A provision in the draft 2027 National Defense Authorization Act that aims to coordinate and enhance cooperation between the U.S. and Israeli militaries has proven to be a significant source of controversy among Democrats, with even some senior lawmakers who defended the provision on its merits flipping against it under pressure.

And, as Congress will have only months to pass the NDAA when it returns from recess after the November elections, the provision may face some resistance from Republican lawmakers as well — an indication of skepticism of the U.S.-Israel partnership building among the GOP base as part of the debate between hawks and isolationists. 

“There’s nobody here who’s more of an ardent supporter of Israel’s right to exist and ability to defend themselves, but I don’t think we should integrate our military with anybody, not even the Bahamas,” Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-OH) told the far-left outlet Drop Site News earlier this year. His office has declined to provide further comment.

Critics falsely assert the provision would merge the U.S. and Israeli militaries or otherwise compromise U.S. sovereignty and control of the U.S. military. 

Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) also expressed opposition to the provision, and claimed that the White House and Pentagon wanted the provision removed from the bill. Neither have expressed such a view publicly, but did not respond to requests for comment.

Some in the far-right online sphere have previously criticized the provision.

Two other senators aligned with the restrictionist foreign policy wing of the party, Sens. Eric Schmitt (R-MO) and Josh Hawley (R-MO) — who have also generally been strong supporters of Israel — were also noncommittal.

“I know there was a House version that was a little more controversial, but we’ll take a look,” Schmitt told Jewish Insider in late July. His office did not respond when asked if his stance has changed since then.

“Let’s see what happens with the NDAA. That’s going to be a long wait, I think,” Hawley told JI in early August. “I don’t know what version is going to come to us.”

Yet Sen. Jim Banks (R-IN), who has sought a “middle path” on foreign policy between internationalism and restrictionism, while urging Republicans not to label each other “isolationists,” expressed strong support for the provision.

“I think [the concerns are] overblown. That cooperation is important. It’s cooperation that’s always existed,” Banks told JI. “I’m sure we’ll have a thorough debate on that one when it gets to the floor, but having served myself, I know how important that relationship is. Strengthening that relationship is more important than ever.”

Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS), who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, told JI in August he has not been concerned about Republican opposition to the provision. “I haven’t been worried about that, no,” Wicker said at the time. He declined to answer additional questions on the subject, and his office did not respond to follow-up questions.

Several Democratic lawmakers blasted New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani on Wednesday for his statement on the third anniversary of the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks on Israel — which focused primarily on condemning Israel, the war in Gaza and Jerusalem’s alleged “ongoing genocide” and “apartheid.”

“He basically said ‘The Jews that died, sad, but it’s their fault,’” Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) said on X. “He needs the city’s antisemitism policy for himself. Just an atrocious statement.”

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) accused Mamdani of “[d]esecrating the memory of murdered, innocent Jews today of all days and refusing to even condemn Hamas,” calling the mayor’s statement “obscene.”

Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY), who lost his primary race in part due to his support for Israel, said that Mamdani’s statement was “reprehensible.”

“In the guise of ‘grieving’ with those mourning that day, Mayor Mamdani asserts as fact hotly disputed allegations that he knows full well will offend and further upset those same people he pretends to grieve with,” Goldman said. “On this day of all days, the Mayor of the city with the largest Jewish population outside of Israel embraces extreme activism instead of balanced leadership.”

Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) accused Mamdani of worsening Jews’ pain.

“Mr. Mayor, you’re right that today is painful for Jews. You’re also the one making it worse,” Gottheimer said. “Blame the victims. Trash Israel. Wife likes posts cheering the attack. Thanks for the clarity.”

Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY) did not explicitly mention Mamdani, but condemned critics of Israel who used the anniversary as an opportunity to bash Israel.

“The world demonizes Israel 365 days a year,” Torres said. “Perhaps, for just one day—October 7th—the critics of Israel could take a vacation from their hysterical hatred of the world’s only Jewish State and find it within themselves to express condolences for the thousands of Israelis murdered, maimed, mutilated, raped, and abducted at the hands of Hamas.”

Other Democratic leaders have also spoken out.

Former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who ran against Mamdani, also criticized him, saying that Oct. 7 “should be sacred.”

“Yet even today, @NYCMayor cannot put aside his ideological obsession with Israel long enough to simply let Jews mourn,” Cuomo said. “At a time of rising antisemitism, words matter, and rhetoric has real-world consequences. There are 364 other days for politics. Today, remember the victims. Condemn Hamas. Stand with the Jewish community. It should not be difficult.”

Former New Jersey gubernatorial candidate Steve Fulop, who now leads the business advocacy group Partnership for NYC, called Mamdani’s statement “inappropriate and unnecessarily inflammatory.”

“At a time when heightened antisemitism is a real concern — one the Mayor himself has acknowledged — New York’s elected leaders should be focused on bringing our city together and addressing the urgent challenges facing New Yorkers, not creating further division,” Fulop said.

Former Florida Senate candidate Alex Vindman issued an implicit condemnation of Mamdani, saying, “You could save your selective ahistorical biased opinions on the whole history of Israel and Palestine (seemingly justifying October 7th) until say tomorrow. Your empathy could exceed your biases.”

Deborah Lipstadt, the State Department’s former ambassador to monitor and combat antisemitism under the Biden administration, also criticized Mamdani’s statement.

New York-based and national Jewish groups have condemned Mamdani’s statement as well.

The UJA-Federation of New York said that the anniversary “should have been a day” to stand with the victims and survivors of Oct. 7.

“Instead, Mayor Mamdani chose to respond to the grief of Jewish New Yorkers by advancing false and inflammatory attacks against Israel — not only inappropriately shifting the focus away from the victims of Hamas’s cruelty, but also placing Jewish New Yorkers at risk, the group continued.

William Daroff and Betsy Berns Korn, respectively CEO and chair of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, said similarly in a joint statement, “There is a time for debate over Middle East policy. The anniversary of the October 7 massacre is not that time. Exploiting a day of profound grief to accuse Israel of genocide dishonors the memory of those who were murdered, deepens the pain of survivors and hostage families, and further alienates Jewish New Yorkers at a moment that should unite us in remembrance.”

Rabbi Rick Jacobs, the president of the Union for Reform Judaism, said he’s spoken directly with Mamdani about his rhetoric, “but he once again found an opportunity to be callous toward Jewish pain.”

“He gave Hamas a single sentence and then spent the rest of his statement condemning Israel,” Jacobs said. “You cannot proclaim empathy and care for the Jewish community and then fail to show basic humanity toward us in our grief. Turning this anniversary into an indictment of the Jewish state is not only hurtful, and deeply offensive, but it also makes Jewish New Yorkers less safe.”

Democratic Majority for Israel said Mamdani’s statement “diminishes the gravity of the day and disrespects the victims.”

A slew of Republicans have also spoken out to condemn Mamdani, including Sens. Tom Cotton (R-AR), Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Rick Scott (R-FL); Reps. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), Mike Lawler (R-NY), Jason Smith (R-MO) and Rudy Yakym (R-IN); U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum Board Chair Jeff Miller; Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders; U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee; former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley; and former Rep. Anthony D’Esposito (R-NY).

Israeli Ambassador to the United States Yechiel Leiter also condemned Mamdani’s “dangerous lies” and called him a “defender of Palestinian terrorism, a promoter of antisemitism, and an advocate of anti-Americanism” as well as an ally of Hamas.

In spite of his staunch anti-Israel stance, Mamdani is still facing protests from further-left anti-Israel demonstrators today, accusing him of genocide and of betraying the anti-Israel movement. 

Democratic Majority for Israel, the Democratic pro-Israel advocacy group, released a proposal on Thursday for a “modernized U.S.-Israel relationship,” with a focus on reimagined ties between the countries following the end of the current memorandum of understanding on military aid, set to expire in 2028.

The plan comes as Democrats grapple with the future of the U.S.-Israel relationship, particularly ahead of a potential Democratic majority in one or both chambers of Congress, which could bring renewed efforts to end or substantially condition U.S. military aid and sales to the Jewish state. 

The framework laid out by DMFI mirrors the policies likely to be championed by moderate pro-Israel Democrats in the coming Congress.

“‘Cut everything’ and ‘defend everything’ are shortcuts. Neither is a serious policy for advancing peace in the region,” DMFI said in a press release. “Our vision offers a path grounded in security, responsibility, regional cooperation, and sustained American leadership.”

DMFI said that the U.S. should fulfill its commitments on military aid through the end of the current MOU, arguing that failing to do so “would diminish the close defense partnership through which the United States and Israel plan, develop, and produce the capabilities both countries need to confront shared threats.”

The group maintained that the U.S. and the region “have far more to gain from a stronger and more effective partnership” than from cutting off the U.S.-Israel relationship, and that the path forward will help secure military victories against Iran and its proxies, protect American troops and civilians, support regional partners and strengthen the path toward a two-state solution.

Beyond 2028, the group urged focusing on “more joint development and production in missile defense, cybersecurity, and emerging technologies” — which itself has proven to be a controversial idea among some congressional Democrats and, to a lesser extent, Republicans.

But it also did not fully rule out the potential for “some” continued military aid and missile defense funding past 2028, while suggesting that such aid would likely be phased out “over time, and by mutual agreement … toward an increasingly reciprocal relationship centered on joint investment, innovation, and technological advantage.”

And it said that the U.S. still “has a strategic and moral interest in ensuring that Israel can deter and defend against threats to Israel’s fundamental security,” including preserving Israel’s qualitative military edge and ensuring that Israel maintains access to the military capabilities it needs.

DMFI said that cooperative military programs redound to the U.S.’ benefit, allowing “access to capabilities, operational experience, and regional insights that would be difficult and costly to replicate independently,” while allowing Israel and other partners to “shoulder more of the security burden” while the U.S. turns attention toward China and the Indo-Pacific.

The group emphasized that continued support for Israel “does not require support for every decision made by an Israeli government” and that the U.S. should speak out when Israel undermines “shared interests, democratic values, prospects for peace, or Israel’s own long-term security” and work with Israel to ensure that security assistance “continues to be used in accordance with U.S. law and that military operations incorporate effective measures to minimize civilian harm.”

But it also firmly rejected the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement and other efforts to delegitimize Israel and deny its right to exist as a Jewish state, as well as double standards singling out Israel.

“Criticism of Israeli governments and policies is legitimate, but political debate about Israel must never become a vehicle for antisemitism or collective blame of Jews,” the DMFI plan argues.

It said that the U.S., Israel, Palestinians and Arab states should continue to push toward a two-state solution, and that such a path includes obligations for both Israelis and Palestinians, and steps to improve conditions for Palestinians even without broader final-status negotiations.

The group said Israel must act to halt settler violence in the West Bank; “preserve the territorial integrity, economic viability, and institutional capacity necessary for legitimate Palestinian governance and eventual statehood”; and not work to weaken the Palestinian Authority, arguing that it’s in Israel’s interest to ensure stronger PA institutions and economic conditions as an alternative to extremism.

At the same time, DMFI’s plan describes Israeli skepticism of and concern about a Palestinian state as valid and based on Israel’s experience, particularly in the Oct. 7, 2023 attacks, and said that security arrangements around a two-state solution must “give Israelis confidence that a future Palestinian state will not become another base for terrorism.”

It also argues that the PA is a critical part of a two-state solution but must be significantly reformed to reject terrorism, support Hamas’ removal, stop incitement, overhaul educational materials that incite terrorism, combat corruption and improve governance.

“A reformed PA must demonstrate that it can serve its population, maintain security, govern responsibly, and act as a credible partner for peace before assuming responsibility for Gaza,” DMFI said. “The United States and its regional partners should help the PA undertake these reforms while establishing clear benchmarks to measure and verify progress.”

DMFI called on Arab states to work to strengthen the PA while integrating more closely with Israel.

In Gaza, the DMFI plan largely aligns with the 20-point peace plan put forward by the Trump administration, including disarming Hamas, establishing governance and ensuring humanitarian assistance, which “will require sustained American leadership and diplomatic engagement over many years.”

It argues that recovery and reconstruction should start in Israeli-controlled areas with a shift toward civilian governance and international oversight.

The plan speaks in broad strokes about a path forward for Iran, describing diplomacy as “an essential tool” to addressing Iran’s various threats, “backed by credible deterrence, rigorous verification, economic pressure, and close coordination with allies and regional partners,” alongside “military force [when] necessary” with clear goals and congressional authorization.

It also calls on Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah and offers support for “stable governance” in Syria that will block Iran and other terrorist groups from using Syrian territory to attack Israel.

“DMFI is proposing a vision for the Middle East that a Democratic majority can actually govern with: security for Israel, self-determination for the Palestinian people, and stability for the region, with every party carrying obligations you can name, measure, and verify,” DMFI President Brian Romick said in a statement. “Our commitment to Israel’s security is ironclad, and we are equally clear that there is no lasting peace without Israeli responsibility and no Palestinian state without credible Palestinian governance.”

Former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who is seen as a potential presidential contender, also praised the plan. The Democratic operative delivered a major speech in Israel earlier this year offering criticisms of Israeli policy and calling for an end of unconditional support for the Jewish state.

“DMFI is right to put regional stability, Israel’s security, and Palestinian self-determination in the same conversation. None succeeds on its own,” Emanuel said. “The next step is to make the Arab states full partners in building a credible path to Palestinian sovereignty and Israeli security — and to be clear that America’s support for Israel does not mean silence when its government makes choices that undermine both.”

Rep. Lois Frankel (D-FL), the ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee subcommittee that oversees U.S. military aid to Israel, said in a statement on the proposal that “U.S. partnership with Israel is essential to our national security and to advancing peace and stability in the Middle East” and that the DMFI plan “offer[s] a thoughtful and serious vision for strengthening that relationship to meet today’s challenges, while making clear that American interests, Israel’s security and Palestinian self-determination can be advanced together.”

Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL), who co-chairs the Congressional Jewish Caucus and the Abraham Accords Caucus and is a leader among moderate pro-Israel Democrats, said, “Especially at this critical moment, it is vitally important to chart a course that strengthens the U.S.-Israel relationship and advances our mutual security interests and shared democratic values. I look forward to working with DMFI and others committed to this effort to help shape that future.”

The race to succeed U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres is still wide open, with seven candidates vying to lead an organization whose approach toward Israel has become a central concern for the United States and pro-Israel advocates. 

But even as the candidates stake out different records on Israel, diplomats and experts caution that the next secretary-general will have limited power to alter the U.N.’s broader posture toward the Jewish state — and could inherit an institution in which those policies are deeply embedded.

Guterres, whose tenure has been riddled with accusations of antisemitism and anti-Israel bias, will leave office on Dec. 31 after serving two five-year terms. His successor is expected to be selected in the coming months, though one source familiar with the situation told Jewish Insider the process may not be completed by the time Guterres leaves office, and it’s not clear what — if any — consequences there will be if the post remains empty for a period of time. 

Seven candidates are currently seeking the position, including four women, raising the possibility that the U.N. could select its first female secretary-general. Under the organization’s informal regional rotation, there is also a strong possibility that the next secretary-general will come from Latin America or the Caribbean.

Costa Rican economist Rebeca Grynspan and Guyana’s U.N. ambassador, Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett, have emerged as the leading contenders. The field also includes Rafael Grossi of Argentina, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency; María Fernanda Espinosa Garcés and Ivonne A-Baki of Ecuador; Olara Otunnu of Uganda; and former Senegalese President Macky Sall.

The source, who requested anonymity to speak candidly about private deliberations, said that U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz has tasked Jennifer Locetta, the alternate representative of the United States for special political affairs at the U.N., as well as Ambassador Jeff Bartos, the U.S. representative for U.N. management and reform, with interviewing the candidates “and being front and center in the process. They have had multiple meetings with every candidate.”

A Sept. 18 straw poll, one of three conducted by the 15-member U.N. Security Council since July, offered the clearest indication yet of where the race stands. In the anonymous poll, in which members indicate whether they encourage, discourage or have no opinion about each candidate, Grynspan received nine “encourage” votes, the most of any candidate, while Rodrigues-Birkett received eight. Otunnu and Grossi each received five. 

The informal, nonbinding straw poll votes are intended to gauge support but do not determine the winner. The UNSC will ultimately hold a formal vote to determine its final recommendation, which requires at least nine votes and no veto from any of the five permanent members — the U.S., U.K., France, Russia and China. The recommended candidate then goes to the General Assembly for approval. If the General Assembly does not accept the recommendation, the UNSC must return to the process and put forward another candidate.

Ben Cohen, a senior analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said the contest remains inconclusive as compared to past secretary-general races, leaving open the possibility that another candidate could emerge late in the process. 

“We’re at a juncture three months from Guterres leaving office, and we still don’t have a clear front-runner,” Cohen said. “Going by history, you would expect to have a clear front-runner at this point, and you really don’t. So I wouldn’t rule out the possibility that you could have a candidate entering very late, who would be palatable to all five of the permanent members, who could win over most of the other 10 nonpermanent members.”

He noted that despite the strong showings for Grynspan and Rodrigues-Birkett in the straw polls, both leading candidates could run into trouble given signs of opposition among the UNSC’s permanent members.

“We have no idea how the Security Council members are voting, and particularly whether the five permanent members are going to veto any of them,” Cohen said. “In that sense, I’d say both Grynspan and Rodrigues-Birkett are in a bit of trouble because there are rumors that the Russians or the Chinese — or indeed both — are not happy with Grynspan and don’t want her as secretary-general, so there’s a potential veto there. And as far as Rodriguez Burkett is concerned, I would eat my hat if the U.S. doesn’t veto her.” 

David May, research manager at FDD, described Grynspan and Rodrigues-Birkett as currently “neck and neck for the top spot.” 

He acknowledged that the U.N. Conference on Trade and Development, currently led by Grynspan, “has been harshly critical of Israel.” Under her leadership, the agency has issued reports sharply critical of the impact of Israeli policies on the Palestinian economy.

Cohen similarly noted her record at UNCTAD, which he argued has amplified the Human Rights Council’s blacklist of companies operating in the West Bank, will leave Israel wary.

“In terms of economic warfare against Israel, it’s something that she knows about, and something that she has not rejected outright,” Cohen said. “I think she’s willing to engage in it, where she believes at least it could make a difference.”

Cohen described Grynspan as a U.N. insider candidate who has been close to Guterres and knows the U.N. system well. He argued she would likely “be in the mold of Guterres.” 

Jonathan Ruhe, a fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, similarly contended that Grynspan “is a U.N. insider who seems unlikely to depart from Guterres’ record.”

However, given Grynspan’s background as the daughter of Holocaust survivors with family members residing in Israel, she could be viewed as friendlier to the Jewish state. One source familiar with the deliberations remarked that there is some concern in the Jewish community about whether it would “be a plus or a minus for there to be a Jewish secretary-general,” given the hostile views toward Israel among U.N. members generally.

Rodrigues-Birkett, meanwhile, has drawn criticism from experts over statements that they view as disproportionately critical of Israel. She has previously described the Jewish state’s actions against Palestinians as “brutality that would make some of history’s most cruel oppressors blush,” and praised former Cuban dictator Fidel Castro as a “visionary” in a June 2013 speech.

She has also “echoed a Hamas narrative falsely accusing Israel of genocide and framing the Oct. 7 massacre as a response to Israeli wrongdoing,” May said. “The already pervasive anti-Israel hostility at the United Nations would only increase under her leadership.”

Elliott Abrams, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and former U.S. special envoy for Iran during the first Trump administration, also criticized Rodrigues-Birkett’s track record, calling her “unbalanced in her criticisms of Israel” and saying he “would hope the U.S. will make it clear that we won’t accept her either,” Abrams said.

Beyond Israel, Cohen pointed to Rodrigues-Birkett’s ties to Beijing as a potential sticking point for Washington. He noted that she was one of about five candidates who visited China’s Foreign Ministry over the summer.

“She was the only one who explicitly endorsed a General Assembly resolution from 1971 that states that the PRC, the People’s Republic, is the only legitimate representative of China at the U.N., basically freezing out Taiwan,” Cohen said. “And she’s also been very supportive of Chinese initiatives on artificial intelligence, which will absolutely worry this administration.”

