grade uranium.”
“When the country that wants death to America and wants to destroy Israel could have been months away from developing a nuclear weapon, and every single Democratic candidate for president all agreed we can never allow them [to do so], why can’t we just acknowledge what’s happened?” he asked. “It’s a profound development. I don’t get it. I know what the [Democratic] base demands right now: condemn and criticize.”
He said that Democrats should be able and willing to praise the operation for degrading Iran’s regime and its capabilities.
“Why can’t a Democrat call this a positive development given everything that Iran is responsible for and what their ambitions are?” Fetterman said. “This is effectively us destroying the Nazi regime and Hitler before they could’ve even begun. So, to your readers, whether in Israel or here, I ask: Why is that a problem?”
Fetterman also said that the media and fellow Democrats are ignoring what he characterized as the apparent successes and effectiveness of the U.S.-Israel strikes.
“Iran’s capabilities have been effectively ended. Right now, the missile strikes are down by 90 percent. Their Navy is gone. They can’t even project any force at this point,” Fetterman said. “Why do The New York Times and other left-wing media keep making it seem that the region is on fire when this is the breaking free of Iran? Why can’t a single Democrat agree that this is a good thing for the world and the region?”
Fetterman also blasted recent comments from former Vice President Kamala Harris and California Gov. Gavin Newsom, potential 2028 Democratic presidential contenders, criticizing Trump’s decision to launch the U.S. war in Iran and questioning the future of the U.S.-Israel relationship. The Pennsylvania senator said he was not surprised by the mainstreaming of opposition to Israel within the Democratic Party, predicting that the shift away from supporting Israel would continue.
“I expect at the end that our party is going to continue to back away from the moral clarity of Israel. If you are describing Israel as an apartheid state, or you have people in leadership [doing so], that’s profoundly disappointing but unsurprising,” Fetterman said.
The resolutions are unlikely to pass; if they do, they will need two-thirds support to override an inevitable presidential veto
Kevin Carter/Getty Images
The U.S. Capitol Building is seen at sunset on May 31, 2025 in Washington, DC.
As the U.S.-Israel air war against Iran continues, the Senate and House are set to vote this week on war powers resolutions that would aim to cut the U.S. operations short.
The resolutions, led by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-VA) and Rand Paul (R-KY) and Reps. Ro Khanna (D-CA) and Thomas Massie (R-KY), respectively, were originally introduced before the war began, in an effort to block military action and signal dissatisfaction with the then-looming war.
Now, the resolutions, if passed, would force the administration to end the nascent war, withdraw forces and cease operations against the Iranian regime.
It’s almost certain that the resolution will not pass the Senate; the House vote may be closer but it is also not likely to pass. And even if the resolutions were to pass, they would not have the two-thirds support necessary to overcome an inevitable presidential veto.
But the resolution will be an opportunity for Democrats — and a small number of Republicans — to go on record demonstrating their opposition to the war and dissatisfaction with the administration’s approach.
Democrats, even lawmakers like Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) who are relatively hawkish on Iran and have offered some positive feedback about the ongoing operations, are expected to mostly vote for the war powers resolution.
They have cited concerns about the administration’s failure to brief Congress at large about its plans before launching the war, its decision not to seek congressional authorization for the operations and what they say is the administration’s failure to make the case for war to the American public.
Lawmakers are reportedly set to receive classified briefings on the war on Tuesday from Cabinet and other senior administration officials.
A small number of Democrats will likely vote against the resolutions, such as Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA), an outspoken supporter of the war against Iran, and Rep. Greg Landsman (D-OH), who backed limited operations against Iran and said yesterday he would oppose the resolution.
Two other Democrats, Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) and Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), had said before the war started that they would oppose the war powers resolutions, but haven’t specified their plans now that active combat operations are underway.
The key difference between the text of the Senate and House resolutions is language in the Senate version specifically permitting the U.S. to continue intelligence sharing with and providing military aid for Israel and other allies. The House bill does not contain any such language, a potential issue for some supporters of Israel.
Most Republicans, with the exception of some isolationist-leaning lawmakers like Paul, Massie and Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH), have been offering full-throated support for the Trump administration’s actions and are likely to vote against the war powers resolutions.
Kaine said he expects the Senate vote will happen on Tuesday or Wednesday. The House isn’t set to reconvene until Wednesday, with a vote likely set for Wednesday or Thursday.
Most Democrats are pushing for a war powers resolution next week, amid ongoing military operations
Win McNamee/Getty Images
The American flag flies in front of the U.S. Capitol on February 28, 2026 in Washington, DC. U.S.
A number of Republican lawmakers rallied behind President Donald Trump’s military strikes against Iran on Saturday, while leading Democrats expressed quick and strident opposition to the administration’s decision to attack Iran.
Democrats are also demanding Congress reconvene promptly next week to vote on war powers resolutions to block further military operations in Iran without congressional approval. The resolutions were already expected to come up for votes in the coming week.
A few Democratic lawmakers sounded more open-minded about the attack against Tehran. Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA), one of the few foreign policy hawks in his party, said the president “was absolutely” correct to attack Iran in an appearance on Fox News. “God bless the United States, our great military, and Israel,” Fetterman said.
Rep. Greg Landsman (D-OH), who told Jewish Insider earlier this week that limited strikes on Iran could be necessary and productive, echoed that stance on Saturday. He said that he would oppose the war powers resolution.
“I hope these targeted strikes on the Iranian regime’s military assets end the regime’s mayhem and bloodshed and makes way for this lasting peace in the region,” Landsman said. “Thank you to our brave service members who are leading this effort, and I pray their work will finally free the people of Iran and those in the region from more violence or war. May peace emerge from all of this.”
Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), who had been planning to oppose the war powers resolution, praised the attack while highlighting the administration’s obligations under the War Powers Act, which limits the duration for which the president can unilaterally commit forces to armed conflict without congressional approval.
“Today, the United States, with our key democratic ally Israel, took decisive action to defend our national security, fight terror, protect our allies and stand with the Iranian people who have been massacred in the streets for demanding freedom from the murderous Iranian regime,” Gottheimer said. “I applaud the extraordinary bravery and professionalism of our servicemembers and pray for their safety as Iran and its terrorist proxies retaliate against American bases and our partners in the region.”
“Confronting the Iranian threat is essential to America’s national security and to global stability. The world is safer because of the courage and skill of our service members. I am praying for their safety and the safety of all of our allies who have been targeted by Iranian retaliation,” he continued.
Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) offered more muted support for the operation, praising U.S. servicemembers while saying she “stand[s] with the Iranian people in their hope for a better future and will continue to work in a bipartisan way in Congress to provide them the support they need.” She called for an immediate and detailed briefing on the administration’s plans, and highlighted Iran’s long record of malign activity and attacks on its own citizens.
But Rosen also warned against a protracted conflict and criticized the lack of congressional authorization.
Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-NY), among the most moderate Democrats in the House and a potential swing vote on the war powers resolution, said Trump needs to seek congressional authorization for the operation, while offering support for the administration’s goals.
“I agree with the President’s objectives that Iran can never be allowed to obtain nuclear capabilities. The President must now clearly define the national security objective and articulate his plan to avoid another costly, prolonged war in the Middle East,” Suozzi said. “Iran remains the leading state sponsor of terrorism in the region and must never be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon. Preventing that outcome is vital to our national security, the safety of our allies, and the stability of the Middle East.”
Most of the leading voices in the Democratic Party, however, are rallying against the Iran attack.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA), who is leading a war powers resolution in the Senate that he planned to call up for a vote next week, said in a statement, “Every single Senator needs to go on the record about this dangerous, unnecessary, and idiotic action,” calling the strikes a “colossal mistake,” accusing the president of having “learned nothing from decades of U.S. meddling in Iran and forever wars in the Middle East” and of being “mentally incapacitated.”
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), who is leading similar legislation in the House, said that “the American people are tired of regime change wars that cost us billions of dollars and risk our lives. We don’t want to be at war with a country of 90 million people in the Middle East.”
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), one of the few GOP isolationists in Congress and Khanna’s cosponsor on that resolution, also said he opposes the operation.
“This is not ‘America First,’” Massie said. “When Congress reconvenes, I will work with @RepRoKhanna to force a Congressional vote on war with Iran. The Constitution requires a vote, and your Representative needs to be on record as opposing or supporting this war.”
Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH), another isolationist-minded Republican who indicated this week that he was leaning toward voting for the war powers resolution, sent similar signals on Saturday.
“We need a government small enough to fit within the Constitution. We need a government effective enough to solve problems and serve its own people. Or, we need a new Constitution,” Davidson said.
The House is not scheduled to reconvene until Wednesday.
Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT), the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, who was one of the handful of congressional leaders briefed on the administration’s plans earlier this week, said that “everything I have heard from the administration before and after these strikes on Iran confirms this is a war of choice with no strategic endgame.”
He said he expressed his concerns to Secretary of State Marco Rubio during the briefing this week.
Republicans are largely lining up behind the administration, with the exception of Massie.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who had urged Trump to take action, praised the administration, saying Trump had “met the moment.”
“My mind is racing with the thought that the murderous ayatollah’s regime in Iran will soon be no more. The biggest change in the Middle East in a thousand years is upon us,” Graham said. “The likelihood of normalization between Saudi Arabia and Israel getting back on track is exceedingly high – a subject I brought up last week to the key players in the region who concurred if the ayatollah goes down, historic peace advances.”
Graham met with leaders in Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates this month and said on Fox News on Saturday morning that he plans to return soon. Following retaliatory strikes by Iran on U.S. military facilities in several Arab states, Saudi Arabia issued a statement condemning Iran and offering its support for measures the Arab states may take in response.
“This operation has been well-planned,” Graham continued. “It will be violent, extensive and I believe, at the end of the day, successful. Again the demise of the ayatollah’s regime with American blood on its hands is necessary and more than justified.”
He later urged Arab and other allies to “get behind President Trump and go all in to ensure the ayatollah’s Iran, which has become the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world is no more.”
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, who was also briefed, said, “The butcher’s bill has finally come due for the ayatollahs. May God bless and protect our troops on this vital mission of vengeance, and justice, and safety,” highlighting the regime’s long record of attacks against Americans.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) said Iran is “facing the severe consequences of its evil actions,” and said Trump had “made every effort” at diplomacy. “For decades, Iran has defiantly maintained its nuclear program while arming and funding Hamas, Hezbollah, and other internationally recognized terrorist organizations. Iran and its proxies have menaced America and American lives, undermined our core national interests, systematically destabilized the Middle East, and threatened the security of the entire West.”
“The Gang of 8 was briefed in detail earlier this week that military action may become necessary to protect American troops and American citizens in Iran. I received updates from Secretary Rubio thereafter, and I will remain in close contact with the President and the Department of War as this operation proceeds,” Johnson continued.
Other rank-and-file Democrats, including some moderates, drew parallels with the Bush administration’s war against Iraq in their criticism.
Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said that the strikes raise “serious legal and constitutional concerns.”
“The American people have seen this playbook before — claims of urgency, misrepresented intelligence, and military action that pulls the United States into regime change and prolonged, costly nation-building,” Warner continued. “We owe it to our service members, and to every American family, to ensure that we are not repeating the mistakes of the past. The president owes the country clear answers: What is the objective? What is the strategy to prevent escalation? And how does this make Americans safer?”
Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), an Iraq war veteran representing a GOP-leaning state, expressed concern for U.S. forces, who Trump acknowledged could be lost in the ensuing war.