Meanwhile, Grossi is also viewed favorably by some pro-Israel analysts. However, despite leading the race earlier in the process, his candidacy has now “faltered,” according to May.

“The early front-runner, [he] is seen by the Israelis as even-handed and admired for his commitment to preventing Iranian nuclear ambitions,” May said. “However, his campaign has faltered of late.”

Ruhe similarly described Grossi as a “more hopeful alternative” because he is “a serious diplomat who’s been dogged about holding actual violators of international law like Iran and Russia to account.”

Cohen attributed Grossi’s decline to a growing push for a female secretary-general and to fierce Russian opposition, including recent attacks against him by Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova. She has accused Grossi of tacitly encouraging Ukrainian military activity around the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant.

“The Russians absolutely hate him,” Cohen said. “It’s not beyond the bounds of possibility that at the eleventh hour something could be arranged with the Russians where they drop their veto. But I don’t know that the Russians are really in the mood to compromise right now, and Zakharova in particular has been so hostile towards Grossi that it would be a climb-down that they’re unwilling to make at this point. So if I was Grossi, I wouldn’t be planning to move my family to New York City just yet.”

Still, several experts cautioned against overstating how much the political identity of the next secretary-general could change the U.N.’s overall approach toward Israel.

Aaron David Miller, a former State Department negotiator and senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, argued that the secretary-general has limited ability to overcome divisions within the organization and that Israel’s own policies will likely play a greater role in determining its relationship with the next U.N. leader.

“Since the days of Dag Hammarskjold, the most consequential UNSYG, in the UN’s history, it matters very little to either the US, Israel or the world [who the next secretary general is],” Miller said in a statement to JI. “The UNSC is so divided that the UN can’t serve as an effective instrument to resolve conflict.”

Miller said that while Israel’s relationship with the U.N. “has always been fraught,” he argued that it was “better when [Israel] had [prime ministers] who were interested in serious peacemaking.”

“It’s Israeli policies that are likely to determine how the next UNSYG relates to Israel,” Miller added. “The ‘what’ is more important than the ‘who.’”

Abrams similarly noted that a new secretary-general on its own is unlikely to be enough to sway the U.N.’s posture toward Israel.

“The secretary general does not control the General Assembly or UN agencies like the Human Rights Council or UNESCO, so Israel will still face a hostile organization even if the Secretary General is neutral,” Abrams said.

Ruhe argued that the structural constraints run even deeper and that candidates have little incentive to campaign against the institution’s anti-Israel bias because doing so could make it harder to build the consensus necessary to win.

“No candidate is going to become the next secretary-general by campaigning on reforming the U.N.’s institutional hostility to Israel,” Ruhe said. “Nor will they build consensus for their own initiatives by meaningfully softening the organization’s anti-Israel bias, even if they privately disagree with it.”

Still, experts said that does not make the choice irrelevant. They argued that a secretary-general who reinforces existing hostility toward Israel could worsen an already difficult environment, while a leader who attempts to apply a more even-handed standard could affect the organization’s credibility and priorities.

Andrew Weinstein, who served as a public delegate to the U.N. General Assembly during the Biden administration, said the U.N. “has built a structural bias against Israel into its machinery,” and that the next secretary-general must be prepared to inherit what he described as a “credibility crisis.”

“Whoever’s chosen is going to face a simple test, which is, can they speak both honestly about the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza and the rights of Palestinians, and at the same time reject the politicization of antisemitism, condemn U.N. actors who traffic in antisemitic tropes, and insist that Jewish fears and Israeli security are treated as seriously as that of any other people,” Weinstein said.

Asked whether a secretary-general who continued the U.N.’s existing hostility toward Israel could make the problem worse, Weinstein said, “Certainly that’s true,” pointing to Guterres’ remark after the Oct. 7 attacks that they “didn’t happen in a vacuum” and what he described as a delay by U.N. Women in explicitly condemning sexual violence against Israeli women.

“If the U.N. wants to be taken seriously on human rights, the next secretary-general really needs to move away from performative, one-sided condemnations and toward a fair standard that protects Palestinians, Israelis, and Jews worldwide without using any of them as props in someone else’s politics,” Weinstein said.

Tuesday night’s Democratic primaries in New Hampshire delivered mixed results for candidates who made attacks on Israel a centerpiece of their closing arguments.

Rep. Chris Pappas (D-NH) trounced progressive activist Karishma Manzur by nearly a 2-to-1 margin (65%-33%) in the Senate primary, after Manzur attacked Pappas for his stance on Israel and called him a “shill for AIPAC” as a central message of her campaign.

Pappas is now facing a competitive general election against former Sen. John Sununu (R-NH), who is running to rejoin the Senate after nearly two decades out of office. Sununu is expected to be a formidable challenger who holds a narrow lead over Pappas in recent public polling.

The Cook Political Report rates the race as “Lean Democratic.” A longtime New Hampshire pollster told JI last week that Sununu is the underdog but is a strong and experienced candidate, and has a well-known and popular family name in the state, with a record of support from moderates and independents whom Pappas has previously worked to attract.

Pappas will likely be buoyed, however, by the strong national environment for Democrats, while Sununu will need to hold together a coalition of moderates skeptical of President Donald Trump and MAGA diehards in the GOP base.

Meanwhile, Stefany Shaheen, the daughter of Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), narrowly beat military veteran and second-time candidate Maura Sullivan. Shaheen closed out the race with claims that AIPAC, which did not endorse and was not involved in either race, had been bundling contributions for Sullivan.

Shaheen’s advantage is partly attributable to her family name — but Sullivan came close to overcoming that advantage despite starting the race trailing Shaheen by double digits.

Shaheen went on air in the closing days of the race with ads accusing Sullivan of being “bankrolled” by AIPAC, and leaned into her opposition to Israel in interviews. Sullivan hit back in her own ad saying she doesn’t take any money from AIPAC.

Under pressure from the left in the wake of the war in Gaza, both Pappas and Sullivan recalibrated their stances on Israel during their primary races. Pappas, a pro-Israel moderate for most of his time in the House, backed away from his previous relationship with AIPAC and called for a “reset” of the U.S.-Israel relationship while voting “present” on an amendment to strip aid from Israel.

Democratic Majority for Israel and the Jewish Democratic Council of America congratulated Pappas on his victory.

Sullivan, who rejected efforts to cut aid to Israel earlier in the race, came around to supporting the suspension of at least some weapons sales to Israel.

For Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), the Democratic caucus has become an increasingly lonely place for those who remain staunchly pro-Israel, with what he described as bullying, harassment and threats from the anti-Israel camp contributing to the shift away from Israel among Democratic lawmakers.

“What is it like to be in the caucus? It’s become lonely,” Moskowitz said during a wide-ranging interview with Jewish Insider in his Capitol Hill office last week. “None of my colleagues are mean to me, but it is an ostracizing feeling. There’s no doubt that the Democrats that are super pro-Israel, in general, feel somewhat ostracized, and how could you not?”

He said that the “mushy middle” of the party is being pushed left, explaining that he has had colleagues tell him that consultants have told them that, in order to win reelection, they’ll need to reject AIPAC or vote against pro-Israel legislation or express opposition to Israeli missile-defense systems.

“No one really loves family infighting,” he said. “For me, I’m fighting for what I believe in. For me, it’s not about the polling. I’ll go down on this issue. Ultimately, I’m not interested in moderating to try to win my election.”

He also attributed some of the shift to harassment and threats of violence targeting members, including Moskowitz being the target of an assassination attempt in 2024. Standing up for Israel, at this point, puts members’ families at risk, he said, and with that pressure coming exclusively from the anti-Israel side, it’s no surprise that some members are caving.

“I talk to members. They’re scared from all of this stuff. Not only are they scared, their spouses are scared, and do not underestimate the spouse in this congressional relationship,” he said. “The bullying is only happening one way. Members are getting bullied online. They’re getting bullied in the hallways. They come down the steps [from the House chamber], cameras get put in their face on this issue.”

Moskowitz said that, because he has refused to cave on this issue, he now needs armed security and police protecting him in his district — as do other outspoken members. He said that it’s important for members who have been outspoken, on both sides of the aisle, to be reelected.

“If you look at what’s happened to the Jewish community in two years, where are we in five? Where are we in five years? Are we going to lose an entire political party?” he asked. 

And Moskowitz warned that he sees similar issues on the horizon in the Republican Party. “The Tucker [Carlson] wing of the [Republican] Party is ready to pounce. The only thing that’s keeping them at bay is Trump. … The fight you’re seeing that we’re having now, they are going to have on the right.”

The Florida congressman, asked about the upcoming Israeli elections, said that he believes that some of his Democratic colleagues have “backed themselves into a corner” by focusing their criticism on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

“A lot of my colleagues, when they voted to cut off aid to Israel, both in the Senate and in the House, said, ‘Well, it was all about Netanyahu,’” he recounted. “My argument to them was, ‘At some point, he won’t be there. How are you going to go back to those voters who you’ve now courted because you cut off aid and go back to them saying, ‘Well I’m going to let the aid flow now because Netanyahu is gone?’”

As a result, he predicted that a loss for Netanyahu would do little to change Democratic discourse on Israel, noting that anti-Israel voices online have already begun to target other Israeli leaders as polling has suggested that Netanyahu may lose.

Moskowitz said that the recent outrage, from both progressive commentators and some of his colleagues, over his appointment as ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s Middle East and North Africa subcommittee has been disproportionate to the position itself, and tinged with “veiled antisemitism.”

At the same time, Moskowitz argued that the appointment shows that pro-Israel Jews remain part of the Democratic “big tent” — at least for Democratic House leaders. He also noted that anyone on the committee — which includes several vocal critics of Israel — could have objected to the appointment, but chose not to.

“For me, this isn’t game theory. This is real,” Moskowitz said, emphasizing that his relatives fled the Holocaust in Europe. “Tough economic times in a country, wealth inequality — the Jews. It’s not a new playbook that’s being run on the community.”

“Not only does the big tent include pro-Israel Jews but we’re going to give them leadership spots on that issue,” he said.

He said that he sees criticisms of “Zionists” and of Israel as barely disguised attacks on the Jewish people as a whole — with the vast majority of American Jews being Zionists — drawing on historic tropes and patterns.

“For me, this isn’t game theory. This is real,” Moskowitz said, emphasizing that his relatives fled the Holocaust in Europe. “Tough economic times in a country, wealth inequality — the Jews. It’s not a new playbook that’s being run on the community.”

“If we don’t fix the affordability issue, antisemitism is going to continue to get worse,” he added. “For me, it’s intricately linked. It’s not our fault, but we are being made the scapegoat for all of these things. Flock cameras? Jews. AI? Jews. Can’t afford your groceries? Jews. If we don’t start fixing problems here, we’re going to be on the short side of that stick.”

His children, he said, will grow up in a different and more hostile America than he did, after the Jewish community had believed it was assimilated and safe.

“We assimilated in Spain. We assimilated in Germany. Never thought what could happen could happen, and we were expelled and exterminated in both of those countries,” he said.

He credited much of the rise in antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment to malign foreign influence, particularly through coordinated bot campaigns on social media. He said that, if the Nazis had a tool like social media on their side during World War II, they likely would have won.

“Congrats to China and our foreign adversaries, who took an 80-20 issue and turned it into a 20-80 issue as an experiment in a petri dish that they can apply to Taiwan in the future,” Moskowitz said. “We’re just letting foreign adversaries decide how the American people are going to think on everything.”

He described social media platforms as deliberately blind to the problem — until similar tactics were applied to the issue of data centers, which could impact their bottom lines.

“When it comes to Israel, I want to see them treated like any other ally,” he continued. “If the idea is that the majority of our members want to cut off aid to Israel, then we’re going to have to look at all our other allies’ humanitarian records, and we’re going to have to treat them all the same. I look at that as calling balls and strikes, and getting into reality off of the internet.”

Moskowitz is favored to be chairman of the Middle East subcommittee next year if Democrats take the House, but he said he would still need to rally support on the committee to secure the seat. He said that ultimately House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and Foreign Affairs Committee Ranking Member Greg Meeks (D-NY) would set the agenda for Democrats, but that he sees opportunities to use the post to strengthen U.S. ties with the Gulf and Mideast allies.

He called the decision to allow a Saudi nuclear energy deal to proceed without Saudi Arabia joining the Abraham Accords a “missed opportunity” and said it’s important to ensure that Gulf allies don’t try to appease Iran “because the Iran war now has gone south.”

“When it comes to Israel, I want to see them treated like any other ally,” he continued. “If the idea is that the majority of our members want to cut off aid to Israel, then we’re going to have to look at all our other allies’ humanitarian records, and we’re going to have to treat them all the same. I look at that as calling balls and strikes, and getting into reality off of the internet.”

The congressman also blasted those who blame Israel alone for the war in Iran, explaining that in conversations with ambassadors from the Gulf countries, “they were all supportive of this — all of them,” but are now “upset about the marketing and the branding of the war” and hiding from responsibility.

Moskowitz supported the administration’s 2025 strikes on Iran’s nuclear program, and opposed war powers efforts to block a U.S. attack on Iran before the war began earlier this year. But he has supported war powers resolutions since the war started, arguing that Congress must preserve its constitutional role in making war.

“I think the president made a mistake in hindsight. Think about it this way: In an alternative reality, had he come to Congress in the very beginning, it probably would have passed,” he said, “and then we would have owned it with him. He owns it all on his own.”

He said the administration underestimated Iran’s willingness to take the Strait of Hormuz hostage and to expand the war to attack Gulf allies, and overestimated the fragility of the Iranian regime.

Moskowitz also said that the administration has shifted and scaled back its goals, noting that Trump no longer emphasizes the need to remove enriched nuclear material from Iran, now focusing primarily on the Strait of Hormuz.

“We didn’t succeed on the terms he told people of why we were going. And so I think it was a completely failed strategy on prosecuting the war,” Moskowitz said, even as he said he’s glad that former Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is dead, Iran’s navy has been destroyed and the Iranian nuclear program has been set back.

He said he does not want the war to become a long-term problem, but also said that he still does not want to see a deal that would provide Iran with substantial financial relief. “That has to be still the North Star. They cannot have a nuclear weapon. But mistakes that we have made to try to achieve that now could have long-term repercussions.”

Since beating Democratic Socialists of America member Oliver Larkin by nearly 30 points in his primary race, Moskowitz has gone on the offensive against the DSA and the surging socialist wing of the Democratic Party.

He said that he thinks mainstream Democrats need to recognize income inequality and other economic struggles that are driving young people toward the DSA, but also need to realize that the DSA is “awash in antisemitism” and a range of other unpopular and fringe ideas.

“There will be members here from the DSA, but they’ll be 5% of the caucus,” Moskowitz said. “What we can’t do is what the Republicans did with [former House Speaker] Kevin McCarthy. We can’t go make a deal with the DSA because then that deal will be held over the entire caucus for the next two years while we’re in power.”

He said that, despite being targeted with what he described as the “whole DSA apparatus” in his primary, he decided not to engage directly with his opponent, to not run negative ads and to try to keep the race local. 

“I was going to deny these viral moments for them,” he said, arguing that other Democrats had erred by getting in direct fights with DSA opponents. “It was my belief that the voters would reject it without me having to spend a ton of money explaining to them why it was bad, and that’s what happened.”

He said his polling showed that Larkin’s stances were turning off voters and argued that his strategies “blew up in their face,” alienating older voters, Jewish voters and Hispanic voters.

“This is not a place that the DSA can win in, and they shouldn’t have done it because it made them look stupid,” Moskowitz said.

Moskowitz noted that he now enters the general election with $2 million, a substantial cash advantage over his Republican opponent, former Boca Raton Mayor Scott Singer, who is also Jewish.

He argued that his brand of politics and his past ties to former Gov. Ron DeSantis will help him win over independent voters in the general election, and highlighted his appeal with Jewish voters, among whom he vastly outperformed former Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 election. He noted that he doesn’t have to calibrate stances on the U.S.-Israel relationship in his district, but can instead express his honest views in a way that other Democrats can’t.

“This election between me and [Singer], on [Israel and antisemitism] in particular, is the difference between a vote versus a voice,” Moskowitz continued. “He’ll be a vote on pro-Israel. I’m not going to deny that. He will be a vote, but he won’t be a voice.”

LAS VEGAS — Vice President JD Vance stuck to a pro-Israel line and rejected antisemitism in remarks on Monday to the Republican Jewish Coalition, avoiding any new controversies while not being pressed directly about some of his past comments and affiliations, including with Tucker Carlson, that have most concerned Jewish Republicans.

Attendees, with some exceptions, largely said that the speech helped Vance reassure skeptical Jewish and pro-Israel Republicans and boost his support with the RJC crowd ahead of a potential 2028 presidential bid.

Vance, in an off-record conversation with RJC Chairman Norm Coleman, audio and a transcript of which were leaked shortly after his remarks, was asked about a list of antisemitic influencers including Carlson and Nick Fuentes and his decisions about how to engage with those figures. He didn’t directly address Carlson — who he has previously defended as a friend — in his response, instead highlighting differences he sees between figures like Fuentes (who he tagged as antisemitic) and Rogan (who he said wasn’t).

“One area where I really do draw the line is on people who engage in what I call this blood libel attitude. I recognize a lot of people in this room might disagree with things that Tucker Carlson or Megyn Kelly or Joe Rogan has said, but — just to hone in on Fuentes and Rogan, I think these are two very, very different categories of people, both with their reach, but also within the ideas that are in their actual head,” Vance said.

Regarding Rogan, he said that he thinks the best approach is to engage and make his case and try to reach his audience. Fuentes, he said, is a substantively different case who is not worth engaging with given both his neo-Nazi views and his personal attacks on Vance and his family.

“But outside of some pretty bright lines, I try to talk to as many people as I can,” Vance continued.

Vance also highlighted a “growing suspicion” among the under-40 generation of the U.S.-Israel relationship and said that he believes that the best way to make the case for the relationship is to “actually get out there and talk about the ways in which it is in the best interest of the United States of America,” highlighting advanced missile defense technology as one example.

He said that other arguments that may have “made a lot of sense rhetorically 30 or 40 years ago” may not have the same appeal to young people today.

Asked about his past comments that Israeli and U.S. interests don’t always align, the vice president said that Israel is important to U.S. national security and among the U.S.’s most critical alliances, as well as undergirded by a “deeper cultural symbiosis and harmony.”

Vance was not directly asked about his recent comments accusing the Israeli government of conducting influence operations in the U.S. to undermine negotiations with Iran.

Vance suggested that Israel’s focus on the Middle East and the U.S.’s desire to shift away from a two-decade focus on that region is “a natural place in which Israel is going to look at these things slightly differently than the United States of America. … The most important thing is to say that there are alignments of interest across a whole host of issues.”

Towards the end of his remarks, Vance said that he sees antisemitism as having increased primarily as a result of immigration and the “importation of large groups of people who bring their ethnic rivalries” rather than changing sentiments in the American populace.

The vice president emphasized that he and the entire administration “love” the Jewish community and “you will very much always be on the team so long as I have any say in it.”

He argued that antisemitism — or the idea of punishing anyone for their genetics or ancestry, which he referred to as “blood libel” or “blood guilt”— is anathema to his Christian faith. He also highlighted past conversations with conservative activist Charlie Kirk about how antisemitism is “corrosive to the soul.”

“I think the antidote to antisemitism is the rejection of this idea of blood guilt,” Vance continued. “And I would tell any young man who claims to be a Christian that this is super corrosive for the soul.”

Vance said he feels a personal affinity and connection between the Catholic and Jewish religions and sees similarities between the two faiths — noting that he participated in a reading at the Orthodox Jewish wedding of his former chief of staff, Jacob Reses.

Vance, who spent the day on the campaign trail in Michigan with former Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), called Rogers “the single most important candidate right now in this midterm election” and El-Sayed “one of the worst disgraces running in the history of the American political process.”