“I lost friends in Iraq to an illegal war. Young working-class kids should not pay the ultimate price for regime change and a war that hasn’t been explained or justified to the American people,” Gallego said. “We can support the democracy movement and the Iranian people without sending our troops to die.”
Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL), a co-chair of the House Jewish caucus and a key pro-Israel leader, criticized the administration’s move and said he would support the war powers resolution. “The President of the United States is not allowed to take our nation to war without authorization from Congress.”
“This is a moment of peril and opportunity,” Schneider said. “Congress must step up to meet the moment, fulfill its constitutional duties, and ensure American action — with our allies in the region and around the world — leads to a more stable and peaceful Middle East, not another generational entanglement ending in failure.”
Former Rep. Elaine Luria (D-VA), among the House’s most vocal Democratic Iran hawks while she was in office and who is now running to reclaim her former seat, also said Congress should “immediately return to Washington” to vote on Kaine’s war powers resolution.
Rep. Jake Auchincloss (D-MA) said that Trump has “no credibility on either the strategy or law guiding foreign policy” — pointing to the president’s delayed promise to Iranian protesters earlier this year that help would be coming — and said he plans to support the war powers resolution.
“I am ready to work across the aisle to craft congressionally directed strategy on Iran, especially for securing American air supremacy in the region and supporting the Iranian people’s right to self determination,” Auchincloss said. “But first congressional Republicans must call the question on this fundamental issue of war powers by voting against a reckless commander-in-chief and for the Constitution.”
‘If Iran restarts their nuclear ambitions, I fully support bombing them until they get the message,’ the Pennsylvania senator told JI
Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images
Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) talks with reporters after the Senate luncheons in the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday, March 11, 2025.
Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) said on Thursday that he would support the U.S. striking Iran’s nuclear facilities again to prevent Tehran from rebuilding its nuclear program — if the regime is found to be making strides toward restoring sites damaged by U.S. and Israeli strikes last year.
The Pennsylvania senator told Jewish Insider that he believes the U.S. and Israel should keep targeting Iranian nuclear facilities until Iran’s leaders “get the message” that the Islamic Republic will never be allowed to acquire a nuclear weapon.
“If Iran restarts their nuclear ambitions, I fully support bombing them until they get the message,” Fetterman told JI.
Fetterman was supportive of President Donald Trump’s decision to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities amid the 12-day war with Israel last year and has emerged as one of the staunchest Iran hawks in the Democratic Party. He criticized members of his party last June who spoke out against Israel’s strikes on Iran and Trump’s subsequent decision to join the strikes.
“It was just astonishing to see colleagues criticizing these things. It’s like, do you think you can negotiate with that regime? Do you think you want to run that scenario and allow them to acquire 1,000 pounds of weapons grade uranium?” Fetterman told JI at the time. “I can’t understand, I can’t even begin to understand that.”
For his part, the president said late last month while meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he was open to another round of strikes against Iran.
Asked by reporters if he will support another Israeli attack on Iran if it continues its ballistic missile and nuclear programs, Trump said, “If they continue with the missiles? Yes. If the nuclear? Fast, OK? One will be yes, absolutely; the other was, we’ll do it immediately.”
“Iran may be behaving badly,” he added. “It hasn’t been confirmed, but if it’s confirmed, look, they know the consequences.”
Fetterman is the first Democrat in Congress to publicly endorse additional strikes on Iran’s nuclear program, a move several of his Republican colleagues have also gotten behind.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said in Israel last month that Washington had a duty to act on “credible evidence” that Iran is looking for avenues to rebuild its nuclear program. The South Carolina senator argued it was imperative that the U.S. and Israel “hit them before they can” do so.
“We obliterated the Iranian nuclear facilities. We did not obliterate Iran’s desire to have a nuclear weapon,” Graham said. “The regime hasn’t changed at all. They still want to kill all the Jews, consider America the great Satan, and purify Islam.”
“Are they regenerating their nuclear capability? Are they building more ballistic missiles that could hurt Europe and Israel?” he added. “I don’t know, but there’s evidence that, yes, they are.”
The Pennsylvania Democrat joins a handful of Republicans in supporting U.S. recognition of Somaliland, but other lawmakers warn it may not be fully aligned with U.S. interests
Lev Radin/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images
Senator John Fetterman speaks during the grand opening of The Altneu synagogue.
Some Republicans and at least one Democrat on Capitol Hill are voicing their support for the U.S. to follow Israel’s lead in recognizing Somaliland — but many lawmakers, even some who have supported expanded U.S.-Somaliland ties in the past, say such a step would be premature, if not misguided, at this point.
Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA), one of the most vocal pro-Israel Democrats in Congress, said in a statement to Jewish Insider that he’s in favor of U.S. recognition of Somaliland, making him the first member of his party to do so publicly.
“As an unapologetic friend of Israel, I fully support their decision on Somaliland. I support the U.S. doing the same,” Fetterman told JI.
“Recognizing Somaliland isn’t charity — it’s strategy. It aligns with America’s security interests and the ‘America First’ doctrine by strengthening an ally that shares our values in a region vital to global trade and counterterrorism,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) said in a statement on Monday.
Cruz has been a longtime champion for Somaliland recognition, urging the administration to take such a step last August in a letter to President Donald Trump.
Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ), the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee subcommittee on Africa, praised Israel in a statement on Tuesday for recognizing Somaliland and urged others, including the U.S., to do the same.
“Somaliland is a functioning democracy, as demonstrated by the peaceful transfer of power more than a year ago following elections — a rare, positive example in the Horn of Africa, and, indeed, in much of Africa,” Smith said. “Somaliland’s strategic location and deep-water port at Berbera also underscore its national security significance to the United States. And Somaliland’s close ties with Taiwan offset Communist China’s malign influence in the region … Above all, official recognition signals to the Somaliland people that their commitment to democracy — and to free and fair elections — is not in vain, and their nation is getting the acknowledgment it deserves.”
Reps. Scott Perry (R-PA), Andy Ogles (R-TN), Pat Harrigan (R-NC) and Tom Tiffany (R-WI) introduced a bill last June to recognize Somaliland’s independence. Reps. Tim Burchett (R-TN) and John Rose (R-TN) have since joined as cosponsors.
Still, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle said that U.S. recognition would be either premature or a mistake entirely.
Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) told JI that he didn’t support the idea “yet,” citing issues the U.S. has had with recognizing still-developing nations. “I’m still deciding on that. I was just in the region not long ago on that. I don’t share their [the Israelis’] recognition of it yet, but it is one I’m actually looking at,” Lankford told JI.
Lankford also pointed to issues that experts have raised around the need for continued positive relations with Somalia, which opposes Somaliland independence, as it pertains to regional stability and counterterrorism efforts.
“We’ve done a lot to try to stabilize Somalia over the years, which has just been a hot mess for a very long time. We need their country to be a stable country. Al-Shabaab has been a major threat of terrorism in the entire region. The work they [Somalia] have done has destabilized Kenya, a close ally of ours,” Lankford said. “There’s a lot that we’re trying to be able to work with the countries in the region on what they’re going to do. You don’t want to see Somalia collapse. You want to see Somalia succeed. We want successful democracies there, and I think Somaliland has struggled with that.”
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) said that the U.S. should examine the issue but that it has other considerations to take into account that Israel may not.
“We should take a close look at it, but I don’t know that we should be the second in the world to do it,” Blumenthal said. “I think that Israel’s reasons for recognition, while deserving of respect, probably are different from what ours should be.”
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD), a lead sponsor of legislation in 2022 that sought to expand U.S. ties with Somaliland — but explicitly stopped short of recognizing Somaliland’s independence or establishing a relationship with Somaliland as an independent entity — said that U.S. recognition would be premature.
“There are some diplomatic issues that have to play out there yet. I’m not sure how that’s going to look when it’s all done,” Rounds said. “I’m aware of what [Israel has] done, but I’m not exactly sure what the next steps will be, so I really can’t give you a whole lot of information right now, that I can share publicly anyway.”
Parts of that legislation were adopted as part of the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act, directing a report and feasibility study on existing and potential greater collaboration with Somaliland.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), another lead sponsor of the bill with Rounds, said the U.S. should not recognize Somaliland’s independence.
“I think the United States should be engaged with people throughout Somalia, including Somaliland,” Van Hollen said. “It continues to be part of Somalia. And I don’t think that the United States should be essentially getting in the middle of that.”
Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID), the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, also sponsored the 2022 bill on expanded ties. Risch did not respond to a request for comment.
Multiple other senators indicated to JI that they hadn’t followed the issue closely enough to weigh in.
Other prominent lawmakers on the Hill have also called for steps to deepen the U.S.-Somaliland relationship without endorsing full recognition of its independence.
Smith and Rep. John Moolenaar (R-MI), the chair of the House Select Committee on China, urged the administration in September to distinguish Somaliland from Somalia in its travel advisory report, a step toward expanding relations with Somaliland and incentivizing U.S. investors to enter its market.
That letter also noted that Somaliland is working with U.S. partners including Israel and Taiwan.
Moolenaar in January 2025 urged the State Department to open a representative office in the Somaliland capital, Hargeisa. He did not respond to a request for comment.
Dating back to 2022, bipartisan members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, including the committee’s former chairman, Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), have called for expanded ties with Somaliland.
Beyond Capitol Hill, analysts and former military personnel say the question of U.S. recognition hinges on a complex tradeoff: potential military and geopolitical gains weighed against the risk of destabilizing existing alliances and inflaming regional tensions.
Vice Adm. Kevin Donegan (Ret.), who served as commander of the U.S. Fifth Fleet and the 32-nation Combined Maritime Forces in the Middle East, told JI that an expanded American presence in Somaliland could carry military benefits – from greater access to the Red Sea to deeper cooperation on counterterrorism – in what he described as a “critical choke point” in the world.
“Having options is always good for the military,” Donegan said, pointing to concerns about ISIS and broader counterterrorism efforts in the region. “When you look at the region in general, we are worried about ISIS and doing counterterrorism operations when necessary, or at least collecting information and maybe empowering other nations to help in this anti-terrorism fight.”
He added that “it’s always better to have more places that you have access to and more governments that are going to work with you against counterterrorism.”
Another factor potentially shaping U.S. thinking is growing Chinese influence in Africa, according to Donegan. “We all know that Chinese influence exists in Africa,” he said, adding that expanded engagement in Somaliland could provide Washington with “options” to push back against Beijing’s footprint on the continent.
Edmund Fitton-Brown, a former British diplomat and senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, who supports a U.S. move to recognize Somaliland, said that the east African nation’s capital city and Berbera port “could be very useful.”
“The U.S. would have a great deal of freedom of action in a landmass and coastline with potential strategic significance, close to Yemen, the Gulf of Aden, the Red Sea, and not far from Iran,” said Fitton-Brown. “In my opinion, the U.S. should recognize [Somaliland].”
Donegan, however, stopped short of endorsing formal recognition, instead suggesting that it may not be necessary to “unlock” military and geopolitical benefits in the region.
“Ensuring that what’s in the best interests of the United States for helping to create stability in the region is the number one predominant thing that we should look at, as opposed to adding another issue that’s relatively charged to the plate,” he said. “Some of these things, including access to the port in Berbera and access to helping their forces, potentially can be worked out without declaring Somaliland independent.”