“You don’t see a bunch of innocent Jewish kids who almost lose their lives and empathize with the killer unless you see those people as less than human,” Vance said, referring to El-Sayed’s response to the attack on Temple Israel in West Bloomfield, Mich., in March.

Several RJC board members, all speaking in their personal capacities, and other attendees largely said that Vance’s remarks had helped his case with the Jewish community.

“His sincerity was appreciated, and his comment that the under-40 generation doesn’t have the same emotional or historical attachment to Israel so must be met where they are was correct,” Joshua Katzen, an RJC board member told Jewish Insider. “The audience was relieved.”

Katzen told JI prior to Vance’s speech that the remarks would be an opportunity to alleviate concerns from RJC members, and his remarks earned repeated standing ovations from the crowd.

“I am going to support him,” Yitz Applbaum, another RJC board member, told JI. “He is definitely strong on the U.S.-Israel relationship and totally understands the issues, especially with the youth and how we need to work to do away with antisemitism with people under 40. [That was] a very key part of what he talked about.”

Sander Gerber, also an RJC board member, told JI, “Vice President Vance spoke to an enthusiastic room who understands that the American Jewish community is a core part of the political future of our country. I applaud the VPs statements repudiating antisemitism on the right.”

Bobby Schostak, an RJC board member and former Michigan Republican Party chairman, said that the RJC is “honored to have [Vance] here” and that Vance “made clear his positions … there was nothing concerning to me overall.” 

“I think he needs to continue to reach out to us and us to him,” Schostak continued. “We have a good understanding going forward, but I didn’t find anything there, you know, alarming or concerning.”

Stuart Weil, an RJC member from California, told reporters that Vance’s remarks confirmed to him that any potential issues were a result of media distortion of Vance’s record.

“I will gladly support JD Vance as president of the United States,” Weil said. “As a big supporter of Israel, I believe that JD Vance will make a wonderful president. … He just reinforced what I already know.”

Not everyone was won over by Vance’s comments, however, with one attendee expressing disappointment with his failure to repudiate Carlson directly. “He was given the opportunity to call out and separate himself from Tucker. To the disappointment of many, he ducked the Tucker issue altogether,” the attendee told JI.

Schostak also acknowledged that others in the room might not have been satisfied with Vance’s answer.

“He addressed it as the elephant in the room. … I think the way he responded was, ‘It was important to not ignore all factions of opinion,’” Schostak said. “I don’t know how well that was received.”

Radio host Sid Rosenberg, who in remarks before the RJC earlier in the day urged the audience to “give Vance a chance,” said that he was disappointed by Vance’s remarks.

“He was not strong enough on Israel. In fact he referred to Israel as ONE of our best allies. One of?” Rosenberg said on X. “He had a chance to hammer [Carlson] and [Kelly] but instead spent all his time defending [Rogan] over Nick Fuentes. He also blamed immigration for a lot of the antisemitism in our country today. Silly. Look, he’s still better than any Democrat candidate but I don’t think he wowed the STRONG Jews in the room tonight.”

RJC CEO Matt Brooks and other members of the group’s leadership offered strong praise and support for Vance during a press conference following the session. 

“Coming into a room that many would say had not necessarily known who JD was and what was in in his heart, or would be coming in skeptical to learn more — I think he really connected very very well with the audience tonight,” Brooks said.

Ari Fleischer, an RJC board member and former White House press secretary, told reporters that Vance “really helped himself tonight” and “answered a lot of the questions that people had about where his heart is.” He added that repeated appearances will help the crowd grow more comfortable.

“Today was not primary day, but I think today was progress day for JD Vance with the Jewish community,” he said. 

Vance entered the room facing a divided crowd — with some in the audience skeptical of the vice president given his ties to Carlson, his public criticisms of Israel, his approach to negotiations with Iran and a host of other issues.

Uniformly, RJC board members and Jewish Republican elected officials said that Vance’s appearance at the RJC was a positive sign for him and for the Jewish community and that they were grateful that Vance was coming to address the crowd.

“I was surprised yet pleased to see that he’s coming,” Katzen said ahead of the speech. “I doubt that the vice president is coming to tell us that he thinks that Tucker Carlson’s view of Judaism is correct. He’s not here to tell us that. I have to think that he’s here to build bridges. I wonder how explicit he’ll be in rejecting the antisemites associated with Tucker Carlson.”

He said that Vance “must understand that he’s walking into 750 people who are very skeptical about his support” — largely because he “failed to respond when offered the opportunity” to people who have made antisemitic comments — so RJC members want him to address those concerns.

“I think his remarks can make all the difference,” Katzen said, noting that Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s name received loud applause from the RJC audience, while the same was not true of Vance.

“He can fix that tonight, and I hope he will. I would much rather have the Republican Party choosing between two excellent candidates [in 2028], especially the Jews in the Republican Party,” Katzen said. “I don’t want the Jews to feel like there’s only part of the Republican Party that is a home for them, because the Jews have no home in the Democratic Party.”

He said he would still prefer Vance to any Democrat.

RJC board members who spoke to JI otherwise generally declined to speculate about Vance’s potential presidential ambitions or the 2028 race, arguing that it’s too early to consider that election. Vance was the only anticipated 2028 hopeful who attended the conference.

Board member Eric Levine said ahead of the speech that it’s an “affirmatively good thing” that Vance is speaking to the RJC because it shows that the Jewish community and the U.S.-Israel relationship matter to him — particularly when juxtaposed with the increasing hostility toward Israel on the Democratic side.

Levine said that Vance has been helping President Donald Trump advance his Middle East policy — “and there has been no more pro-Israel president in the history of our country than Donald Trump.”

“Having said that, it’s a fool’s errand to just deny reality,” Levine continued, referring to Vance’s “relationship and association with Tucker Carlson,” who he said is indistinguishable from Nick Fuentes, former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), Hasan Piker,  New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed. “So it’s unhelpful to have a relationship with Tucker Carlson, but that’s up for the vice president to navigate.”

He said he didn’t expect a sweeping statement from Vance either in defense or denunciation of Carlson.

Others said they had fewer concerns about the vice president going into the speech, but saw it as an opportunity for the vice president to mend fences with those in the RJC crowd who were concerned.

Schostak said before the event that it was “terrific” and an honor for Vance to appear, and said that it was an opportunity to start a process of strengthening his relationships with members of the RJC and reassuring those who do have concerns.

“This is a process. You’re not going to do everything in 45 minutes, but I think he’s going to show us, honoring us by being here and showing us that he cares about the American Jewish community and its fight against antisemitism and its support and his support for Israel’s right to defend itself and its self-determination,” Schostak said.

He said that the appearance was a “starting point to have those discussions for people that have any doubts or concerns” but he also argued that those concerns are largely based on incomplete comments.

“I think people are hearing things out of context. They’re getting three-hour podcast sections sliced and diced and put into a digital feed,” he said. “And I just think that unless you are hearing in its entirety, it’s hard to draw an honest conclusion.”

Applbaum before the event said he didn’t share the concerns of some other RJC members, but that he hoped the speech would provide an opportunity for Vance to assuage their concerns.

Applbaum emphasized that Vance’s association with Trump and his policies gives him strong credibility and credentials — ”they’re great for Israel, they’re great friends with the Jewish people in Israel.”

Brooks said that the RJC, not Vance’s team, decided to close the event to the press, so that Vance could “talk to the people in the front of the room in a way that wasn’t through the filter of the people on the press risers in the back of the room.”

Brooks and Fleischer downplayed the event’s significance as a stop on the 2028 presidential election trail, emphasizing that the speaker list had been selected with an eye toward the upcoming midterm elections, rather than the next presidential race.

Disclaimer: Yitz Applbaum serves as Jewish Insider’s wine columnist.

LAS VEGAS — The Republican Jewish Coalition’s annual leadership summit kicked off in the blazing heat of Las Vegas on Sunday, with a series of speeches by pro-Israel House members and Senate candidates, including Georgia GOP Senate nominee Mike Collins, North Carolina GOP Senate nominee Michael Whatley and senior GOP lawmakers including Reps. Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Lisa McClain (R-MI). 

The program is set to continue on Monday with video remarks by President Donald Trump, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and in-person speeches by other major Republicans in pro-Israel politics. 

But the most anticipated remarks of the day will be one the public won’t be able to see, a closed-door appearance by Vice President JD Vance at a Monday night VIP gala. It will be Vance’s first address to the group as vice president.

Vance is facing what’s likely to be, at minimum, some skeptics in the crowd, given his relationship with antisemitic commentator Tucker Carlson — attendees at last year’s RJC conference brandished “TUCKER IS NOT MAGA” placards — his involvement in peace talks with Iran and his public criticisms of Israel.

The session will be a major test for the vice president in front of large GOP donors and national party activists ahead of his anticipated 2028 presidential run. Vance’s remarks could help soothe fears among pro-Israel Republicans, or they could further fuel their anxieties and prompt them to consider efforts to oppose his candidacy. 

Three Jewish Republican House members who spoke to Jewish Insider on Sunday agreed that it’s a positive sign for both Vance and the RJC that he’s traveling to Las Vegas to make the address.

Rep. Randy Fine (R-FL), who acknowledged that he’s been critical of the vice president at times, told JI he’s “glad that he’s coming” and “interested to hear what he has to say,” adding that the vice president “has a big hill to climb coming into this room” but he hopes for the sake of the Republican Party that Vance is successful.

“He could make his problem better, he could make his problem worse. I have no idea what he’s going to say, but I do think it’s a good thing that he’s coming,” Fine continued. He said that Vance should address “his relationships with evil people, starting with Tucker Carlson … who’s clearly an insane Jew hater.”

Vance’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Rep. David Kustoff (R-TN) also said he’s “glad that the vice president is here, and I think that that speaks volumes.” He said he expects Vance will address the “strong relationship that the United States has enjoyed with Israel, and that it should continue, and that we need to do what we need to do to ensure that Iran does not get a nuclear weapon.”

Rep. Craig Goldman (R-TX) agreed it’s a good sign that the RJC is welcoming Vance, and predicted that many in the crowd will be surprised by the vice president. “He’s nothing but impressive, he’s smart as a whip and he knows the issues. And so I hope he’s very upfront. … I know he’s going to do a tremendous job, and he’s very direct and very honest. And I know he will be with the RJC as well.”

Vice President JD Vance will appear at the Republican Jewish Coalition’s annual leadership summit in Las Vegas, Nevada, to deliver the keynote address at Monday night’s closed-door gala dinner for VIP attendees.

Vance’s address comes as Jewish and pro-Israel Republicans have expressed concern over his critical tone toward Israel and his association with far-right commentator Tucker Carlson, who has hosted numerous antisemitic guests on his podcast over the last two years. 

The appearance will be Vance’s first at the RJC’s annual summit since entering public office. Vance attended the three-day confab as a guest in 2021 while running in the GOP primary for his former Senate seat, though he did not deliver remarks at that year’s gathering. 

President Donald Trump will be delivering videotaped remarks at the gala dinner on Monday night. Several of the GOP’s top Senate recruits will also be in attendance, including former GOP Rep. Mike Rogers, who’s running against Democrat Abdul El-Sayed in the pivotal Michigan Senate contest. Rep. Mike Collins (R-GA), who’s running against Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA), will also be speaking. 

The summit has evolved somewhat in recent years as rising antisemitism within the GOP caused intra-party fissures. Carlson’s decision to host neo-Nazi influencer Nick Fuentes for a friendly interview on his podcast in the days leading up to last year’s confab prompted the RJC to make fighting right-wing antisemitism a key focus of the summit, which has historically been centered around celebrating broad GOP support for a strong U.S.-Israel relationship and connecting Republican politicians and candidates with potential donors.

Signs saying “Tucker is not MAGA” were featured at last year’s 2025 summit. 

While Vance has condemned antisemitism and argued that it has no place in the GOP, he has said he rejects the notion that Jew hatred is spreading in the conservative movement. He also dismissed the suggestion that the rise in anti-Israel sentiment in the Republican Party was the result of antisemitism.

He said after being heckled over Israel’s war in Gaza at a Turning Point USA event in April that “the humanitarian situation in Gaza was an absolute catastrophe” when Trump began his second term and defended the ceasefire brokered by the president. In a pivot from his tone two years prior, Vance instead criticized the Biden administration for failing to reach a deal to stop the fighting and declined to defend Israel’s conduct in Gaza.

Since the Iran war was launched six months ago, the vice president has led several rounds of direct peace talks with Iran while emphasizing publicly that the administration was looking for a peaceful end to the conflict. He has also largely defended the war in public by noting the efforts to end the conflict.

In June, he issued a scathing public rebuke of Israeli officials who have criticized Trump for approving the memorandum of understanding between the U.S. and Iran, during which he cautioned Israeli skeptics of the deal against “attacking the only powerful ally” it has left and urged them to “wake up and smell the reality of the situation that country is in.”

Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) was named on Tuesday as the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s Middle East Subcommittee, a move that places one of the House’s most outspoken Jewish pro-Israel Democrats in a key leadership role even as many in the party take a more skeptical stance toward the U.S.-Israel relationship.

Moskowitz has frequently worked with his GOP counterpart, subcommittee Chair Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY), on various issues related to Israel and Middle East policy.

“I’m honored to be named Ranking Member of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa,” Moskowitz said in a statement. “At a moment of enormous change across the region, I’ll work to strengthen America’s relationships with Israel and our Gulf allies, expand regional peace, advance American diplomacy, and ensure our foreign policy is grounded in strength, security, and reality. I’m ready to get to work.”

He also thanked Rep. Greg Meeks (D-NY), the Foreign Affairs Committee ranking member, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) “for this important responsibility to help lead Democrats[‘] policy in the Middle East and North Africa on the Foreign Affairs Committee.”

The position has a turbulent history, as it was originally held in the current congressional term by former Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL). Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) took over the spot after Cherfilus-McCormick was indicted on corruption charges, but he holds another subcommittee leadership post and would not have been able to retain the Middle East leadership role in the next Congress.

Sherman and Lawler, while working together on some legislation, also clashed heatedly on multiple occasions during committee hearings.

Two sources familiar with the situation explained that, since Sherman would have been unable to remain in the post next year, he decided to give up the position early to help support Moskowitz in his reelection race — in a South Florida district with a substantial pro-Israel constituency where the leadership position will further bolster Moskowitz’s profile — and to pass off the committee leadership to a pro-Israel successor.

One source noted there are several vocal critics of Israel on the committee who would otherwise be in contention for the post in the next Congress and jockeyed for the role at the outset of this term, but Moskowitz stepping into the role now should help ensure he retains it in the coming year or — should Democrats win the House and Moskowitz win his reelection race — becomes chair of the subcommittee.

In a statement, Meeks congratulated Moskowitz and thanked Sherman for his “stewardship” of the subcommittee over the past several months.

“Congratulations to my friend [Rep. Moskowitz] on his appointment as Ranking Member of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa,” Lawler said in a statement. “As Chair, I look forward to partnering with him to protect America’s interests in the region, combat Iran and its malign influence and terror proxy network, and stand resolute in support of a strong US-Israel relationship.”

Moskowitz is the sixth lawmaker to lead Democrats on the subcommittee since 2022. The post was previously held by former Rep. Dean Phillips (D-MN), who retired at the end of the previous session, and former Reps. Ted Deutch (D-FL) and David Cicilline (D-RI), both of whom resigned in the middle of their terms.

Deutch, who now heads the American Jewish Committee and previously represented Moskowitz’s district, congratulated his “friend and fellow Floridan [Rep. Moskowitz], as he’s set to lead the Democrats on the [House Foreign Affairs Committee’s] subcommittee for the Middle East and North Africa.”

“In a moment marked by instability, violence, and increasing demonization of Israel, Jared’s leadership, communication skills, and moral clarity will help Congress advance meaningful steps toward peace and security throughout the region,” Deutch said.

The announcement has prompted an outpouring of anger from Israel critics, who argued that Moskowitz is out of step with a majority of Democrats on Middle East issues, and described the appointment as a betrayal by Democratic leaders.

Ben Rhodes, a senior Obama administration aide, called the appointment a “giant f*** you from Democratic leadership to Democratic voters.” He added, “Dems are counting on people not noticing how they approach governing. Appointments on HFAC are a signal of what the party cares about and the disregard for war crimes and voter concerns could not be clearer.”

Rhodes and other critics asserted that the appointment shows that senior Democrats including Meeks don’t oppose the Iran war or have sought to avoid forcing the administration to account for it. Though Moskowitz initially said he opposed efforts to pass a war powers resolution to halt the war, he has voted in favor of every Iran war powers resolution that has come to the floor.

Sherman and Cherfilus-McCormick, his predecessors, also held largely positions on Middle East policy issues that were similar to Moskowitz.

Some critics also asserted that the position would allow Moskowitz to determine what Middle East-related legislation makes it to the House floor; his primary authority would be in determining what hearings the subcommittee holds and what witnesses are called to appear.

Some on the far-left bizarrely linked a recent meeting between Jeffries and Jared Kushner, an unofficial advisor to the administration, to Moskowitz’s appointment.

Several leading Jewish and pro-Israel organizations condemned actor Mark Ruffalo for using what they deemed antisemitic rhetoric in his social media commentary targeting the Ellison family amid the pending merger of Paramount with Warner Bros. Discovery. 

Ruffalo posted an Instagram story last week featuring footage of Safra Catz, the executive vice chair of Oracle and a Paramount board member, discussing the company’s engagement in Israel following the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas terrorist attacks. In the post, Ruffalo called Larry Ellison, Oracle’s co-founder and executive chairman, a “classic oligarch,” accusing him and his son, Paramount Skydance chairman and CEO David Ellison, of “powering some of the most destructive and inhuman forces in the world.”

Pointing to Catz, who is Israeli American, Ruffalo wrote that she “revels in what we now have come to see as a genocide, which was built on an apartheid system of oppression powered by Oracle.” 

Paramount condemned Ruffalo on Friday, saying it was “troubled when antisemitic tropes are invoked in purported service of a business dispute. Words like ‘genocide’ and ‘apartheid,’ applied to a corporate transaction, aren’t just wrong — they’re a bridge too far, and they cheapen the very real suffering those words are meant to describe. This doesn’t deserve a response in kind — and to be clear, we don’t tolerate prejudice of any kind, against anyone.”

The studio said Ruffalo’s remarks “expose the true motive of some of those who have acted against the deal” and urged those involved to “lower the temperature, not raise it.”

The “Avengers” star fired back on Paramount’s accusations of antisemitism, calling it “appalling and fundamentally dishonest,” and stating that “everything I know about acting, activism, and humanism has been profoundly shaped by the Jewish friends, colleagues, and loved ones.” 

On Monday, Rabbi Noah Farkas, president and CEO of Jewish Federation Los Angeles — which serves the epicenter of the entertainment industry — said Ruffalo’s “unhinged rant, which combined Jewish wealth, media control, secret technology and sinister global power, is not legitimate criticism. It draws on recognizable antisemitic tropes with a long and dangerous history.” 

Farkas called on California Attorney General Rob Bonta — who told Ruffalo in February “Mark, I hear you,” regarding earlier criticism of the deal and said the state has a “special interest in protecting competition” — to clarify his comments. On Sunday night, Bonta canceled planned settlement talks with Paramount after accusing the company of acting in bad faith by misrepresenting details from an earlier meeting. 

“We agree that California has a special obligation to protect Hollywood, but not only from anticompetitive conduct. It must also protect the people who power this industry from antisemitism and every form of hate,” Farkas said. 

“Bonta has done the right thing on some issues, but his record with Jewish Californians remains mixed. In some important moments, he has failed to stand up with the clarity and urgency our community deserved. This is why it is so important that Bonta clarify what ‘Mark, I hear you’ means. Hearing legitimate antitrust concerns cannot mean excusing rhetoric that invokes age-old tropes about Jewish wealth, media control and sinister power.” 

Several other Jewish leaders condemned Ruffalo over the weekend, stating that his comments repeat old antisemitic tropes and could put Jewish people in danger. Since the Oct. 7 attacks and ensuing war in Gaza, Ruffalo, a four-time Oscar nominated actor, has frequently pushed accusations of Israeli-led “genocide,” “apartheid” and “famine” to his millions of followers. 