Donegan also warned that recognition risked adding to regional instability. He pointed to the complex regional dynamics involving Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, two U.S. partners whose growing policy differences include whether to support Somaliland. The UAE has quietly supported Somaliland’s de facto independence, while Saudi Arabia has strongly backed Somalia’s territorial integrity.
“The harder problem is, does [recognition] make [the U.S.] aligned or misaligned with regional allies?” he said. “As a country, the United States is very much supportive of the Emiratis and very much supportive of the work they’re doing, and very much supportive of the Saudis and the work they’re doing, and we wouldn’t want to pick sides between those, and that’s where it starts to get complex.”
Steven Cook, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, told JI that geopolitical concerns among Middle East partners are a possible reason that the Trump administration has thus far refrained from formal recognition.
“It is unclear to me exactly why President Trump is opposed to recognition of Somaliland, but I surmise it has to do with Turkey, Qatar, Egypt and Saudi Arabia — four countries that are important to U.S. foreign policy,” said Cook. “The Qataris and Turkey are invested heavily in Somalia and as a result, are likely concerned about an Israeli partner next door and an Israeli presence in the Red Sea.”
Cook added that Egypt is likely “worried that the Israelis will forcibly relocate Gazans [in Somaliland],” despite calling such a move “unlikely.”
As U.S. officials weigh whether to follow in Israel’s lead, Fitton-Brown said there is “talk of other states,” such as Ethiopia, Kenya, Morocco, the UAE and India, moving towards recognition of Somaliland, which could “put the issue more firmly on the U.S. radar screen.”
Every member of the caucus except Sen. John Fetterman said they want to ‘preserve the viability of a two-state solution’
Brandon Bell/Getty Images
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) speaks with reporters after closing remarks during the fifth hearing on the January 6th investigation in the Cannon House Office Building on June 23, 2022, in Washington, D.C.
Every Senate Democrat with the exception of Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) wrote to President Donald Trump on Tuesday urging him to “reinforce” the White House’s pledge to oppose Israeli annexation of the West Bank.
In a letter led by Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the senators offered their “support for your comments opposing any efforts by the Government of Israel to annex territory in the West Bank and to urge your Administration to promote steps to preserve the viability of a two-state solution and the success of the Abraham Accords.”
The missive was sent weeks after Trump vowed publicly to not allow Israel to annex the West Bank, telling reporters in the Oval Office in late September that, “I will not allow Israel to annex the West Bank, nope, I will not allow it. It’s not gonna happen.”
“Since your plan for Gaza does not address the West Bank, it is imperative that your Administration reinforce your comments and emphasize its opposition to annexation. As longstanding supporters of Israel’s security and Palestinian aspirations for statehood, we are unified in our opposition to unilateral measures by either party that undermine the prospect of lasting peace through negotiations to achieve a two-state solution,” the letter stated.
The senators argued that “any steps by Israel to annex territory or expand settlements that prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state” would be harmful to the peace process.
“Such steps have elicited deep concern and opposition from Arab partners and place at risk your past achievements under the Abraham Accords and the possibility of expanding them further,” they wrote. “At the same time, terrorism, including the horrific terrorist attack of Oct. 7, 2023, must be uniformly condemned and will not bring the region closer to peace.”
“It is essential that the United States reject measures that undermine the viability of a negotiated resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” the letter continued.
The bipartisan duo urged university leaders to ‘commit to ensuring Jewish institutions on your campus are equipped to protect the students they serve’
Scott Eisen/Getty Images
U.S. Senators John Fetterman (D-PA) and David McCormick (R-PA) shake hands after the sixth installment of The Senate Project moderated by FOX NEWS anchor Shannon Bream at the Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the United States Senate on June 2, 2025 in Boston, Massachusetts.
With the 2025-26 school year kicking off, Sens. Dave McCormick (R-PA) and John Fetterman (D-PA) wrote to the presidents of five Pennsylvania universities urging them to work with their Jewish communities to ensure Jewish students’ safety and ability to participate in campus life.
McCormick and Fetterman wrote the letters to the presidents of Lehigh University, Pennsylvania State University, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Pittsburgh and Temple University, and suggested in part that the schools should cover additional security expenses incurred by campus Jewish organizations.
“We write to you to urge you, as a leader of a Pennsylvania university with a large Jewish student population, to commit to ensuring Jewish institutions on your campus are equipped to protect the students they serve, including by allocating the resources to do so,” the lawmakers wrote. “It is incumbent on all of us — especially our nation’s universities — to ensure vibrant Jewish life is not compromised or driven into the shadows.”
They urged the college presidents to “work with your campus’s Jewish institutions and ensure all students, regardless of their race, ethnicity, or shared ancestry, are safe and able to fully participate in campus life.”
The senators noted that antisemitic harassment and violence has plagued Jewish communities and institutions on campuses in the state, that “many Jewish institutions have been forced to cover the costs of additional security” and that students have been forced to hide their Judaism.
McCormick and Fetterman told the schools that “no students should feel like they must risk their safety” to practice their religion and that institutions such as Hillel and Chabad should not be forced to divert funding from programs toward security expenses.
They praised some Pennsylvania schools for taking steps to enforce their campus policies, break up encampments and suspend student groups involved in antisemitic activity.
‘It was just astonishing to see colleagues criticizing these things,’ Fetterman told JI
Lev Radin/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images
Senator John Fetterman speaks during the grand opening of The Altneu synagogue.
Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) criticized his Democratic colleagues in Congress who have spoken out against Israel’s attack on Iran, calling it “astonishing” to see members of his party treat Israel’s actions as escalatory.
Fetterman spoke to Jewish Insider on Friday for an interview in the wake of Israel launching its military operation to take out Iran’s nuclear facilities and prevent the regime from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
The Pennsylvania senator said he could not fathom how some Democrats on Capitol Hill could accuse the Jewish state of launching the strikes to upend the Trump administration’s nuclear negotiations with Tehran.