“Oppose the Paramount merger on the merits, find arguments grounded in facts, and draw on what you know about the industry without engaging in antisemitic rhetoric,” Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of the Anti-Defamation League, wrote on X. 

“Introducing the Jewish state out of the blue when it’s entirely unrelated, making baseless claims about Israel, and then trying to avoid accountability by essentially claiming that ‘some of my best friends are Jewish’ is gaslighting 101,” Greenblatt wrote, asserting that Ruffalo’s words “continue to put Jewish communities around the world at risk while antisemitic incidents are far too common.”

Simon Wiesenthal Center CEO Jim Berk said, “Invoking Israel in an issue where it is completely irrelevant is a textbook case of obsession and demonization.” 

Ari Ingel, executive director of Creative Community for Peace, said Ruffalo’s statements “echo some of the oldest antisemitic conspiracy theories in history, depicting Jews as a wealthy and sinister elite who accumulate control over media, money and power, then use that control against society.”

CCFP, an organization that works to counter anti-Israel sentiment in the entertainment industry, called for Hollywood to boycott Ruffalo until he retracts the remarks and apologizes. 

Two progressive groups took a different approach, defending Ruffalo by stating that his criticism of a corporation and the Israeli government is not antisemitic.

“What is antisemitism? Blaming Jewish people for the actions of the Israeli government. Hatred or discrimination directed at people because they are Jewish,” the Israel advocacy group J Street wrote Monday on X. “What isn’t? Criticism of a corporation’s monopolistic actions and investments. Criticism of Israel’s government. We cheapen the fight against antisemitism when we blur that distinction.” 

The Nexus Project wrote Sunday on X that claiming Ruffalo is antisemitic is “misguided.”

“He expressed his opinion about a corporation’s actions and investments, not an executive’s religion,” the group said. “Whether you agree with him or not, he did not cross the line into antisemitic speech. The same is true of his longstanding opposition to Israel’s actions in Gaza.”

Ruffalo was among more than 20 Hollywood actors known for their roles in Marvel films who on Friday reportedly signed a petition calling for the release of Marwan Barghouti, an imprisoned Palestinian terrorist serving five life sentences in Israel, according to an Instagram post published by the group.

The debate over AIPAC’s involvement in the high-stakes Michigan Senate race is drawing renewed attention after an Axios report outlined a request from allies of former Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) for the pro-Israel group’s super PAC to lay low for the general election. The Rogers campaign advisors suggested instead that the group transfer money for the race to a separate pro-Rogers entity so as not to make its outside spending a major issue in the contest. 

The episode has touched a lot of raw nerves in both the pro-Israel world and the Republican political landscape. Rogers, a longtime supporter of the U.S.-Israel relationship, is highlighting his relationships with Michigan’s Jewish community, and has made attacking Democratic nominee Abdul El-Sayed’s anti-Israel virulence and his relationship with antisemitic figures like Hasan Piker a central element of his campaign message. 

AIPAC’s super PAC, United Democracy Project, spent about $32 million in the Democratic primary to try to defeat El-Sayed, and there’s little doubt its money — in the absence of any moderate group willing to spend similar resources to stop a far-left candidate like El-Sayed from winning  — made the race more competitive than it otherwise would have been. But it also gave El-Sayed a talking point in attacking outside money in the race that diluted the impact of the aggressive advertising campaign, especially at a time when support for Israel itself is diminishing within the Democratic Party. 

Both the Rogers campaign and AIPAC see El-Sayed as uniquely vulnerable, with polls showing the race statistically tied despite the overall favorable environment for Democrats in the swing state. But beyond focusing on winning the race, both sides have slightly different tactical imperatives: AIPAC, after coming close to defeating El-Sayed in the primary, wants credit for helping finish the job in the general election. Rogers, meanwhile, is trying to turn the tables on El-Sayed, using his endless primary campaign attacks on Israel as a way to underscore he’s more obsessed about the Middle East than the issues critical to Michigan voters. 

On one hand, support for Israel is decidedly higher among the general electorate than it was among primary voters — and likely is a winning issue for Rogers, especially given El-Sayed’s radicalism on the subject. But populist concerns about foreign aid and engagement abroad still resonate across party lines, with 44% of Michigan voters in a recent Fox News survey saying they favor continued military aid to Israel, while 55% oppose such aid. 

The Rogers campaign believes that making the race about Middle East policy would be shortsighted, especially given that El-Sayed’s record and background makes him vulnerable to the charge that he’s the candidate more consumed with international affairs than improving the lives of Michiganders.

Furthermore, unlike in the Democratic primary, there will be no shortage of money available for the Rogers campaign and its allies in the general election. Rogers has been a solid fundraiser, and the deep pockets of both the Senate Leadership Fund GOP super PAC and a separate pro-Rogers super PAC should offer more than enough resources to run a full-fledged campaign. Rogers’ campaign would prefer donations get directed — and spent — under the Republican Party umbrella. 

There’s a reason AIPAC’s super PAC hardly ever spends in general elections — most competitive races are already saturated with cash, so its involvement (or that of any outside nonpartisan super PAC) wouldn’t make much of a difference anyway. 

AIPAC’s concerns are understandable as well, and I have heard them echoed by several senior GOP strategists involved with the race. El-Sayed’s ties to extremists and inability to forthrightly condemn antisemitism in his home state is a major reason why he’s vulnerable in the first place. Diluting or downplaying that argument takes one of the campaign’s strongest angles off the table. 

It’s one thing to debate about whether advertisements would be best aired under the GOP banner or the UDP banner. It’s another issue to be concerned that the Rogers’ campaign, in its desire to universalize the race, isn’t taking full advantage of winning over the many Democratic-friendly Jewish voters who view El-Sayed’s record as intolerable. Asking AIPAC’s chair to stand down its ad campaign, as reported in the Axios story, might have been a tactical dispute, but it risks coming across as downplaying the importance of the pro-Israel and Jewish communities in the state.

Ultimately, the goals of the two sides are the same: winning the race. If the differences between the Rogers’ campaign and AIPAC are tactical, that’s understandable in a lengthy campaign. But if it’s a dispute about who gets credit for taking down El-Sayed, the argument seems a bit frivolous when the stakes in the race are so high.

Stefany Shaheen, the daughter of Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and a candidate for New Hampshire’s 1st Congressional District, launched a TV ad this week hitting her opponent for receiving  support from pro-Israel donors.

The ad claims Maura Sullivan, a military veteran, has taken $300,000 in donations “bundled from AIPAC donors,” in addition to support from Jeff Bezos and a contractor for Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The attacks come even as Sullivan has shifted left on Israel policy issues during the campaign.

“Let’s show them New Hampshire’s not for sale,” the ad declares.

The donations referenced in the ad appear to be from individual donors who have previously contributed to AIPAC, referencing a story in the New Hampshire Union Leader. Despite the claims, AIPAC itself has made no endorsement and has not been directly involved in the race — although the grassroots pro-Israel group NORPAC did hold a fundraiser for Sullivan earlier this year.

“Maura has not received any money from AIPAC and would not accept its endorsement if offered,” Emmett Avery, a spokesperson for Sullivan, told HuffPost. Avery also said that Sullivan wants to see a “full reevaluation of the U.S.-Israel security relationship” and that the U.S. can no longer provide a “blank check for offensive weapons.”

Though Sullivan has outraised Shaheen $3.3 million to $2.2 million, limited public polling of the race had put Shaheen ahead until this week. The most recent poll, from St. Anselm College conducted, had the two at a statistical tie, with Sullivan at 26% and Shaheen at 24%. The survey suggests Sullivan is gaining ground — the same poll put Shaheen seven points ahead, 22-15%, in late June, with nearly 50% of voters remained undecided.

The stance expressed by Sullivan’s spokesperson is a shift from her position in an interview with Jewish Insider in 2025, when Sullivan said she would not support efforts to cut off U.S. aid to Israel, and emphasized the importance of the U.S.-Israel relationship even as she criticized the humanitarian situation in Gaza.

Shaheen has said she would have supported an amendment led by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) to cut off $3.3 billion in U.S. aid to Israel in 2027 and her campaign has repeatedly hit Sullivan over alleged ties to AIPAC.

Emma Greenberg, a spokesperson for Shaheen’s campaign, accused Sullivan of being “beholden” to AIPAC and said that Shaeen “supported the Massie amendment to stop sending endless weapons to Netanyahu because she knows change is critical.”

Florida Democrats and Republicans fended off extreme challengers against pro-Israel incumbents in Tuesday night’s primaries, indicating that the state’s older, moderate and notably Jewish electorate was uniquely inhospitable towards the anti-Israel left and the antisemitic right.

Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) handily defeated socialist challenger Oliver Larkin by nearly a 2-to-1 margin (64-36%), while Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) easily prevailed in a newly drawn district against a crowded field of challengers. Elijah Manley — the candidate running against Wasserman Schultz on the Democratic Socialists of America, anti-Israel platform — lagged in third place, with just 13% of the vote.

Moskowitz will still be facing a competitive general election in a district that President Donald Trump carried. Former Boca Raton Mayor Scott Singer won the Republican nomination and, like Moskowitz, is an outspoken supporter of the U.S.-Israel relationship.

On the Republican side, Rep. Randy Fine (R-FL) dominated over a neo-Nazi podcaster who made hatred of Jews the central message of his campaign. Fine won renomination with 57% of the vote, while the antisemitic Dan Bilzerian tallied 17% of the GOP vote. And in the governor’s race, James Fishback, who used racist and antisemitic messages as part of his campaign, lagged well behind the Trump-endorsed winner, Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL), finishing in third place with just 10% of the vote.

Donalds will face former Rep. David Jolly (who served as a Republican in Congress before switching to the Democratic Party) in the general election.

In another victory for the GOP mainstream, former TV anchor Ryan Elijah ousted scandal-plagued (and also Trump-endorsed) Rep. Cory Mills (R-FL), who has been dogged by a series of investigations related to alleged domestic violence and harassment, financial misconduct, sexual misconduct, stolen valor and alleged use of his office for his own financial gain.

But the big surprise of the night came in the Democratic primary to determine a Democratic nominee against appointed Sen. Ashley Moody (R-FL), who was tapped to replace Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Alex Vindman, the star witness in the first impeachment hearing against Trump, lost badly to DSA-backed challenger Angie Nixon despite being supported by national party leaders.

Nixon, a Florida state legislator and community organizer, holds staunchly anti-Israel views, having repeatedly called Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza a “genocide” and campaigning with Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) in a preelection rally last weekend.

The outcome means that Moody will be heavily favored to win election in November, taking away any Democratic outside hopes of winning the seat with a more mainstream standard-bearer.

Rep. Randy Fine’s (R-FL) primary opponent, influencer Dan Bilzerian, is pushing blatantly antisemitic and pro-Adolf Hitler messaging in the closing days of Florida’s primary season.

Bilzerian has made no secret of the openly antisemitic tenor of his campaign, having said from the outset that he is challenging Fine because he is Jewish and pushing antisemitic conspiracy theories about Fine, the Jewish community and Israel.

But messaging and advertising from Bilzerian’s campaign has gained increased attention in the final days of the race, after Bilzerian posted a shocking video that leans into a series of blatant antisemitic tropes and overtones.

The two-and-a-half minute AI-generated video repeatedly calls Fine a “fat Jew” and accuses him of serving Israel over the United States. It describes Fine a “Jewish [supremacist]” and “Satan’s creepy little [minion]” over imagery of Fine hugging a bag of money.

It also calls Fine a “satanic whore,” over footage of horns growing out of his forehead, and refers to him as “Shylock.”

Over footage of Hitler, the video asks, “Should we revisit that Austrian painter’s opinions?”

It also suggests that Fine rapes children and calls for him to be tarred, feathered and imprisoned.

“Celebrating Hitler. Having horns grow out of the heads of Jews. Showing me violently assaulted,” Fine said in response to the video. “If this appeals to you, I don’t want your vote.   We have a choice on Tuesday, to embrace the kind of Nazism that led to the Holocaust or to repudiate this filth and reaffirm American values and character. Let’s send a resounding message on Tuesday.”

Bilzerian posted another AI video accusing Fine of staging an incident last week in which an unknown individual spray-painted a swastika on a Fine campaign sign outside of an early voting site.

Several prominent Republicans joined Fine in condemning the pro-Hitler Bilzerian ad.

“This brazen Nazi — who’s urging us to ‘revisit’ the opinions of Hitler— revels in Jew hate & defends Sharia law,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) said on X. “This evil has no place in the Republican Party.”

Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) said that Bilzerian is “disgusting” and that “every single Republican needs to condemn this evil, and every single news outlet needs to expose how bad and antisemitic he is.”

U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee called Bilzerian’s messaging “possibly the most disgusting … I’ve seen” and said he had “taken Jew-hate to a new low.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) called the attacks “vile” and “disgusting” and said that all leaders on both sides should reject them.

“Antisemitism and outward hatred of Jewish communities have no place in our politics or in America, and we will continue to call them out wherever they arise,” Johnson said. “On Tuesday, voters will reject the revolting rhetoric, and I am proud to endorse [Fine] as he works to continue delivering results for every family in [Florida’s 6th Congressional District].”

Rep. Mike Lawler (R-FL) said the video is “vile and has zero place in our politics, let alone the Republican Party.”

Several Democrats also denounced the video.

“The hateful campaign being run by Daniel Bilzerian in Florida is blatantly antisemitic and shocks the conscience,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) said. “People of goodwill regardless of political affiliation must reject his vile attacks on the Jewish community. This cannot and will not stand.”

A group of Jewish House Democrats — Reps. Jake Auchincloss (D-MA), Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR), Lois Frankel (D-FL), Laura Friedman (D-CA), Dan Goldman (D-NY), Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), Greg Landsman (D-OH), Mike Levin (D-CA), Seth Magaziner (D-RI), Jamie Raskin (D-MD), Brad Schnieder (D-IL), Kim Schrier (D-WA), Brad Sherman (D-CA), Eugene Vindman (D-VA) and Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) — also condemned the attacks on Fine.

“We don’t agree with Randy Fine on much, if anything, and have condemned his racist, islamophobic statements,” the Democrats said. “But the grotesque, antisemitic campaign video posted by Republican Daniel Bilzerian has no place in America. We unequivocally condemn Bilzerian and his hateful antisemitic attacks.”

The Democrats urged social media platforms to take down the video and other antisemitic posts by Bilzeria, and called on the National Republican Congressional Committee and all Republicans to condemn and disavow Bilzerian and his backers.

Landsman also individually called out the post.

“This is a candidate for Congress, on the ballot in Florida on Tuesday. It’s blatant antisemitism, and could lead to violence against Jews,” Landsman said. “Unless he did this on his own, there is an AI company that created this. Which one? Plus, the social media platforms that don’t just allow this, but most likely boost it to millions. Everyone should be condemning this.”

Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC), facing a runoff special election to succeed the late Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), has walked a fine line on supporting Israel during his nearly decade in Congress — maintaining strong rhetorical support for the Jewish state while voting against major aid packages and some antisemitism legislation.

Sources with Norman’s campaign and with the campaign of his opponent, Sen. Darline Graham (R-SC), told Jewish Insider that both camps are seeking the pro-Israel vote in the Aug. 25 runoff. Still, the two candidates have taken different approaches to the issue, which are now under the microscope as the race enters its final leg. 

A member of the right-wing House Freedom Caucus, Norman has developed a reputation on Capitol Hill as a committed fiscal hawk known for frequently opposing must-pass items like the debt ceiling increase or government spending packages because they did not address the national debt or include provisions to offset the spending. 

Norman has generally maintained a pro-Israel record since being elected to Congress in 2017. In the wake of Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks on Israel, Norman signed on to several resolutions and letters condemning the attacks and the subsequent anti-Israel protests on university campuses nationwide. 

But Norman also voted against two Israel aid packages in 2024 — he opposed the first bill in February for not containing offsets to cover the financial costs and another bill in April for being tied to Ukraine assistance, which he opposes. 

Norman defended both votes, arguing that neither were indicative of his commitment to the Jewish state and pointing to his support for the Israel aid package that the House passed in November 2023, which included offsets. (That bill stalled in the Senate.)

“There’s NO DISCUSSION about any spending reductions to pay for any of this, so we’re just supposed to borrow more and more money to pay for this aid?” Norman wrote in a blog post of his opposition to the Israel aid package without offsets. “It’s borderline criminal what we’re doing, and it’s sad that the United States is no longer able to help a critical ally because of our own abhorrent financial recklessness.”

Norman repeatedly criticized then-President Joe Biden for his waning support for Israel as the 2024 presidential election drew near, and urged the Trump administration to stand with the Jewish state in its campaign to eliminate Hamas from Gaza.

Norman called the White House’s Gaza peace plan, announced in October, “a step in the right direction and long overdue.” 

“We must continue to stand with Israel, ensure Hamas is fully dismantled, and never forget who the terrorists are in this conflict. This is a win for peace, for strength, and for our greatest ally in the Middle East,” he said.

He voted against the long-stalled Antisemitism Awareness Act (AAA) when it passed the House in May of 2024 and voiced his opposition to any new legislation on the issue of antisemitism the following spring. “We shouldn’t do anything further with antisemitism. I don’t know how you define it. It’s subjective,” Norman told Punchbowl News. 

While Norman was one of just five lawmakers to vote against the Never Again Education Act — a bill to further Holocaust-related programming and educational materials in middle and high schools — when it was passed by the House in 2020, he supported legislation in 2023 reauthorizing the law and extending the program through 2030. 

Representatives for Norman did not respond to JI’s request for comment on his opposition to those bills.

During the GOP debate in the special election primary, Norman pointed to his record of calling out the Iranian regime as a threat to the U.S. The House lawmaker praised the president’s decision to strike Iran, though he argued that the ongoing war “has gone on longer” than expected and said he would not vote to support U.S. troops on the ground.

“There are military generals now that are saying that if we’re going to really eliminate them, they’re gonna have to put boots on the ground. I don’t think the country wants that right now,” he said. “[Trump] will eventually, sooner rather than later, use whatever power from the air to take them out, and I think that’s the right course to take.” 

Norman has been endorsed in the runoff by Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL), a pro-Israel champion in Congress. Graham, meanwhile, has the support of Trump and the Republican Jewish Coalition. Rep. Russell Fry (R-SC), who came in third in the special primary election, endorsed Graham in the runoff on Friday. 

Graham’s tenure in public office only began in mid-July, when her late brother’s sudden passing led to her appointment to serve out the rest of his term. The incumbent senator has begun cosponsoring legislation, including on supporting Israel and targeting Iran, in recent weeks in a continuation of her brother’s policy on the issues. 

Graham announced on Thursday that she was cosponsoring an additional four bills, all of which “strengthen the U.S.-Israel partnership, target the Iranian regime and confront antisemitism,” according to a readout from her office. 

All four bills are also bipartisan and bicameral: the U.S.-Israel FUTURES Act, establishing a cooperative initiative focused on defense technology R&D; the Iran Human Rights, Internet Freedom, and Accountability Act, aimed at disrupting the finances of the Iranian regime and its allies and expand internet access in Iran; the Enhanced Iran Sanctions Act, a bill targeting Iran’s oil exports to China and other countries; and the Jewish American Security Act, a proposal to address antisemitism across multiple sectors of American society being championed by the mainstream Jewish community. 

“I truly believe we have a moral and religious duty to stand with the Jewish people and the nation of Israel to guard against those who seek to destroy them,” Darline Graham told JI in a statement. “In dangerous times, it is crucial we strengthen ties with a friend and ally like Israel, not walk away from them.”

At the primary debate, Graham also voiced strong support for the Iran war. 

“I completely agree with President Trump on standing with Israel. They are an extremely important ally of the United States,” Graham said. “We cannot allow terrorists to build nuclear missiles because they’re going to want to kill Americans, that is just the sad truth. If they build the nuclear missiles, their goal is to come here and kill us, so the more we can fight them over there and prevent it over there, the better for the United States. I am all for peace through strength.”

Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI) dismissed the notion on Wednesday that campaign spending in her favor by AIPAC’s super PAC  backfired in her failed bid for U.S. Senate, and defended the pro-Israel group as Jewish Americans participating in the democratic process.

Stevens, who lost the Michigan Democratic Senate primary to Abdul El-Sayed last week, has faced scrutiny from progressive Democrats over her support for Israel and the role of AIPAC in supporting her campaign. Following her primary loss, Stevens endorsed El-Sayed, who is now facing former Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) in the November general election.

Asked by CNN’s Pamela Brown whether AIPAC’s involvement ultimately hurt her campaign, Stevens remained firm.

“No, I don’t,” Stevens said. “I mean, I think that there [were] a lot of people talking about it, and they didn’t love it because maybe they don’t understand what the group is. AIPAC is a group of six million Jewish Americans, a lot of Jewish moms whose kiddos spend time in Israel.” 

“They’re scared, just like a lot of people are scared, for a variety of different reasons here in America,” she continued. “They’re really good Americans who just care about democracy and freedom.”

Stevens said she remains “proud of the campaign I have run,” as well as the “friendships and relationships” she maintains within AIPAC, asserting that the pro-Israel lobbying group, “just like some of the other large groups, is going to continue to exist.”

“Obviously, I don’t work for the organization, so in terms of how they pitch themselves and sell themselves, that — I will leave that to them,” Stevens said, noting that “a lot of people are deeply frustrated that [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu has failed to give us peace.”

The congresswoman emphasized, however, that AIPAC was not the only outside entity involved in the primary, noting that “a bunch of Democratic money got involved, too” and that “Abdul also had super PACs and outside monies and all that going on.”

Addressing whether Jewish voters might still harbor concerns over El-Sayed, despite her decision to rally behind him, Stevens acknowledged that “there’s going to be a private and personal decision made by Michigan’s Jewish community.”

“I deeply respect and cherish the relationship that I have with Michigan’s Jewish population. I am a Zionist Democrat. I’m saying that live on CNN. I’m standing by the Jewish community,” Stevens said.

However, Stevens emphasized that Michiganders ultimately “don’t want to see this seat go to a Republican.”

“He’s [El-Sayed] going to do a ton more for healthcare than Mike Rogers ever will. He will stand up for women’s health as well,” Stevens. “And he has rejected socialism, which I appreciate.”

Rep. Ed Case (D-HI), a moderate pro-Israel Democrat in Hawaii who was first elected to the House in 2002, has not drawn a serious primary threat in several years.

Now, as he prepares to defend his seat in a primary on Saturday that has largely flown under the radar, some Democrats are warning that Case, 73, could be at risk of losing to a younger challenger capitalizing on a national political environment that has proven unfavorable to Democratic incumbents amid broader calls for generational change from the party’s activist base.

“It’s one of those sleeper races where there’s definitely an upset brewing,” said a Democratic operative who worked on the Case campaign until a few months ago, speaking on condition of anonymity to avoid professional reprisals. “Ed is running a poor race,” the former staffer told Jewish Insider, echoing other observers who described a sluggish approach in which Case has largely foregone campaign events and avoided debates with his opposition.

While the contest has not centered around Israel or AIPAC, which has officially endorsed Case but is not involved in the race, it reflects a trend seen in several recent Democratic primaries, where well-established pro-Israel incumbents were unseated by increasingly competitive challenges from an emboldened far left.

Jarrett Keohokalole, a 42-year-old progressive state senator, has instead argued that his opponent is not meeting “the urgency of the moment,” to which Case has countered that “seniority matters” in Congress — where he sits on the powerful House Appropriations Committee.

Keohokalole’s message is resonating, experts in the state and recent polling suggest, particularly after a separate challenger dropped out of the race in May, effectively narrowing the contest to what is viewed as a one-on-one matchup in Hawaii’s safely Democratic 1st District, anchored by the state capital of Honolulu on Oahu.

One Democratic strategist in Honolulu who is not involved in the primary told JI that Keohokalole “is making this closer than” Case “would like to see” in the final stretch of the race. “There’s really not much of any excitement around him,” he said of the veteran lawmaker. 

“I think it’s going to be closer than anyone would have predicted back in the beginning and may come down to a single-digit difference,” another Honolulu strategist who is not working in the primary told JI. 

“Jarrett has closed the gap” and run a “very effective campaign,” the strategist added, noting that Case had stepped up his digital advertising and texting, “which he hasn’t ever done before.”

Polling from Keohokalole’s campaign conducted in early July and obtained by JI had Case leading by eight points, 33-25%, with 42% undecided. A more recent internal tracking poll from July 24 showed Keohokalole leading Case by seven points. 

Martin Hamburger, a veteran Democratic ad maker who is serving as a media consultant to Keohokalole, said he was feeling optimistic. “Our first poll showed us that there was a big name ID gap, but Case wasn’t breaking 50 percent,” he told JI, noting that he cut an introductory ad with a jingle about how to pronounce Keohokalole’s name based on a tune preschoolers in Hawaii learn.

“I think we have a very, very good shot, as good a shot as all the work I’ve done in Hawaii,” Hamburger told JI this week. “There are a lot of trade winds that are blowing in a ‘throw the bums out’ sort of mood.”

Hamburger’s firm has also been working for Future Progress, a new super PAC that recently entered the primary to boost Keohokalole and whose donors have yet to be disclosed. But he said he was not personally involved in the effort and that his firm had instituted a firewall between the campaign and the super PAC.

In contrast with other races where Middle East policy had featured prominently, “Israel has barely come up at all,” Hamburger told JI. He described Keohokalole as more closely aligned with J Street, the progressive Israel advocacy organization. Hamburger, who called himself pro-Israel and an AIPAC supporter, said that he wrote Keohokalole’s Israel position paper but was unable to share the final draft with JI.

Keohokalole, backed by groups critical of Israel such as Our Revolution and Peace Action, has appeared to avoid more divisive rhetoric on Israel used by the far left, including claims of genocide. But he has still positioned himself well to the left of Case on Middle East policy, recently confirming he would have voted in favor of an amendment to end aid to Israel that drew support from more than 100 House Democrats. Case opposed the measure.

To the extent Middle East policy has emerged as a salient issue in the primary, it has come in relation to the Iran war and rising gas prices that have provoked broader debates about affordability.

“I haven’t read or heard Ed Case say ‘I opposed the war in Iran and we need to stop the fighting now,’” Keohokalole said recently. “I haven’t heard him say, ‘Not one more taxpayer dollar’ toward extending this conflict. It needs to end now.”

He has also criticized Case for taking contributions from AIPAC and defense contractors, but the group has not been a major source of attention in the race, even as it has grown increasingly toxic in other Democratic primaries. Keohokalole has not actively sought to draw attention to Israel during the race, observers say.

A spokesperson for AIPAC declined to comment on the primary. 

While experts say that Case is likely vulnerable, a low-turnout election combined with Keohokalole’s relative lack of name ID remain as obstacles in a state where it is notoriously difficult to unseat incumbents.

John Hart, a professor of communications at Hawaii Pacific University, called speculation that Case is in trouble “wishful thinking,” while also acknowledging that “the progressive end of the party and some of the Hawaii party leadership” is “not happy with some of his votes.”

“However, it is incredibly difficult if not impossible to take out an incumbent Democrat at the federal level in this state,” Hart told JI, adding that Case “simply hasn’t made the major kind of mistake either in his personal, financial or policy choices that would result in this stunning of an upset.”

Neither campaign returned requests for comment from JI.

Whatever the outcome, the former Case campaign staffer said the race more broadly demonstrates how progressive challengers to AIPAC-backed incumbents can mount an opposition without fixating on Israel.

“While Israel is obviously playing a large factor nationally,” the former campaign staffer told JI this week, the Hawaii contest “shows there is a pathway for progressives to win without making the whole race about AIPAC.”

Rumors of the demise of the mainstream, pro-Israel wing of the Democratic Party turned out to be somewhat exaggerated: The Michigan Senate race between Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI) and Abdul El-Sayed is a lot closer than polls suggested, while Rep. Wesley Bell (D-MO) romped to victory over his anti-Israel opponent, with the help of pro-Israel, Jewish supporters.

Bell’s sweeping 22-point victory in a rematch over former Rep. Cori Bush (D-MO) was an early election night highlight for Jewish and pro-Israel groups, which poured money and organizing efforts into ensuring the virulently anti-Israel Bush didn’t get a chance to return to Congress. AIPAC’s super PAC spent over $3 million on ads attacking Bush as corrupt and extreme, resources which likely played a key role in Bell’s landslide margin. 

There were some other silver linings for the moderate side of the Democratic Party on Tuesday night: Michigan state Sen. Jeremy Moss won comfortably to succeed Stevens despite facing attacks over his pro-Israel record from his opponents. And Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), the moderate ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee who faced harassment and threats over his longstanding pro-Israel record, won a clear majority of the vote against far-left challengers in Washington state’s all-party primary.

But there were plenty of warning signs about the changing ideological direction of the Democratic Party, as we’ve previously seen in deep-blue congressional districts across the country. Despite Stevens’ closer-than-expected showing, she still trails El-Sayed even after winning endorsements from top Democratic officials (including Gov. Gretchen Whitmer) and being the beneficiary of tens of millions in outside spending led by AIPAC’s ad blitz.

Meanwhile, Rep. Shri Thanedar (D-MI), seen as a reliable pro-Israel ally, is trailing against DSA-aligned challenger state Rep. Donavan McKinney, who ran on an anti-Israel platform. 

And in the battleground Michigan 7th District, left-wing activist William Lawrence prevailed with a plurality of the vote, largely because of a split between his two moderate challengers. Running in a district President Donald Trump carried in 2024, Lawrence will find his ideological baggage a major vulnerability as he tries to unseat freshman Rep. Tom Barrett (R-MI). 

The results paint a picture of a Democratic Party deeply divided, with older voters, Black voters and Jewish voters forming the centrist coalition, which is facing an insurgency from the left made up of younger voters, white progressives and Arab Americans.

What should be most concerning for the Jewish community is that virulently anti-Israel candidates are making inroads in the affluent, college-educated suburbs — areas where such views would have been politically toxic not long ago. 

Stevens only narrowly won her home base of suburban Oakland County — the center of the state’s Jewish community — and lost badly in affluent Kent County, spanning the city of Grand Rapids. It underscores the point that the base of the DSA movement is among fairly well-off white voters. 

But on the other side, there are plenty of red flags for El-Sayed after his underwhelming primary performance. El-Sayed struggled with Black voters, who make up the core of the party’s voting base. He got romped in the state’s rural counties. And El-Sayed’s overconfidence and the campaign’s grandiose expectations were undercut by the race’s close margin, and he didn’t get to enjoy a celebratory moment in the media spotlight on Election Night.

For AIPAC, which poured over $30 million into the Michigan Senate race, this is merely the first round of a lengthy battle against El-Sayed. If El-Sayed ends up prevailing, expect the pro-Israel advocacy group to remain actively engaged in the race as attention pivots to a general election with former Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) as the GOP nominee.

Harmeet Dhillon, the assistant attorney general for civil rights, urged pro-Israel college students to distinguish between protected speech and actionable discriminatory conduct — “people literally interfering with your ability to get an education” — when facing antisemitism on campus. 

“[With] a lot of young people these days, there’s kind of a snowflake culture with ‘I feel unsafe.’ I feel unsafe everyday when I go to work and get a mean email from a colleague. Life is full of challenges,” Dhillon said on Tuesday at the conclusion of the Israel on Campus Coalition’s National Leadership Summit in Washington. 

“Someone wearing a keffiyeh or shouting ‘from the river to the sea,’ it’s protected by the First Amendment,” Dhillon said. “Holding a red triangle over a student’s head in a mob setting and saying ‘Jews not welcome’ is much closer to not protected speech.” 

“You have to sort out people being mean or rude to you versus people literally interfering with your ability to get an education,” she said. 

Dhillon, who has led the Trump administration’s ongoing legal battles with a number of universities over their alleged failures to address antisemitism, added that the next hurdle will be fighting anti-Israel rhetoric from left-wing politicians.

“One of the new challenges, which I never would have predicted, is political leaders like [New York City Mayor] Zohran Mamdani or candidates on the ballot today in Michigan whose rhetoric isn’t something you would have seen five or 10 years ago,” said Dhillon. “The normalization of violent rhetoric about an entire population of people of a national origin and religion is something I didn’t see growing up in this country, and I grew up in the Deep South.”   

“I have neighbors in my community in Sea Ranch, Calif., who are professors at UC Davis and I see them on television lock hands and block the Jewish students from going to campus,” she said. “And I see them at the grocery store. Am I supposed to treat them normally? They don’t think I should be treated normally. So these are some of the challenges we face in today’s society.” 

It is unclear what incident Dhillon was referring to, though a similar incident did occur in April 2024 on UCLA’s campus, at which time students participating in an anti-Israel encampment moved in groups and shouted “human chain” in order to block students from moving through campus, according to DOJ findings.

As close to 1,000 pro-Israel students from around the country gather in the nation’s capital for the Israel on Campus Coalition’s annual National Leadership Summit, they’ll do so against a backdrop of seemingly quieter campus antisemitism than in the years immediately following the Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attacks in Israel. But students are still seeking tools to navigate a campus climate they’ve come to see as permanently changed. 

“My main concern [on campus today] is every time I sit down with a classmate I have to wonder whether the person next to me was at the [anti-Israel] encampment,” Noah Lederman, an incoming senior at Columbia University majoring in philosophy and Jewish ethics, told Jewish Insider. In February 2024, Lederman said he was shoved and pinned against a wall by an anti-Israel protester as he donned a shirt with an Israeli flag on it during a pro-Israel demonstration right outside of the Morningside Heights campus.  

More than two years later, Lederman still feels wary on campus. “Did the person sitting next to me siege Hamilton Hall?” he said, referring to the April 2024 occupation of the academic building at Columbia by anti-Israel student demonstrators, who barricaded the doors. “Because those students have yet to receive consequences or be identified because they wore masks to cover their faces. Are they the person who pushed me up against a wall?” he said. 

“Campus is not better, it’s just different,” said Lederman. “The assumption is that it’s better by virtue of there being no encampments right now, there’s no buildings being sieged. But that being the bar is ridiculous. What we saw my freshman year was so beyond the pale that people are inclined to say campus is better just because we don’t have people storming buildings, disrupting classes and Jewish students being told to go home because campus isn’t safe.”

He views the ICC conference as a place to help “further my skills in having civil dialogue” before returning to Columbia in the coming weeks. 

The program spans a wide range of topics, from making sense of Middle East tensions to addressing antisemitism at home.

The summit opened Sunday with a moderated conversation featuring former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant about the future of the region. It was followed by a security update by IDF Col. (ret.) Miri Eisin; former Knesset member Ruth Wasserman Lande and Jonathan Schanzer, executive director of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. The panel was moderated by JI Executive Editor Melissa Weiss. 

Last year’s conference came at the height of the Trump administration’s pressure campaign on universities to crack down on antisemitism, which has included federal funding cuts from dozens of schools. 

Monday’s opening session will address the implications of those cuts, when Noah Pollak, a senior advisor at the Education Department, and Jonathan Rauch, a senior fellow of the Brookings Institution, debate whether the federal government’s campus crackdown is good for America.  

Other speakers scheduled to address the gathering throughout the three-day conference include Rachel Goldberg-Polin and Jon Polin, parents of the late Israeli hostage Hersh Goldberg-Polin; former hostage Omer Shem Tov; Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA); Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY); and Harmeet Dhillon, assistant attorney general for civil rights at the Department of Justice. 

“With respect to [campus] antisemitism, we’ve seen improvements over the last year,” Ken Marcus, founder and chairman of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law and a former Education Department official, told JI. “[That is] thanks, in part, to the efforts of many different organizations and government agencies.”

“But we’re still seeing a level of challenge that is near historic levels,” said Marcus. “In other words, we don’t have encampments and similar problems to the extent of previous semesters, but we are receiving intake calls that are significantly higher in number and severity than we had in all the worst of the last few years.” The Brandeis Center has filed numerous lawsuits and federal complaints against universities on behalf of Jewish students alleging a failure to address antisemitism since Oct. 7.   

“There’s no sugarcoating what Jewish students are living through,” Jacob Baime, CEO of ICC, told JI. “Campus life has grown more hostile, and the antisemitism more brazen, than at any point in memory: it’s on the quad, in the classroom, and online. But something profound is happening at the same time. This generation refuses to hide. They are prouder, better organized and more determined than any pro-Israel student cohort in history.” 

The goal of the conference, Baime said, is “to train them, connect them and send them back to school ready to stand tall and proud.”

One of the most profound changes since Oct. 7, Lederman said, is a shift in how professors behave. Before the attacks, he said, “antisemitism was subtle and professors were afraid.”

“Now they are brazenly antisemitic under the guise of anti-Zionism,” he continued. The biggest difference, Lederman added, is that professors “are no longer afraid to incite Jew hatred in their classes.”

Lederman said he expects the conference to give students tools to deal with that shift. “We are not going to run away and hide,” he said. “[ICC] teaches students to be unashamedly Zionist and Jewish. They teach them how to advocate for Israel, while also thinking for themselves.” 

In the concluding weeks of the primary season, AIPAC is drawing in part on a messaging strategy used successfully by pro-Israel groups in previous cycles to thwart the far left, which is facing a new set of political tests after a series of recent victories in heavily progressive congressional districts.

From Michigan to Missouri, where tensions between the Democratic Party’s moderate and far-left factions are playing out in high-profile contests for the House and Senate, AIPAC is hitting its anti-Israel opponents for their past criticism of former President Joe Biden and former Vice President Kamala Harris in an effort to portray the candidates as hostile to mainstream policy goals.

The tactic, which UDP also deployed last election cycle in key races, dates back to at least 2021, when DMFI PAC, Democratic Majority for Israel’s political arm, had relentlessly attacked Nina Turner — a former Ohio state senator running for an open House seat in Cleveland on a platform that was critical of Israel — for remarks in which she had compared voting for Biden to eating a “bowl of s**t.”

Mark Mellman, the veteran Democratic pollster who founded DMFI and died in November 2025, was the brainchild of the anti-Turner strategy. His attack ads were effective in emphasizing what became a liability for Turner, particularly among Black voters, helping to elevate a lesser-known moderate rival with ties to the establishment, Rep. Shontel Brown (D-OH), to a come-from-behind upset.

The race served as an early venue for the Democratic proxy fights over Israel shaping a growing number of primaries in the wake of the war in Gaza and Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks.

Now, UDP is reviving Mellman’s playbook as it takes on former Rep. Cori Bush (D-MO), who is seeking a rematch against Rep. Wesley Bell (D-MO) after she lost her St. Louis House seat in 2024. 

In recent attack ads, UDP, which has spent over $2.5 million to boost Bell, is hitting Bush over past comments criticizing Biden and Harris, as well as her vote against the bipartisan infrastructure package while in Congress in 2021. Its strategy is reminiscent of messaging it deployed two years ago to help oust the former Squad member who was among the harshest critics of Israel in the House.

“Cori Bush’s attacks helped Trump,” one of the UDP ads claims, citing interview clips in which she voiced misgivings about voting for Harris shortly before the 2024 election.

It remains to be seen if such ads will resonate amid a national political environment favorable to left-wing populists who are now casting themselves as strident opponents of the establishment and claiming wins in recent competitive congressional primaries.

The playbook has had mixed results in other races, including a 2022 primary in Pittsburgh where UDP failed to block Rep. Summer Lee (D-PA) even as the group spent heavily on ads depicting her as disloyal to Biden’s agenda.

More recently, Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-NY), a close AIPAC ally, lost his House seat early last month to an anti-Israel challenger, Darializa Avila Chevalier, who drew scrutiny over controversial deleted social media posts in which she had called Biden a “rapist” as well as a “war criminal,” while also dismissing Harris with an expletive.

Both Espaillat and his allies sought to draw attention to the comments in the final stretch of the race, to no avail. UDP was not directly involved in the New York City primary but did contribute over $1.5 million to a pro-Espaillat super PAC that hit his opponent for her past remarks, according to campaign disclosures filed after the race had concluded. Avila Chevalier has said she regrets her rhetoric attacking Biden and Harris.

For her part, Bush, rather than leaning into her reservations with Harris tied to the war in Gaza as the former vice president keeps the door open for a White House bid in 2028, has indicated she sees the attacks as a possible vulnerability.

During a recent joint media appearance, Bush, who endorsed Harris soon after she had announced her campaign to replace Biden in July 2024, accused Bell of equivocating on whether he had immediately done the same.

In a statement to Jewish Insider, Patrick Dorton, a spokesperson for UDP, criticized Bush as “a terrible member of Congress who didn’t do her job and didn’t deliver for St. Louis.” 

“We are going to educate every Democratic primary voter in St. Louis about how bad and ineffective Cori Bush was in Congress,” Dorton said on Monday when asked to explain how UDP believes its repeat strategy will again persuade voters in the Aug. 4 primary race.

Meanwhile, in Michigan’s closely watched Senate primary set for next Tuesday, Abdul El-Sayed, an anti-Israel insurgent who is facing AIPAC-backed Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI), has sought to downplay his role in promoting the “uncommitted” movement that urged Democratic primary voters to leave their ballots blank as a protest against Biden’s support for Israel during the war in Gaza.

In a recent campaign ad, for example, El-Sayed boasted that he was “the first Muslim American leader to endorse Kamala Harris for president,” a claim that fact-checkers have deemed inaccurate.

While Stevens has highlighted El-Sayed’s support for “uncommitted,” UDP, which is spending aggressively in the primary, has been focused more broadly on his perceived hostility to popular Democratic leaders.

In its first negative ad, released earlier this month, UDP attacked El-Sayed for what the group called his “long history of disrespecting women,” citing harshly worded past criticisms of former First Lady Michelle Obama as well as Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, the latter of whom announced a late endorsement of Stevens last week.

Elsewhere in Michigan, a far-left Democrat who is seeking the nomination to claim a Republican-held Lansing swing seat, Will Lawrence, has faced recent attacks for his comments denigrating Black political leadership and calling Harris a “warmonger,” as well as his support for the “uncommitted” movement. He has said his remarks have been taken out of context.

The race is expected to be close as Lawrence, a vocal critic of Israel, has gained endorsements from several prominent progressives, including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT). Crush MAGA PAC has spent nearly $1 million on attack ads against Lawrence that have cited his affiliation with “uncommitted,” among other things.

While Lawrence’s allies have accused AIPAC of funding the ads, UDP has denied involvement in the race, calling such claims “pure fiction and dishonest.”

For Democrats worried about the party’s left turn, the outcome of the presidential nominating calendar, which was approved by a Democratic National Committee panel on Friday, is something of a mixed bag. (For pro-Israel Democrats, the presence of Michigan taking center stage on the early schedule is already causing heartburn, per reporting from JI’s Matthew Kassel.)

In a boost for centrists, the nomination process is slated to lead with South Carolina, a Southern state that has long been a moderating force in the party’s presidential calendar, largely because of its sizable Black population.  

But as Jonathan Martin noted in Politico, South Carolina’s first-in-the-nation status carries some unintended consequences. The state, which has typically voted after Iowa’s caucuses and New Hampshire’s primary, often played the role of choosing the nominee after the field was winnowed down by the earlier states. South Carolina has picked the primary winners in the last two decades: Barack Obama (in 2008), Hillary Clinton (in 2016) and most notably Joe Biden (in 2020) when pundits counted the former vice president out after losses in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada.

With South Carolina being moved to the front of the line, the state will end up narrowing down the lineup of candidates rather than having the final say on a shortlist of candidates. The changed primary calendar also puts pressure on moderate candidates to make a strong showing right away: If a leading centrist such as Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro runs for president, South Carolina suddenly becomes much more of a pivotal state, with outreach to Black voters a necessity.

Nevada will miss out on being the central player under the new calendar, but will still play a key role, holding the first primary in the West just over a week after South Carolina. The state has typically been friendly turf for progressives, given the influence of the state’s culinary union, which organizes workers in the gaming industry. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) easily won the state in 2020 and only lost narrowly to Clinton in 2016, demonstrating his insurgent campaign’s staying power.

The power of the state’s progressive organizers and its large Hispanic population have raised concerns that a far-left candidate such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) could emerge as a favorite — a factor that dampened support for its bid to be the first-in-the-nation contest.

But Nevada also is a swing state, and the state’s switch from a caucus to a primary should broaden the Democratic electorate beyond the most committed activists. That two of the most pragmatic and pro-Israel Democrats represent the state in the Senate — Democrats Jacky Rosen and Catherine Cortez Masto — should also be a silver lining for Jewish Democrats worried about the Democratic Socialists of America factor in the state.

Under the DNC plan, New Hampshire loses its first-in-the-nation-primary status — diminishing its traditional role of thinning out the large field of candidates — but it will still hold the politically pivotal third spot.  (New Hampshire Democrats condemned the calendar proposal after it was announced; New Hampshire law requires the state to hold the first presidential primary.)

If New Hampshire ends up accepting its diminished role, it is a likely blow for the more-moderate wing of the party. Even though Sanders won the 2016 and 2020 primaries (in part because he represents the state next door), New Hampshire’s primary hinges less on ideology and more on who can capture the enthusiasm of the exacting voters who treat the process as a state sport every four years. 

It’s no coincidence that center-left candidates such as Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) outperformed expectations in 2020, and that a dark horse moderate candidate, Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ), is polling surprisingly well in a recent statewide survey. If there was a state that a straight-talking centrist such as Rahm Emanuel would need to do well in, it would be New Hampshire.

But with the new calendar, it will be harder for appealing candidates to translate retail buzz in New Hampshire into political momentum, as has happened so often in the past. At a time when algorithmic media and rage-bait virality typically benefit the left, New Hampshire could have served as a corrective against the ideological fads dominating the party. But going third, after two bigger states, makes it tougher for a moderate maverick to emerge. 

The biggest red flag for the party — especially among its Jewish and pro-Israel supporters — is its decision to give Michigan Democrats such a pivotal role, given the rise of antisemitism and anti-Israel hostility within the state party ranks. If you’re a Jewish pro-Israel candidate like Shapiro, it will be a headache confronting the radicalism within the party that has been documented thoroughly over the last year. 

Michigan is scheduled to be voting fifth in the country on Feb. 22, 2028 — with 115 delegates at stake, the most of the states in the early voting window. 

The optimist’s case? The Democratic establishment in Michigan still has some fight left in them, as demonstrated by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s late endorsement of Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI) against the far-left Abdul El-Sayed in the state’s critical Senate primary that’s become a proxy battle between the party mainstream and the far left. If Stevens prevails, it would underscore party activists aren’t all that representative of party voters. 

And, as one senior Democratic official told JI, any successful party candidate will have to confront the issue of antisemitism head on, regardless of whether Michigan plays a key nominating role. In this strategist’s view, having to deal with it early on in a Michigan contest could end up being beneficial in the long run, despite the obvious pitfalls.

Virginia and New Mexico are the two wild cards, with both being added to the early voting schedule. Both states tend to prefer moderates over progressives, but it remains to be seen how their higher-profile roles will shape the nominating process. 

All told, there are reasons for centrists to be hopeful about the nominating schedule, especially with the presence of two moderate-minded Southern states in the top five. But the importance of Michigan in the primary calendar threatens to deepen rifts between Jewish voters and the Democratic Party — at the worst possible time. 

The selection of Michigan as an early Democratic primary state in the 2028 presidential nominating contest, approved on Friday by a panel of the Democratic National Committee, is prompting some concerns among Jewish and pro-Israel activists who fear the party’s sharp divisions over Israel and its recent controversies over antisemitism could create a volatile political landscape during the key contest.

In recent years, Michigan has been at the center of some of the fiercest fights over Israel animating the Democratic Party. In the 2024 presidential race, for instance, the battleground state first laid the ground for the “uncommitted” movement that urged primary voters not to vote for former President Joe Biden as a protest against his support for Israel during the war in Gaza.

At Michigan’s state party convention in April, meanwhile, pro-Israel candidates were heckled by far-left activists, while an attorney with a history of praising Hezbollah was nominated for a position on the University of Michigan Board of Regents, episodes that left Jewish voters questioning if they belonged in a party they had long called home.

The state’s Democratic Senate primary, set for Aug. 4, has emerged as the latest high-profile proxy battle between the party’s mainstream and far-left factions. The most heated clashes have revolved around Israel and AIPAC, the pro-Israel advocacy group that is now spending millions to help Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI), a close ally, in a bitter race against Abdul El-Sayed — whose rhetoric targeting Israel and ongoing refusal to recognize its right to exist has alarmed Jewish voters. 

Michigan’s presidential primary will now tentatively go fifth among the six states chosen for early primaries, on Feb. 22 — a week after New Mexico and a week before Virginia. South Carolina will kick off the nominating contest on Jan. 22, followed by Nevada and New Hampshire. The newly proposed calendar will need to be ratified by DNC members at a meeting in Austin next month.

If the schedule is officially locked in, Michigan, which has the most delegates of the states chosen, “figures to be one of the first anti-Israel or antisemitic states that has a vote,” Dennis Bernard, a Jewish leader in Michigan who helps advise members of both parties, said in an interview with Jewish Insider on Sunday.

“I do think we will be very much a bellwether state” that “could be the first true test of the Democratic Party and how big their tent is,” added Bernard, the national chair of government relations for the Jewish Federations of North America. “You will potentially see a continuation of that war going on right now.”

Several Jewish leaders in Michigan said the Senate primary outcome would likely help crystallize their expectations about the degree to which Democratic conflict over Israel, and the state’s role in elevating that battle to the forefront, may end up influencing the presidential election.

“Those results will give us a better indication of 2028,” said Michael Horowitz, one such Jewish leader in Michigan, noting the positions espoused by El-Sayed are not a “national trend yet,” despite a recent series of primary wins by anti-Israel Democrats who ran in progressive House districts. “We’ll see how deep this well is. I’m not naive, but I don’t know.” 

Still, the Democratic Party and pro-Israel community “have to get together and take control of the narrative again, because they’re winning the narrative,” he told JI, referring to the far left. “We have got our work cut out for us. We’ve lost the narrative.”

“If you talk to major Democratic donors, they’re concerned about Michigan because the moderate wing of the party is disappearing,” Ed Sarpolus, a Democratic pollster in the state, told JI. “Democrats could be worse off in 2028 if they don’t get back to the issues.”

By contrast, Asher Lopatin, a rabbi who serves as director of community relations at the Jewish Federation of Greater Ann Arbor, cited Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s endorsement of Stevens last week as a sign that “may indicate the direction Michigan Democrats are going in for 2028,” which he called “not falling into the anti-Israel obsession trap.”

“I realize it’s a rosy scenario, but I am hopeful,” he told JI.

Political strategists who spoke with JI shared mixed predictions about Michigan’s early place on the 2028 primary calendar. Ed Sarpolus, a Democratic pollster in the state, said it could “exacerbate tensions within the Democratic Party” over Israel, disrupting a fragile effort to show unity ahead of what is expected to be a bruising general election to reclaim the White House.

“If you talk to major Democratic donors, they’re concerned about Michigan because the moderate wing of the party is disappearing,” Sarpolus told JI. “Democrats could be worse off in 2028 if they don’t get back to the issues.”

But Adrian Hemond, a Democratic strategist in Michigan, said it “is way too early to predict with confidence” how Israel “will play as an issue” in the 2028 Michigan presidential primary, arguing that “a lot will depend on how hard candidates lean into the issue.”

“If the situation in the Middle East deteriorates further,” he explained to JI, “this issue could look very different.”

Some experts have also speculated that Michigan’s position could lead to uncomfortable confrontations for pro-Israel centrists like Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, a Jewish Democrat who is frequently cited as a prospective presidential candidate and who has faced antisemitism over his views on the Middle East.

Some Jewish leaders, however, said a pro-Israel win in Michigan could help defang the far left at what may be a key inflection point in the race. If an openly pro-Israel candidate emerged in the state, “I think it would be a surprise as to the traction they got,” since it “would stand out as authentic,” said one prominent pro-Israel activist in Michigan, granted anonymity to speak candidly about a sensitive issue.

He was not hopeful that such a candidate would step up. “I don’t see why Michigan is the venue in which someone does a complete paradigm shift” on Israel, he told JI, citing the existing political headwinds. “I think we are kind of a laboratory for the Democratic Party across the nation.”

One pro-Israel strategist in Michigan, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that several potential 2028 contenders have already visited the state and have had private meetings with Jewish donors and groups — including Rahm Emanuel, the Democratic operative and former Chicago mayor, and Maryland Gov. Wes Moore.

“A couple others have had meetings with prominent Jews while in Michigan, but I can’t say for sure if the reason for meetings was to lean into the Jewish vote,” the strategist told JI.

While Michigan also went fifth in 2024 after it had lobbied for an early slot, the state promises to play a more consequential role in the next election because it will be a competitive primary, as opposed to the last cycle in which Biden faced no serious opposition before dropping out of the race.

Anti-Israel activists have insisted that former Vice President Kamala Harris lost Michigan, home to the largest concentration of Arab American voters in Dearborn, due to her alignment with Biden’s support for Israel during the war in Gaza.

But many Jewish Democrats in Michigan, who make up a sizable and politically engaged constituency, say the left’s vilification of Israel as well as AIPAC is not only misguided but also a distraction from more urgent concerns that are much more relevant to swing voters who will ultimately decide the election. Some suggested that Michigan’s status in 2028 as an early nominating state could stoke those tensions and overshadow other issues, in a repeat of the last cycle.

“The antisemitic rhetoric that we have observed on the right and the left, the attacks on Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, are, sadly, going to be issues that both parties have to address in 2028,” Robert Zimmerman, a longtime DNC member, told JI while assessing the 2028 primary landscape. “Democrats have to do a much better job of standing up to that hateful rhetoric.”

“It means that the real issues facing Michigan will continue to be less important” than the hostility to Israel now energizing the activist left, Hannan Lis, a Democratic fundraiser and Jewish community leader in the state, told JI. “I cannot tell you I’m optimistic. I’m a realist,” he said.

Even as he acknowledged “two years is a long time,” he voiced anxiety that “support for Israel has become a litmus test for a lot of Democratic candidates,” as it has grown increasingly politicized in party primaries.

“The antisemitic rhetoric that we have observed on the right and the left, the attacks on Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, are, sadly, going to be issues that both parties have to address in 2028,” Robert Zimmerman, a longtime DNC member, told JI while assessing the 2028 primary landscape. “Democrats have to do a much better job of standing up to that hateful rhetoric.”

Despite reservations about Michigan’s potentially divisive role in the presidential race, some Jewish leaders in the state and beyond said they were still staying positive.

In a statement to JI, Jessica Alexander, chair of the Michigan Democratic Jewish caucus and a vice chair of the Michigan Democratic Party, said party activists had “worked hard to make the case for Michigan to be an early primary state, because the state reflects the country’s diverse demographics culturally and geographically.”

“Yes, there is a vocal virtual subset of folks who want to make not the Middle East, but Israel and the U.S.’s engagement in and with it the center” or “soul” of the campaign, she said, “but the reality on the ground is that it’s not the most formidable issue no matter how the press skews it.”

Noah Arbit, a Jewish Michigan state representative who has been outspoken against rising antisemitism in his own party, said that the Democratic Socialists of America and other groups “seem to feel that Israel is a galvanizing wedge issue they can employ to take over the Democratic Party” and for now “seem intent on putting it at the forefront of the primary debate in 2028, regardless of Michigan’s place in the calendar.”

“I’m resigned to the issue being at the forefront of the primary conversation,” he told JI last week, “despite the fact that I would argue Americans have far more pressing concerns about the state of and future of our country than an interminable conflict 5,000 miles away.”

Good Monday morning.

In today’s Daily Kickoff, we look at how pro-Israel advocates are adjusting their approaches to Democratic lawmakers following last week’s failed vote to cut U.S. aid to Israel that garnered the support of 103 House Democrats, and report on antisemitic streamer Hasan Piker’s surprise appearance at a College Democrats of America convention over the weekend. We talk to former U.S. Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro about Israel’s ability to repair its relationships in the U.S., and look at U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Tom Barrack’s effort to create a Middle East trade alignment that excludes Israel. Also in today’s Daily Kickoff: Rabbi Efrem Goldberg, Michael Rubin and Judit Polgar.

We have also launched 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

• Tensions in the Middle East continue to rise following the deaths of four U.S. service members resulting from Iranian attacks targeting U.S. bases in Jordan and Iraq. As the White House considers a broader offensive against Iran, it is moving dozens of military refueling planes to Israel.
• Secretary of State Marco Rubio, meanwhile, told reporters before departing for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations summit in the Philippines on Sunday that the U.S. was still open to diplomacy with Tehran. “We’ve tried multiple times with Iran, and we’ll continue to try. If that door opens, we’ll be happy to see it open,” Rubio said. “Their behavior has to change in order for ours to change.”
• Before departing for Manila, Rubio met with Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, who is in Washington this week, where he’s slated to meet with President Donald Trump on Tuesday.
• Support is growing for former Maine state Sen. Troy Jackson to succeed Graham Platner as the Democratic Party’s nominee to challenge Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), with most of Jackson’s rivals dropping their bids ahead of the state party’s nominating convention set for Saturday. More below.
• Keir Starmer delivered his final address as U.K. prime minister today before formally submitting his resignation to King Charles III. Former Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham then separately traveled to Buckingham Palace to meet with the king and accept his request to form a new government.
• In Israel, Yair Golan’s Democrats party is holding its primary today to determine its slate for the upcoming election.

What You Should Know

A QUICK WORD WITH JI’S JOSH KRAUSHAAR

July was scheduled to offer a break from primary politics, but two seismic developments this month — the collapse of scandal-plagued Graham Platner’s campaign in Maine and the sudden death of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) — are forcing both parties to deal with messy internal conflicts as they choose replacements in these key races.

The outcome of the July 25 Maine Democratic convention choosing an alternative candidate to run against Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) and the Aug. 11 special election primary to choose a GOP nominee for Graham’s seat are offering clarity on the ideological directions of the two parties as the November midterm elections approach.

Already, we’re seeing that Democrats want to nominate a candidate as ideologically similar to Platner as possible, with most of the convention delegates chosen this weekend gravitating towards former state Senate President Troy Jackson, an anti-Israel progressive who unsuccessfully ran for governor this year as a champion of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT).

As Maine counties completed the process of choosing delegates for the nominating convention, Jackson’s campaign expressed confidence that he rallied enough backers to secure a victory. Most of his leading rivals dropped out of the race on Sunday, indicating that the state party is clearly intent on pushing forward a candidate that shares Platner’s anti-establishment, left-wing worldview but without the personal baggage he brought to the table.

Read the rest of ‘What You Should Know’ here.

TRUST FALL

House vote on Israel aid forces pro-Israel advocates to reassess trusted allies

After 104 members of the House voted last week in favor of an amendment to eliminate all $3.3 billion in annual military aid to Israel, pro-Israel activists across the country who have spent years building ties with lawmakers are now wondering how to approach those relationships following a vote that some see as a betrayal, Jewish Insider’s Gabby Deutch reports.

Looking ahead: Several friends and backers of the members of Congress who voted for the amendment told JI that a single vote on a measure that was sure to fail should not spell the end of years of friendship. But even as they acknowledged the seismic reverberations of the vote, many also spoke of the need to tread carefully at a politically uncertain moment. “Our issues are too important to not hold onto the ability to have a conversation with the person, because the votes are not going to end. It’s not going to all of a sudden stop,” Sam Lauter, a major Democratic donor and pro-Israel activist, said. He talked to several members of Congress in the days before the vote, urging them to vote no. 

Read the full story here.

Silent rebuke: AIPAC will no longer allow donations through its political action committee to 18 lawmakers it endorsed who voted in favor of the legislation. The group did not announce the change. But the endorsement page on AIPAC’s political giving portal — where supporters can donate to candidates who have been endorsed by AIPAC — removed the option for individuals to route money to those lawmakers.