Fetterman didn’t mention any of his Democratic colleagues by name, but many have been critical of the Iranian strikes. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), for instance, went on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” Friday morning and said that Israel’s strike on Iran was “pretty transparent that this was an effort to submarine, to undermine our diplomacy.”
“It was just astonishing to see colleagues criticizing these things. It’s like, do you think you can negotiate with that regime? Do you think you want to run that scenario and allow them to acquire 1,000 pounds of weapons grade uranium? I can’t understand, I can’t even begin to understand that,” Fetterman told JI.
“I can’t imagine why they would say that. Remember, Iran tries to acquire nuclear weapons. Iran has created and spent billions of dollars to build those destructive proxies like Hamas or Hezbollah or the Houthis. Why can’t we talk about that? Why can’t we talk about the absolute imperative to keep Iran accountable for what they’ve done? That’s exactly part of what Israel did last night, as well,” he continued.
The Pennsylvania Democrat praised the opening salvos of the operation as “absolutely spectacular,” citing the “precision in targeting people.”
”They eliminated the generals and those scientists in their beds at their building, and they didn’t take out the whole building. It was just their specific apartments. I mean, that is truly remarkable. … It’s like Beepers 2.0, the kind of things they’ve done. Like I said, I am constantly blown away by the sophistication and their lethality,” Fetterman said, referring to the Israeli pager operation that took out senior Hezbollah leaders.
“I think I might have been the only one openly calling for that [striking the nuclear facilities now]. I’m never going to negotiate with that regime. You can never trust them, and the only thing they’re going to respond to, that they respect, are exactly the kind of things that [Israel] did last night. … Any potential path for an enduring peace in the Middle East, these are the kind of steps that do that,” he added.
Fetterman disputed the narrative that the U.S. supporting Israel in targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities could increase the prospect of a regional war. “If Iran is going to take their big, big swing, they would have done that by now. Just imagine how exposed they are, even how [exposed] they were earlier this year after what Israel had done taking out Hezbollah,” he told JI.
“Hezbollah ain’t talking tough anymore. They’re not talking about any kinds of actions, they’re just whimpering, and that’s my point. Iran can’t fight for s**t. … They just shot their big shot, a couple junkie rockets, and it’s like, that’s what you’ve got?” Fetterman asked.
Blumenthal: ‘Our bipartisan effort seeks to strengthen measures to bring long overdue justice to families whose cherished art was brazenly stolen by the Nazis’
J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, center, is flanked by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Ill., left, and Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., at the Capitol in Washington, Thursday, Nov. 14, 2024.
Sens. John Cornyn (R-TX) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) introduced bipartisan legislation last week aimed at eliminating loopholes used by museums and other stakeholders to continue possessing Nazi-looted artwork that Jewish families have been trying to recover.
Introduced on Thursday, the Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery (HEAR) Act would expand on Cornyn’s 2016 legislation of the same name, which was passed at the time by unanimous consent, by ending the Dec. 31, 2026, sunset date on the original bill and strengthen the existing procedural protections to ensure that victims’ claims are not dismissed due to non-merit-based factors such as time constraints.
“The artwork wrongfully ripped from Jewish hands during the Holocaust bears witness to a chapter in history when evil persisted and the worst of humanity was on full display. I’m proud to introduce this legislation to support the Jewish people and Holocaust survivors by helping them recover art confiscated by the Nazis that they are rightfully owed and give them the justice and restitution they deserve,” Cornyn said in a statement.
“The theft of art by the Nazi regime was more than a pilfering of property — it was an act of inhumanity. Our bipartisan effort seeks to strengthen measures to bring long overdue justice to families whose cherished art was brazenly stolen by the Nazis,” Blumenthal said.
Many families of Holocaust victims in the U.S. who have located artwork from deceased relatives and sued to recover those items face the deadline at the end of next year before the statute of limitations sets in. Thousands of stolen works of art remain unreturned to their rightful owners from the Nazi plunder, and there are scores of ongoing cases to resolve disputes over ownership of those items.
“Unfortunately, many museums, governments, and institutions have contradicted Congress’ intent and obstructed justice by stonewalling legitimate claims, obscuring provenance, and employing aggressive legal tactics designed to exhaust and outlast Survivors and their families. Rather than embracing transparency and reconciliation, too many have chosen to entrench and litigate, effectively preserving possession of stolen works rather than returning them to their rightful owners,” a press release for the bill states.
Sens. Thom Tillis (R-NC), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), John Fetterman (D-PA), Eric Schmitt (R-MO) and Katie Britt (R-AL) co-sponsored the bill, which was endorsed by a number of Jewish organizations including Agudath Israel of America, the American Jewish Committee, Anti-Defamation League, Jewish Federations of North America, StandWithUs and World Jewish Congress, among others.
“This legislation helps to right a historic wrong committed during one of the darkest chapters in history. By eliminating unnecessary legal obstacles, the HEAR Act establishes a clear path to restitution for Holocaust survivors and their families, ensuring that art and cultural property stolen by the Nazis can finally be returned to their rightful owners,” Tillis said.
Fetterman said in a statement, “Eighty years after the Holocaust, we have a moral responsibility to do right by the victims of these atrocities and their families. I’m grateful to join my colleagues from both sides of the aisle in introducing the HEAR Act to help return artwork stolen by the Nazis to its rightful owners.”
Sen. John Fetterman asked members of the left, ‘Why can’t you just call it [antisemitism] what it is?’
Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images
Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) talks with reporters after the Senate luncheons in the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday, March 11, 2025.
Pro-Israel leaders in the United States on Thursday connected the murder of two Israeli Embassy employees outside the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington to the anti-Israel advocacy seen on the political extremes throughout the country since the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks, characterizing it as a culmination of such rhetoric and, in some cases, the failure of some politicians to denounce it.
The suspected shooter, Elias Rodriguez, shouted “free, free Palestine” and “I did it for Gaza” following the shooting, according to an eyewitness and video from the arrest. He reportedly published a manifesto railing against Israel.
Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) said that the attack should be a signal to the left that it needs to rethink its rhetoric on Israel and Zionism. He compared the anti-Israel movement in the United States to a “cult” that has been stoked online and is using inherently violent slogans while its members “try to hide behind this idea that it’s free speech to intimidate and terrorize members of the Jewish community.”
He said that too many on the left have failed to call out antisemitism in the anti-Israel movement.
“Why can’t you just call it what it is, and then address and assert the pressure on the aggressor,” which is Hamas,” Fetterman said. “I can’t even imagine having to live with that ever-present antisemitism and what? Why can’t people just acknowledge and call that what it is?”
Fetterman predicted that the same elements of the left that have supported Luigi Mangione, the alleged assassin of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, will also rally behind Rodriguez.
“What part of my party does this come from where it’s like, we try to defend or try to justify assassinating an executive in broad daylight or … somebody [who] guns down” two people at a Jewish event, Fetterman asked incredulously.
Israeli Ambassador Yechiel Leiter connected the shooting to the anti-Israel protests seen on college campuses and elsewhere in the country.
“The point of the matter is that on campuses around this country, where ideas — these are the temples of ideas — where smart ideas, intelligent ideas, moral ideas, truthful ideas, are supposed to be taught, we have useful idiots running around in support of the destruction of Israel,” Leiter said at a press conference.
“This is done in the name of a political agenda to eradicate the State of Israel,” Leiter added. “The State of Israel is now fighting a war on seven fronts. This is the eighth front, a war to demonize, delegitimize, to eradicate the right of the State of Israel to exist.”
He also connected rising global antisemitism to countries like France that have spoken out against Israel and are moving to recognize a Palestinian state.
A coalition of 42 Jewish organizations, in a statement, described the murders as “the direct consequence of rising antisemitic incitement in places such as college campuses, city council meetings, and social media that has normalized hate and emboldened those who wish to do harm.”
William Daroff, the CEO of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, said on X, “There is a direct line between demonizing Israel, tolerating antisemitic hate speech in the public square, and violent action.”
“We are now witnessing the deadly consequences of months of relentless antisemitic incitement — amplified by international organizations and political leaders across the globe — since the horrors of October 7,” Daroff said. “This is not a debate over policy; it is the mainstreaming of hatred, and its consequences are measured in blood.”
Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) said on X the attack was “the deadly consequence of normalizing Jew-hatred.”
“Since October 7, antisemitic attacks have surged — fueled by violent chants to ‘globalize the intifada’ and slurs like ‘dirty Zionist,’” Gottheimer said.
Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY), highlighting a tweet from a local anti-Israel group that praised the attack, said that, “Violence is not a bug but a feature of virulent Anti-Zionism.”
Arizona state Rep. Alma Hernandez called out a series of progressive lawmakers, saying, “spare us the fake outrage.”
“Two Israeli diplomats were murdered in cold blood—and you dare act concerned? Y’all have spent years fueling the hate and antisemitism that’s now exploding across America. Don’t pretend to care,” Hernandez continued, in an X post. “You are constantly surrounded by keffiyehs and “Free Palestine” and have pushed rhetoric that’s radicalized Americans into thinking murdering Jews and harassing them in the streets will somehow “liberate” Palestine and end the so-called genocide. No thanks.”
“We don’t want prayers from politicians who support individuals and organizations that promote this hate and who are being actively supported by said individuals and organizations while they run for office,” Hernandez added.
“You can’t support chants of ‘Globalize the Intifada’ and then be ‘appalled’ when people act it out,” Georgia state Rep. Esther Panitch said on X in response to a statement on the attack from Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) that did not acknowledge that the victims worked for the Israeli embassy and condemned “violence” broadly. Panitch also criticized other progressive Democrats who issued statements on the attack.
Panitch added, “Fascinating that those who campaigned against the Jewish community’s right to define their own experience of antisemitism are the ones who call ‘Globalizing the Intifada’ peaceful protests. The same ones who can’t say the word antisemitism in their posts.”
Jordan Acker, the University of Michigan regent who has been repeatedly targeted with antisemitic harassment and vandalism, drew a direct line between those incidents and demonstrations on the University of Michigan’s campus, and the Wednesday night murders.
“This isn’t protest. It’s a threat. This is what antisemitism looks like — and it’s escalating,” Acker said. “This is part of a terrifying trend: Jews in America being hunted, harassed, and attacked for being visibly Jewish — for existing in public. When we call it antisemitism, we’re told we’re overreacting. That our fear is political. That our pain is inconvenient. We’ve been gaslit for 18 months. Enough.”
He also called out progressives directly, saying “antisemitism isn’t any less dangerous when it comes wrapped in ‘progressive’ language.”
In response to the attack, some of the most prominent far-left critics of Israel on Capitol Hill have offered what many in the Jewish community have seen as half-hearted and inadequate responses.
“My heart breaks for the loved ones of the victims of last night’s attack in D.C. Nobody deserves such terrible violence. Everyone in our communities deserves to live in safety and in peace,” Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) said, linking to an article highlighting that the victims, Sarah Milgrim and Yaron Lischinsky, were Israeli Embassy workers, but not noting their backgrounds or the circumstances of the shooting in her own post.
Omar noted that the shooting took place at the Capital Jewish Museum but did not acknowledge the victims’ backgrounds and condemned violence broadly.
“I am appalled by the deadly shooting at the Capital Jewish Museum last night. Holding the victims, their families, and loved ones in my thoughts and prayers,” Omar said. “Violence should have no place in our country.”