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

SPEAKER SCRUTINY

College Democrats’ conference, co-sponsored by J Street U, features Hasan Piker

J Street’s college group sponsored the College Democrats of America convention over the weekend that featured far-left, antisemitic influencer Hasan Piker. J Street U, the student organizing arm of J Street, “is proud to sponsor and participate in the College Democrats Convention,” Jeremy Ben-Ami, president of J Street, told Jewish Insider’s Haley Cohen on Friday, hours after Piker was announced as the convention’s “surprise speaker.”

J Street’s position: “We had no role in the selection of speakers and we’re sure there will be speakers — including Hasan Piker — with whom we disagree,” said Ben-Ami. “Being in venues like this is even more important when there are participants with whom we disagree. Failing to show up would be an abdication of our responsibility to make the case for our pro-Israel views.”

Read the full story here.

Turning tides: Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) told CNN he left the Congressional Progressive Caucus last year — and decided not to run for reelection this year — in part because of the rise of socialist leadership in the caucus. The Democrat said there’s now a growing contingent of anti-Israel Democrats as well within the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which he said was not present when he first came to the Hill, JI’s Marc Rod reports.

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

TRADE ROUTES

Tom Barrack promotes Middle East trade alignment cutting out Israel

U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Tom Barrack on Friday promoted a new regional trade and security alignment in the Middle East centered around Iraq, Turkey and neighboring Arab states, appearing to sideline a similar regional project including Israel, Jewish Insider’s Matthew Shea reports.

What he said: Speaking at the U.S.-Iraq Business Summit, Barrack told attendees that Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi, who visited with President Donald Trump at the White House last week, is considering a transformative agreement. “What this young leader [al-Zaidi] has in mind — aligned with Syria, Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon, Egypt — is a program that will make the Strait of Hormuz an afterthought in two years,” Barrack said. “We’re going from just-in-time delivery on boats through these minor straits to just-in-case delivery going the other way.”

Read the full story here.

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

NO STRINGS ATTACHED

Lawmakers split on whether Trump should have tied Syria sanctions relief to Israel normalization

As the Trump administration moves to end the diplomatic isolation of Syria, dismantling decades of U.S. sanctions in the process, lawmakers are offering mixed assessments of whether Washington should have conditioned that relief on steps toward normalizing relations with Israel, Jewish Insider’s Matthew Shea reports. 

What they said: Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) said the Trump administration “should be urging” Damascus to improve economic and political relations with Jerusalem in exchange for sanctions relief, “but I would say that you’ve got to have a consistent standard.” Sherman noted he would “like to see Syria move in that direction,” toward joining the Abraham Accords, “even if they can’t join the accords yet.” Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) agreed that the Trump administration should be pursuing normalization as part of its efforts with Damascus, but said the current focus on prioritizing stability is a “worthwhile objective” and “positive” effort. “I think a stable, democratic [Syria] may be too much of a hope, but a stable and non-terrorist-supporting Syria is important to the Middle East and to the United States of America and to some type of global stability,” Hoyer told JI.

Read the full story here, with additional comments from Reps. Brad Schneider (D-IL), Troy Nehls (R-TX) and Tim Burchett (R-TN).

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

HEARD AT ASPEN

Repairing Israel’s standing in the U.S. requires new leader in Israel, Dan Shapiro says

Former U.S. Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro told Jewish Insider’s Marc Rod on the sidelines of the Aspen Security Forum last week that without new leadership in Israel — meaning a defeat for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel’s elections — he does not know how Israel can repair its reputation in the United States.

Notable quotable: “I don’t see a path to repairing Israel’s deteriorating standing in the United States on both sides of the aisle without a change of leadership in Israel,” Shapiro told JI, a sentiment he repeated during a panel on Israel and the U.S.-Israel relationship at the conference. Speaking to JI shortly after more than 100 House Democrats voted to cut off U.S. military aid to Israel, Shapiro said that, while there’s “legitimate ground for concern and for criticism” of Israel’s operations in Gaza, cutting off all $3.3 billion wholesale is not “a very thoughtful way” to address concerns about civilian harm and that maintaining the U.S.-Israel relationship remains in America’s interests.

Read the full interview here.

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

IRAN ADD-ON

Trump’s push to add Iran to Russia sanctions bill confuses Democrats

President Donald Trump’s call for Republicans to incorporate sanctions against Iran into the late Sen. Lindsey Graham’s (R-SC) bipartisan legislation sanctioning Russia and countries that buy Russian oil was met with confusion by some of the Democrats supporting the bill, Jewish Insider’s Emily Jacobs reports.

Dem dismay: “Our Russia sanctions bill was meticulously crafted during painstaking, sometimes painful negotiations over many months,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), who spearheaded the effort alongside Graham for over a year, told JI in a statement. “This bill should move forward as quickly as possible — as is — without additional provisions, which can be done separately.” Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told Bloomberg’s “This Weekend” on Sunday that, “Sen. Graham never raised the concern about putting Iranian sanctions on the bill.”

Read the full story here.

Institution clash: Annalena Baerbock, the president of the United Nations General Assembly and former foreign minister of Germany, on Friday criticized the Board of Peace, the U.S.-led body responsible for managing the ceasefire in Gaza, JI’s Marc Rod reports.

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

Worthy Reads

Swamp Creatures: In his Substack, Erick Erickson examines “self-dealing” among Trump administration officials who have personally financially benefited from their professional roles, despite President Donald Trump’s oft-repeated campaign pledge to “drain the swamp.” “It does not matter whether each arrangement is technically legal. The swamp was never a legal problem; it was a trust problem. When the party that promised to end influence-peddling instead perfects it — when access to the president can be bought with a memecoin and a black-tie ticket — the lesson every ambitious operator learns is that the spoils go to whoever holds power, and restraint is for suckers. That is the real cost.” [Substack]

Taking on Tehran Together: In the Arab News, former White House Middle East Envoy Jason Greenblatt posits that unified Gulf states — which over the last six months have all sustained attacks from Iran — can push back against the Islamic Republic’s malign behavior in the region. “The scale and consequences differed by country. The decision behind them did not. Six governments. One regime deciding, each time, that Gulf territory was a legitimate target. … The differing intensity of Iran’s attacks reflects Tehran’s country-by-country calibration of pressure. Iran weighs its own exposure, the relationships it still hopes to preserve, how much pressure it mistakenly believes it can place on Washington, and how much pressure it wants to place directly on each Gulf government.” [ArabNews]

The Future of Faith: In The Washington Post, David DeSteno considers how religiously engaged people are interacting with AI on issues of moral guidance. “As of yet, the data don’t show that people of faith are forsaking the moral teachings and advice of clergy in favor of that offered by AI; they’re utilizing both. But that might soon change. … According to Anthropic’s own research, its AI chatbot Claude just happens to be most sycophantic when it discusses spiritual themes, meaning that it could be especially persuasive while dispensing moral and religious advice.” [WashPost]

A larger selection of Worthy Reads is available in our Live Briefing.

Word on the Street

Joining President Donald Trump in his suite at MetLife Stadium for Spain’s 1-0 win over Argentina in Sunday’s World Cup final were Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, Spain’s King Felipe VI and Queen Letizia, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, First Lady Melania Trump, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, FIFA President Gianni Infantino, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, Andrew Giuliani, Barron and Eric Trump and Robert Kraft…

Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI) rejected claims, including those made recently by Vice President JD Vance, of Israeli influence over Trump’s decision-making on Iran, calling it “a fool’s run to place blame on him supposedly being dictated by others”… 

Abdul El-Sayed, who is up against Stevens in next month’s Michigan Democratic Senate primary, deflected a question from CNN’s Jake Tapper on Sunday’s “State of the Union” about audio in which El-Sayed was heard telling staff there were “a lot of people in Dearborn who are sad” over the death of former Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei; in response, El-Sayed criticized the war with Iran and the recent deaths of U.S. service members…

Iran reportedly moved $6 billion in oil out of the country during the roughly four weeks that the Strait of Hormuz was open in accordance with the memorandum of understanding between Washington and Tehran…

The Wall Street Journal looks at Iranian efforts to make Jordan a flashpoint in its war with the U.S., which stations thousands of soldiers at a base in the country — three of whom were killed in an Iranian ballistic missile attack last week…

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani told The New York Times he was in “an active conversation” with legal officials regarding the potential arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is expected to travel to New York in September for the U.N. General Assembly; Mamdani had said during his campaign for mayor that he would order the arrest of Netanyahu should the Israeli leader travel to New York, despite doubts from experts over the legality of such a move…

Rabbi Efrem Goldberg, who leads the Boca Raton Synagogue, an Orthodox congregation in South Florida, is urging members of his congregation to register as Democrats ahead of the upcoming Florida primary in order to help Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) fend off a far-left primary challenger, Jewish Insider’s Marc Rod reports…

Fanatics CEO Michael Rubin wrapped tefillin — reportedly for the first time — at Fanatics Fest in New York over the weekend…

eJewishPhilanthropy’s Judah Ari Gross talks to Amy Spitalnick, the CEO of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, about the group’s engagement with education associations and unions on efforts to address antisemitism…

The Wall Street Journal profiles Emily Austin, a sports and pro-Israel influencer with deep ties to the Trump administration who leveraged her relationships in Washington to score a gig as a content creator for FIFA during the World Cup…

Hungarian Prime Minister Péter Magyar announced the nomination of Hungarian chess grandmaster Judit Polgar, who is Jewish, to serve as the country’s interim president…

An Israir plane slated to depart from London’s Luton Airport last week was damaged by an aircraft tug — the third such incident involving an Israir flight at that airport in the last year — prompting concerns that the airline is being targeted by ground workers…

The Wall Street Journal does a deep dive into a $700 million effort by Israel to help improve its global public image, including a $45 million contract with Trump ally Brad Parscale, as well as through influencers and AI-generated texting campaigns…

Cisco is in advanced talks with Zafran Security to purchase the Israeli cybersecurity startup for between $150-200 million…

The Associated Press reports on how a conflict between the Bank of Israel and the Palestinian Monetary Authority as Israel caps the amount of shekels it takes back from the West Bank is causing cash surpluses in the territory…

Fortune compares and contrasts the power of the Israeli shekel and the Japanese yen as the former gains strength and the yen, once one of the world’s strongest currencies, drops in value…

NPR looks at efforts by Israeli paraglider Amnonn Hahn to help swifts during their migration to Israel for the spring nesting season as the global population of the birds faces a steep decline…

The New York Times spotlights the wedding of Pamela Soberman and Rabbi Beni Summers, who met at a Jewish singing retreat in upstate New York…

Simone Kanter, who previously worked for Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY), is joining Tusk Strategies as a vice president in the group’s public affairs practice…

Israeli actor and singer Shoshik Shani died at 91…

Shoshana Bryen, the senior policy director at the Jewish Policy Center, died last week…

Pic of the Day

U.S. Ambassador to Argentina Peter Lamelas participated in an event on Saturday marking the 32nd anniversary of the bombing of the AMIA Jewish community center in Buenos Aires.

Birthdays

Actor and comedian, Joey Bragg turns 30… 

Retired U.S. senator (D-MD), Barbara Mikulski turns 90… Professor emeritus of mathematics at Penn State University, Paul Baum turns 90… Retired president of the National Endowment for Democracy, Carl Gershman turns 83… Long-time Israeli diplomat, he served as Israel’s ambassador to Germany, Yoram Ben-Zeev turns 82… Former commissioner on the Civil Rights Commission, assistant secretary of HUD in the Clinton administration, presently vice chair of the Bank of San Francisco, Roberta Achtenberg turns 76… Senior U.S. District Court judge in Massachusetts, Judge Patti B. Saris turns 75… New York Times weekly columnist and three-time Pulitzer Prize winner, Thomas Loren Friedman turns 73… Molecular geneticist at NYC-based Rockefeller University and an investigator of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Jeffrey M. Friedman turns 72… Broadcast and digital media consultant, Farrell Meisel… Professor of sociology at the University of Illinois at Chicago, Barbara Risman turns 70… Past president of the Women’s Department at the Jewish Federation of Detroit, she is the mother of fashion designers Matthew and Alex, Marcie Hermelin Orley… Head of a women-led political network for the U.S.-Israel relationship, also a mahjong instructor, Linleigh Ayn Richker… Public policy expert and author, Jane S. Hoffman turns 62… Former member of the Knesset for the Yesh Atid party, she is a brigadier general in the IDF (res.), Nira Shpak turns 60… Member of Knesset for the United Torah Judaism party, Yitzhak Ze’ev Pindros turns 55… Attorney, Jack Achiezer Guggenheim… SVP, Washington bureau chief and political director of CNN, where he oversees the political coverage across all of CNN’s platforms, David Marc Chalian turns 53… Author of World Without Mind: The Existential Threat of Big Tech, he is a staff writer at The Atlantic, Franklin Foer turns 52… Miami-based EVP at AIPAC, David Fox… Singer who came on the scene as a finalist on the fifth season of “American Idol,” Efraym Elliott Yamin turns 48… Assistant commissioner in the Community Affairs Bureau at the NYPD, Fred Kreizman… Co-founder and managing partner of the communications and branding firm of Main+Rose, Beth Doane… Co-founder and co-executive director of the progressive Indivisible movement, Ezra Levin turns 41… Former MLB player, he was a shortstop for Team Israel in 2023, Ty Kelly turns 38… Comedian and former regular player on “Saturday Night Live,” Chloe Fineman turns 38… Software engineer at Home Chef, Ashley Abramowicz Gibbs… Anesthesiologist, Dr. Sheila Ganjian Navi… VP of business development and operations at Thyme Care, Etan Raskas… Principal at Blackstone, Jonathan Tamir Alden… Intellectual property attorney at Ballard Spahr, Goldie Fields…

Before AIPAC began spending tens of millions of dollars per election cycle on campaigns, back when it was purely an advocacy organization that touted its relationships with many of the 535 members of Congress, the pro-Israel group used to describe its approach to Capitol Hill with a cheeky, upbeat motto: “You have friends, and you have potential friends.” 

But when former Bay Area AIPAC leader Naomi Lauter used to invoke the slogan, she added a third category: “Friends who have a little less potential than others.” Lauter died in 2017, but the saying still resonates with her son, Sam, who is a major Democratic donor and pro-Israel activist in his own right — and who is now wondering whether that third category might be growing even larger.

After 104 members of the House voted last week in favor of an amendment to eliminate all $3.3 billion in annual military aid to Israel, pro-Israel activists across the country who have spent years building ties with lawmakers are now wondering how to approach those relationships following a vote that some see as a betrayal. Even many longtime Israel supporters — including Reps. Jack Auchincloss (D-MA), Glenn Ivey (D-MD), Laura Friedman (D-CA), Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Pat Ryan (D-NY) — voted for the amendment, which did not pass. Pro-Israel activists who spent years building trust and gaining access to these lawmakers are now grappling with whether whether those relationships are still worth their continued investment. 

To borrow from AIPAC’s old slogan: Are the lawmakers who voted for the amendment still considered friends — or potential friends — of the U.S.-Israel relationship? Or was their vote against the annual aid package to Israel, and against a bill that was opposed by a wide swath of nonpartisan and Democratic Jewish groups, a crossing-the-Rubicon moment that cannot be undone? 

Friends and backers of the members of Congress who voted for the amendment are struggling to answer those questions. Several who spoke to Jewish Insider said that a single vote on a measure that was sure to fail should not spell the end of years of friendship. But even as they acknowledged the seismic reverberations of the vote, many also spoke of the need to tread carefully at a politically uncertain moment.

“Our issues are too important to not hold onto the ability to have a conversation with the person, because the votes are not going to end. It’s not going to all of a sudden stop,” Sam Lauter said. He talked to several members of Congress in the days before the vote, including Pelosi, urging them to vote no. 

“It’s not a good trend line, but also this idea that we’ve lost the Democrats — let’s not create self-fulfilling prophecies here. There’s an opportunity for us to turn some of this around,” Tyler Gregory, CEO of the Bay Area Jewish Community Relations Council, said. “I am optimistic that several of them could be flipped if the vote had actual consequences, and I think that’s the job ahead of us.”

“Now, if someone said to me, ‘You know what, I voted yes, and my reasoning was because actually I don’t think we should be allies with Israel anymore, and I have no interest in the friendship with the community or the country, I’m done.’ Well, OK, that friendship’s done,” said Lauter. 

This vote was destined to fail, but Tyler Gregory, CEO of the Bay Area Jewish Community Relations Council, called it “a dress rehearsal.” It will not be the last time U.S. aid to Israel comes up for a vote, and Gregory said he will need to lean on those lawmaker relationships in the future when the vote is more consequential.

“It’s not a good trend line, but also this idea that we’ve lost the Democrats — let’s not create self-fulfilling prophecies here. There’s an opportunity for us to turn some of this around,” Gregory said. “I am optimistic that several of them could be flipped if the vote had actual consequences, and I think that’s the job ahead of us.”

Halie Soifer, who served as an advisor to then-Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), now leads the Jewish Democratic Council of America, which urged members to vote against the amendment — as did Democratic Majority for Israel and the more liberal J Street. She called the vote “an inflection point,” but said the group is not considering removing its endorsements of lawmakers who supported the amendment. 

“We’ve maintained a very consistent, principled position with regard to aid for Israel, and it’s not us that shifted,” Soifer said. “There is clearly a fast-moving shift within the Democratic Party itself, and we’re considering what that means.” 

When asked whether she had ever seen so many candidates shift their positions on an issue within a single two-year election cycle, Soifer answered directly: “Absolutely not.” 

AIPAC responded to the vote by no longer allowing donations, through its political action committee, to the 18 lawmakers it endorsed who voted for the measure. 

“AIPAC members across the country watched this vote closely and are making sure their representatives in Congress who stood on principle hear that they’re appreciated,” AIPAC spokesperson Deryn Sousa told JI. 

“The reality is these are our representatives. There is a relationship that we have with most of them, and they continue to be our representatives today, tomorrow, next week,” said Jeremy Burton, the CEO of the Greater Boston Jewish Community Relations Council. “The ones who say, ‘No, I’m still committed to Israel’s security and the Jewish community,’ things like that — and I’m not going to quote any one of them — but the ones who are saying that in these private conversations, it’s incumbent upon them now to show what that means.”

Many activists who have relationships with lawmakers are taking the long view, arguing that cutting ties now will not help in future battles. For a lot of them, Israel is not the only issue about which they are concerned.

Jeremy Burton, the CEO of the Greater Boston Jewish Community Relations Council, said he knows that some Jewish Bostonians have told Massachusetts’ congressional representatives, all of whom voted for the amendment, that this moment represents a “break point.” But as the leader of a nonpartisan organization, he cannot end relationships over a disagreement on one vote. He has other issues — such as nonprofit security funding and cooperation on fighting antisemitism — to consider.

“The reality is these are our representatives. There is a relationship that we have with most of them, and they continue to be our representatives today, tomorrow, next week,” said Burton. “The ones who say, ‘No, I’m still committed to Israel’s security and the Jewish community,’ things like that — and I’m not going to quote any one of them — but the ones who are saying that in these private conversations, it’s incumbent upon them now to show what that means.”

For one Jewish former Biden administration staffer, voting to cut off security aid to Israel must be the red line. 

“They’re like, ‘Don’t worry about it. It’s just symbolic.’ Well, no, you’re telling us not to care about it, but clearly other people care about it, and that’s why you’re voting in that way,” said the staffer, who requested anonymity to speak about communal organizations they support. “I don’t think the Jewish community should be giving these people a pass right now, and I believe that’s actually creating an incentive for them to actually take these votes against us and against our interests, because there’s no political consequence or repercussions for them.” 

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) said on Thursday that Democrats will adopt a new approach to Israel if the party regains control of the House in November. “The current status quo is unsustainable,” said Jeffries, who voted no on the amendment.

“On one hand, I am really disappointed to see some true friends of mine and Israel vote for the [amendment] or vote ‘present,’” said Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi, a Jewish philanthropist and disability rights advocate in Maryland. “On the other hand, as an American and as a Jew, I am horrified by how Netanyahu and his administration treat Palestinians in the West Bank, give Haredim the ability to be draft-dodgers and don’t show empathy when legitimate security operations accidentally kill an innocent child.” 