Plus, Rubio, Cruz talk Trump Iran policy
REBECCA DROKE/AFP via Getty Images
Pittsburgh Mayor Ed Gainey speaks ahead of Vice President Kamala Harris at a campaign rally outside Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania on November 4, 2024.
Good Wednesday morning.
In today’s Daily Kickoff, we break down a new Anti-Defamation League report on antisemitism at independent K-12 schools, and report on Corey O’Connor’s victory yesterday in Pittsburgh’s mayoral primary. We report on the increasing pressure on Israel over its conduct in Gaza, cover Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s first appearance on Capitol Hill since being confirmed, and highlight remarks made by Sens. Ted Cruz and John Fetterman to NORPAC members. Also in today’s Daily Kickoff: Lishay Lavi Miran, Sen. Andy Kim, and Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Dan Goldman.
What We’re Watching
- South African President Cyril Ramaphosa and President Donald Trump will meet at the White House today, with new trade agreements on the agenda amid strained ties between the two countries.
- The Combat Antisemitism Movement and the Jewish Federations of North America will host the Annual Jewish American Heritage Month Congressional Breakfast on Capitol Hill today, with a keynote address from Bruce Pearl, head coach of the Auburn men’s basketball team.
- The House Appropriations Committee will hold separate budget hearings with testimony from Education Secretary Linda McMahon and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
- The House Foreign Affairs Committee will also hold a hearing with Rubio on “Fiscal Year 2026 State Department Posture: Protecting American Interests.”
- The Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions will hold a hearing on “The State of Higher Education” with witnesses including Dr. Andrew Gillen, a research fellow at the Cato Institute; Dr. Michael Lindsay, president of Taylor University; Dr. Mark Brown, president of Tuskegee University; Mike Pierce, executive director of the Student Borrower Protection Center; and Dr. Russell Lowery-Hart, chancellor of the Austin Community College District.
- The Qatar Economic Forum continues today in Doha, with speakers including Donald Trump Jr.; Steve Mnuchin, former U.S. treasury secretary; Mark Attanasio, principal owner of the Milwaukee Brewers; John Micklethwait, editor-in-chief of Bloomberg; and Hassan Al-Thawadi, former secretary general at Supreme Committee for Delivery and Legacy for the 2022 FIFA World Cup.
What You Should Know
A QUICK WORD WITH JI’S hALEY COHEN
A new Anti-Defamation League report puts a spotlight on episodes of antisemitism in K-12 non-Jewish independent schools, a trend that doesn’t get as much attention as the higher-profile incidents on college campuses but is affecting Jewish students in critical ways.
The study found antisemitic incidents in independent schools down 26% in 2024, compared to 2023, but still up significantly since the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks. There were only 494 documented incidents of antisemitism in independent schools in 2022; that number has nearly doubled to 860 in 2024.
A quarter of surveyed parents said their children experienced/witnessed antisemitic symbols (such as swastikas) in school.
The research was conducted through four focus groups and a survey of 369 parents of Jewish children in independent K-12 schools across 21 states. The ADL told Jewish Insider‘s Haley Cohen it selected independent schools to evaluate since they operate outside of the oversight of public education and therefore have greater autonomy in shaping their curricula, policies and disciplinary procedures.
In addition to expressing concern over antisemitic symbols, nearly one-third of parents reported anti-Jewish and anti-Israel curricula featuring more prominently in their children’s classrooms since the Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attacks. They’re also deeply dissatisfied with administrators’ responses to antisemitism: Of the parents surveyed who were aware of antisemitism in their child’s school, 34% said the school’s response was either “somewhat” or “very” inadequate.
One bit of encouraging news: A sizable majority of students at these schools (64%) said they felt “very comfortable” showing their Jewish identity at schools, with only 8% feeling somewhat or very uncomfortable with doing so. But there were isolated episodes of student discomfort, including one parent saying their son avoided wearing a Star of David necklace.
Another notable trend: Many independent school parents voiced concern that diversity, equity and inclusion frameworks do not include Jewish identity and antisemitism. They view the exclusion as a fundamental flaw of the programming rather than an oversight and described a pattern in which Jewish identity was omitted altogether from DEI conversations or misrepresented to perpetuate bias.
And parents are voting with their feet: There’s been an increase in Jewish day school enrollment in recent years.
But for those Jewish students who remain in independent schools, the ADL said it’s launching a new initiative to hold schools accountable and support families. “These independent schools are failing to support Jewish families,” Jonathan Greenblatt, the group’s CEO, said. “By tolerating — or in some cases, propagating — antisemitism in their classrooms, too many independent schools in cities across the country are sending a message that Jewish students are not welcome. It’s wrong. It’s hateful. And it must stop.”
GAINEY’S GOODBYE
O’Connor ousts Gainey in heated Pittsburgh mayoral primary

Corey O’Connor prevailed in his bid to oust Mayor Ed Gainey of Pittsburgh in the Democratic primary on Tuesday, dealing a major blow to the activist left in a city where progressives had until recently been ascendant. O’Connor, the Allegheny County controller and a centrist challenger, defeated Gainey, the first-term incumbent aligned with the far left, by a significant six-point margin, 53-47%, on Tuesday evening with most of the vote counted, Jewish Insider’s Matthew Kassel reports.
Victory post: “We built this campaign with and for the people of this city, neighborhood by neighborhood,” O’Connor said in a social media post on Tuesday night. “I’m proud to be your Democratic nominee for Mayor. I’m ready to get to work, and I’m grateful to have you with me as we take the next steps forward, together.”


























































































Continue with Google
Continue with Apple