Many of the 103 Democrats who voted “yes” released statements saying that they still support America’s relationship with Israel, but that they viewed the amendment as a symbolic way to tell Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that they disagreed with his handling of the wars in Gaza and Iran. 

In doing so, they tapped into a difficult reality for many of the Jewish activists who wanted to see the measure defeated. Many of those activists also wish Netanyahu would do more to take the concerns of Democrats and liberal Jews into account, even as they think Washington should continue supporting Jerusalem’s security needs. 

“On one hand, I am really disappointed to see some true friends of mine and Israel vote for the [amendment] or vote ‘present,’” said Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi, a Jewish philanthropist and disability rights advocate in Maryland. “On the other hand, as an American and as a Jew, I am horrified by how Netanyahu and his administration treat Palestinians in the West Bank, give Haredim the ability to be draft-dodgers and don’t show empathy when legitimate security operations accidentally kill an innocent child.” 

In Los Angeles, Democratic donor and pro-Israel activist Howard Welinsky said many of the “yes” votes were a result of political “noise” — namely, concerns about current or future primary challengers from the left. “​​It’s the volume of the noise, and some members of Congress have more intellectual capacity to withstand it, and others have less,” said Welinsky. 

So he is holding out hope that a change in Israel’s political leadership might help rectify Israel’s plummeting support among Democrats. “I just pray that Oct. 27” — the day Israel goes to elections — “gives Israel a new prime minister, and we can turn a page,” said Welinsky.

More than 100 House Democrats — just under half of the party’s caucus — voted to cut off all U.S. aid to Israel on Wednesday, marking another flashpoint in the party’s growing disillusionment with the Jewish state. It’s a result that would have been almost unimaginable even a year ago.

The fact that the number of anti-Israel votes included several longtime pro-Israel Democrats who had previously been endorsed by AIPAC — like Reps. Jake Auchincloss (D-MA), Glenn Ivey (D-MD), Maggie Goodlander (D-NH) and Pat Ryan (D-NY) — is a sign that even some members in the mainstream wing of the party are running scared of a potential primary threat from the left. 

Combined with the Senate vote earlier this year in which 40 Democrats voted for a measure led by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) to block shipments of some weapons to the Jewish state, the message is clear: Israel can no longer count on reliable support from the Democratic Party.

And voting for the equivalent of a wrecking ball to the U.S.-Israel relationship — an amendment that even vocal critics of Israel described as flawed and a calculated political stunt by Republicans — is no longer a nonstarter for congressional Democrats. With a more carefully crafted amendment presented by a member without Rep. Thomas Massie’s (R-KY) baggage, the margin in support could have been greater.

Despite the significance of the Democratic defections on Israel, it’s also notable that nearly all of the Democrats in swing districts or running in closely watched battleground Senate races stood by their support of Israel and voted against the amendment.

Only two of the 16 House Democrats facing the most competitive races — districts the Cook Political Report rates as “Lean Democratic,” “Toss Up” or favoring Republicans — voted for the Massie amendment.

Those lawmakers were Reps. Derek Tran (D-CA) and Gabe Vasquez (D-NM). Rep. Don Davis (D-NC) was absent, but would have opposed the amendment.

Expand that out to include “Likely Democratic” districts, and only two of those 10 lawmakers voted for the amendment: Goodlander and Rep. Steven Horsford (D-NV). Rep. Janelle Bynum (D-OR) voted present.

And nearly all of the Democratic candidates facing challenges from their left over their support for Israel stood their ground, even those running in deep-blue districts. That list includes Reps. Haley Stevens (D-MI) and Angie Craig (D-MN), who are both running for the Senate and facing fierce challenges from anti-Israel challengers. It also includes Reps. Wesley Bell (D-MO), Shri Thanedar (D-MI) and Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), who have faced strong pushback from their opponents over their pro-Israel stances, but held firm on the issue.

The results mark a significant setback for AIPAC, which is struggling to maintain influence within the Democratic Party as support for Israel becomes a more partisan issue. More than a dozen of its endorsed candidates voted against its most central policy priority, including lawmakers like Ivey who won their House seats with significant AIPAC backing and had been seen as close to the group. A handful of others voted present.

Ryan, a onetime moderate who has drifted toward the left, also publicly went on the attack against AIPAC, engaging with the anti-Israel account TrackAIPAC, which has faced accusations of antisemitism, to declare that he no longer wants AIPAC’s support and plans to return donations from the group.

“We are deeply appreciative of the 314 Republicans and Democrats who voted to reject Thomas Massie’s latest anti-Israel effort and are disappointed by the 103 Democrats who voted with Massie to weaken America and our ally Israel,” AIPAC said in a statement.

AIPAC also warned that it and its members aren’t backing down and “will be actively engaged throughout this election cycle, and future election cycles, to support members of Congress of both parties who support a strong U.S.-Israel alliance and oppose those who don’t.”

It’s important to keep in mind that lawmakers’ stated rationale for supporting the amendment varies: some do seek to cut off any U.S. support for Israel and sever the relationship as we know it; some seek changes to how the relationship functions; and others sought to send a signal of their frustration with the current Israeli government and its prosecution of the war in Gaza with a largely symbolic vote they knew would not pass.

By the same token, many Democrats who voted against the amendment made clear that their votes were in part a reflection of their concerns with Massie’s approach, rather than a full-throated endorsement of the U.S.-Israel relationship as it currently exists. That was the position held by Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), whose opposition to the amendment belied his overall concerns about the U.S.-Israel relationship.

Many Democrats called for changes in the relationship going forward, with Jeffries and other party leaders indicating they want direct military aid to end at the expiration of the current memorandum of understanding.

Observers also noted that the Congressional Black Caucus, which has traditionally held strong relationships with the Jewish community and pro-Israel world, was closely divided on the vote. Many of the caucus’ older or longer-tenured members voted to preserve aid to Israel, while newer and younger members for the most part voted against it.

The vote also underscored just how much of a role extreme voices have played within both parties in undermining relationships with allies under military threat. The right-wing grassroots hostility to Ukraine led to a number of party leaders — including a few Senate hawks — to vote against a 2024 funding bill for aid to Ukraine and Israel.

But even as there has been a strain of GOP opposition to Ukraine assistance, the Democrats’ turn against Israel has been more widespread. The fact that relatively few of the Democratic lawmakers who voted against the amendment offered a clear-throated defense of U.S. aid to Israel is a sign of just how politically toxic Israel has become within the party. 

“This vote should serve as a wake-up call [to Israel] that significant work is needed to repair its relationship with Democrats — not only to preserve bipartisan support in the United States, but also to protect Israel’s long-term security and prosperity,” Democratic Majority For Israel CEO Brian Romick said in a statement.

Rep. Ed Case (D-HI), a longtime pro-Israel moderate in the House, is facing his first serious primary challenge in years from state Sen. Jarrett Keohokalole, arguing — as other insurgent Democrats around the country have — that the district needs a new generation of leadership.

Case, 73, has long been a political institution in Hawaii. He has represented the 1st Congressional District in the heart of Honolulu since 2019, after previously serving the state’s 2nd District — which covers all areas outside of Honolulu — from 2002 to 2007, following several years in the Statehouse. He ran unsuccessfully for U.S. Senate before making his return to the House.

As one of the most moderate Democrats in the chamber — siding at times against the Biden administration and with Republicans — he has been something of an unusual fit for the strongly Democratic district.

Hawaii’s primary is set for Aug. 8.

Keohokalole’s campaign site makes little mention of Middle East policy, broadly calling for “reimagining the United States’ role on the world stage as a global peace leader by working to end unnecessary and costly conflicts, including opposing escalation toward war with Iran, and strengthening congressional oversight over military action and executive war powers.”

But the state senator, who is 42, said in late 2025 he supported efforts led by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) to stop U.S. military sales to Israel, arguing that the small size of Gaza “all but guarantees that [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu’s campaign of ‘targeted’ airstrikes will kill innocent adults, children, and infants. Hamas was wrong. So is this.”

Keohokalole said Israel has an inherent right to defend its sovereign territory “but for this to keep going the way it’s going, I think it reflects poorly on everyone involved in the campaign there, and this is going to persist for decades. People are not going to forget this, and I don’t think we should be associated with the carnage.”

He has also called out Case for receiving support from AIPAC.

But Colin Moore, an associate professor at the University of Hawaii, said that the subject has not been a central issue on the campaign to the extent that it has been in other recent Democratic primaries. “Maybe at the margins, but it’s not been an issue that either campaign has made central,” Moore said.

Case, at the beginning of the cycle, faced another challenge as well from a state representative, but that candidate dropped out of the race, consolidating the anti-Case vote, Moore explained.

Moore said that Keohokalole has been stepping up his outreach, making a strong push on social media and garnering national media attention. “It’s still likely that Ed Case will win, but I think it will be closer than I expected it to be a couple of months ago,” Moore said.

Limited polling has made it difficult to assess the state of the race, however. Case maintains a significant fundraising advantage, with $890,000 on hand to Keohokalole’s $252,000 as of the end of March.

“Ed Case has always been the most vulnerable of the four members of Hawaii’s congressional delegation,” Moore continued. “He’s … somewhat of an unusual figure to represent urban Honolulu, which is one of the most democratic districts in the country, to be a Blue Dog centrist Democrat.”

Case left the centrist Blue Dog coalition in 2023, but has remained a moderate.

Some of Case’s breaks with his party during the Biden and Trump administrations have angered local voters and the Hawaii Democratic Party, making him increasingly vulnerable to a challenger, something Moore said “has been a long time coming.”

The recent far-left victories against older, more moderate lawmakers in New York City and Denver are also driving enthusiasm and interest in Keohokalole’s campaign, Moore added. “That, I think is at least contributing to the vibes shift here, in a sense that the race might be tightening a little bit.”

But Moore also warned from drawing too many conclusions from the New York and Colorado results. “Hawaii is a Democratic state, [but] it’s not necessarily a progressive state, and it doesn’t always follow those trends all that closely,” he said.

Case remains very well known in the district and popular with center-left voters and unions, and he has played to his strengths, highlighting his seniority, his track record in delivering results for the district and his support for the military, “and that resonates a lot.”

Moore said that this style of politics — emphasizing seniority and delivering federal funding — has long been successful in Hawaii politics, perhaps more so than in other parts of the country.

In order for Keohokalole to win, he’d need a significant fundraising boost in the final weeks of the campaign so that he could make a larger media push, Moore said, explaining that the race is still largely flying under the radar for most voters and Keohokalole has more work to do to convince voters that he poses a serious challenge to Case.

When Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ) narrowly prevailed in the Democratic primary for an open House seat in Phoenix in 2024, winning by just 39 votes in a deep-blue district, the Arizona lawmaker could attribute her success, in part, to strong backing from the local Jewish community as well as a surge of outside spending from a prominent pro-Israel group.

Many Jewish and pro-Israel leaders in the state and beyond were encouraged that Ansari, who identifies as a progressive, staked out what seemed at the time like a moderate approach to Middle East policy issues amid rising Democratic hostility toward Israel over the war in Gaza — particularly in the party’s far-left wing.

Ansari, an Iranian American and former vice mayor of Phoenix, drew a contrast with her top rival, Raquel Terán, a former state lawmaker and party chair who had raised concerns among Jewish activists over her lack of clarity on key issues, such as whether she supported aid to Israel. For her part, Ansari stressed her commitment to U.S. military funding for Israel “without additional conditions,” while saying in a position paper that the United States “must do everything in its power to stop” Iran “from acquiring a nuclear weapon,” which she argued “would pose an existential threat to Israel.”

Now, however, Ansari, 34, has largely turned away from the stances she embraced during her primary, aligning with a range of far-left policy positions that have led several Jewish and pro-Israel leaders to feel they were misled, they told Jewish Insider.

Alma Hernandez, a Democratic state representative in Tucson who had been one of Ansari’s top Jewish campaign surrogates in the 2024 primary, said she “was really excited for the idea of having someone like” Ansari in office, noting that she attended the congresswoman’s swearing-in ceremony in Washington to demonstrate her solidarity. 

“I have not talked to her since,” Hernandez said last week in an interview with JI. “I think a lot of folks in the community feel they were really used in a sense,” she added, alleging that Ansari “was very careful with all her words because she wanted the support and the financial backing” in a closely contested race. 

Hernandez added that she did not think she could reasonably support Ansari’s reelection or ask Jewish community members to get behind her as she had in the primary race two years ago.

In an interview with JI on Wednesday, Ansari said that she has received positive feedback from Jewish voters in her district about her position on Israel. “I do believe I still have significant support from the Jewish community in Arizona,” she added, affirming that her “relationship to Arizona’s Jewish community has always been, and will continue to be, one of deep engagement and mutual respect.”

“I’m sorry that some people may feel misled, but that’s not how I see it at all,” she said, arguing that her views on the Middle East simply underscore the extent to which “the context and the situation on the ground have changed dramatically since a couple of years ago.”

Ansari said her office keeps a log of local outreach that shows most of her constituents, “if not the vast majority, are pretty in line with the American public on this issue,” stressing voters overwhelmingly agree “that what has happened in Gaza has been atrocious, that we need to really consider using U.S. leverage on how to influence Israeli policy and deep opposition to the far-right Netanyahu government.”

Still, her erstwhile Jewish supporters said they felt betrayed by her shift and questioned her sincerity. “I still really can’t believe how she played us,” said one pro-Israel leader in the state who had enthusiastically backed Ansari’s 2024 bid and was granted anonymity to speak freely about frustrations with the freshman lawmaker. “I thought she was somebody different.”

In her first Middle East policy test as a member of Congress in January, Ansari broke with progressives in backing Republican-led legislation to sanction the International Criminal Court for issuing arrest warrants against senior Israeli officials, even as she clarified it “wasn’t an easy vote.”

But since then, Ansari has adopted a more openly hostile approach to Israel that has fueled a mounting sense of disappointment among her Jewish allies who had believed she would strike a balanced tone while in the House. She is a co-sponsor of the Block the Bombs Act, which would impose sweeping new restrictions on weapons sales or transfers to Israel, for instance, and was an early backer of a Lebanon war powers resolution, introduced by Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), aimed at blocking U.S. support for Israeli military operations against Hezbollah, an Iranian terrorist proxy.

During an interview this week with Mehdi Hasan of the media outlet Zeteo that underscored her growing ties to the far left, Ansari said for the first time she believed that Israel had committed genocide in Gaza as well as Lebanon, citing a U.N. report released this month. “I just don’t think we can continue to mince our words or deny what so many credible actors and institutions and doctors are saying,” she said of her thinking.

Ansari told JI she was “deeply sympathetic” to Jewish colleagues and constituents who “find the term genocide to be extremely hurtful,” saying that she did not “believe that a word should be used as a litmus test” in political debates over Israel that have consumed several recent Democratic primary races.

“Ultimately,” she said, “being clear about what has happened in Gaza and what continues to happen is not to minimize the horrors of either the Holocaust or the violence committed on Oct. 7 by Hamas, and I continue to condemn that forcefully and continue to believe Israelis deserve to live in peace and security in the state of Israel, and I believe we need a secure Palestinian state.”

Elsewhere in the Zeteo discussion, Ansari said that she remained uncertain about where she would land on an anticipated House vote over an amendment led by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) to slash the annual $3.3 billion in military aid the U.S. is set to provide Israel in the 2027 State Department funding bill, a controversial effort that Jewish activists in Arizona have urged her to oppose, according to a recent email shared with JI.

She also vowed to reject financial assistance from pro-Israel groups including AIPAC and Democratic Majority for Israel, the latter of which endorsed her 2024 campaign and pumped more than $400,000 into the race to boost her bid, hailing her victory as proof “that being pro-Israel is not just wise policy, but also winning politics.” 

“I just don’t want anyone to think that any of my decisions are influenced by any organization,” she explained to Zeteo. “They never, quite frankly, have been or should.”

Speaking with JI, Ansari said she has continued to engage with DMFI and has a “respectful relationship” with the group, even as she now disavows its support. “I really do find the villainization of the members of these organizations to be very problematic,” she said of the pro-Israel community. “That’s why I have very much not been antagonistic, because I don’t want to give in to that.”

DMFI’s super PAC declined to comment on Ansari’s remarks. A spokesperson for AIPAC did not return a request for comment.

Ansari’s lack of interest in backing from AIPAC comes as the group’s brand has become toxic in a number of Democratic primaries, particularly those in progressive-minded districts. And her shift to a more skeptical position on the U.S.-Israel alliance is reflective of broader polling trends that show eroding support for Israel in both parties — especially among younger voters.

But according to a source with first-hand knowledge of the matter who spoke with JI on the condition of anonymity to address a sensitive subject, Ansari had “worked tirelessly” in her primary to claim an AIPAC endorsement, crafting a position paper with its policy expectations in mind, meeting with AIPAC’s staff and pledging to visit Israel on an AIPAC-sponsored trip if elected to Congress. 

AIPAC held off on supporting Ansari because it was unconvinced about her views and out of deference to Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ), who was backing Terán and asked the group to remain neutral in the primary, the source noted.

Not long after she had entered the House, Ansari privately reiterated her interest in visiting Israel on an AIPAC-led congressional delegation, according to the source. But despite her prior outreach, her team said then that she did not want an AIPAC endorsement — indicating that it was too early in her tenure and she needed more time to acquaint herself with the group.

Ansari did not dispute that account but added there were irreconcilable disagreements with AIPAC that precluded constructive conversation, not to mention an endorsement. “The truth, from my perspective, is that there was never any room for policy differences with AIPAC,” she said, while stressing that the group “continued to provide feedback on” her positions that she was “unwilling to make.”

Despite having voiced interest in visiting Israel with AIPAC, Ansari said she “could not justify taking part” in a trip last year, amid “the continuation of violence in Gaza” and “well into the Trump administration.” Her outspoken opposition to the war in Iran subsequently hardened her resistance to such a trip, she suggested.

One pro-Israel activist in Arizona said that Jewish leaders who got behind Ansari in 2024 and are now stung by her reversals should not necessarily feel surprised, noting she had no demonstrable record as a strong supporter of Israel prior to her campaign for Congress.

In some ways, Ansari’s evolution echoes that of Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-FL), a fellow progressive who was elected in 2022 after making a range of commitments to uphold support for Israel that he has since reneged on in Congress, stoking disenchantment among local Jewish leaders who were initially energized over his campaign.

But while Frost had engaged in private diplomacy with DMFI to preempt attacks as he ran against the group’s preferred candidate, Ansari actively courted and accepted support from the pro-Israel community in her primary, a key distinguishing factor of the race featuring an opponent seen as more critical of Israel. 

Zachary Bell, a Jewish community activist in Phoenix who has spoken to Ansari about Israel and Gaza, said that he was “very happy with how she has responded” to the wars in the Middle East. “I am far from a super far-left, anti-Israel person,” he clarified. “I think there is a wide range of opinions on this issue in the Jewish community,” he added. “She has done a very good job seriously engaging with people across that spectrum.”

Bell volunteers with J Street, the progressive Israel advocacy group, but said he was speaking for himself. J Street endorsed Terán, Ansari’s primary rival, in 2024, and it has not backed Ansari this cycle, as she runs unopposed for a second term in Arizona’s solidly Democratic 3rd Congressional District. 

A Jewish community leader in Arizona said Ansari’s shifting stances on Israel indicate that she no longer feels she needs support from former pro-Israel allies to continue holding her seat. “She’s packing her bags for reelection, and there is a weight limit,” the Jewish leader told JI. “Israel, right now, weighs too much for her.”

Adam Goodman, a Jewish activist in Phoenix who supported Ansari’s campaign in 2024, said he was aligned with the congresswoman “on many issues,” calling her “smart, pragmatic and engaging, with a long political career ahead of her.”

But while he had once praised Ansari as “unequivocal in her support for Israel,” Goodman suggested he has since grown disillusioned about the congresswoman’s current approach. 

“Unfortunately,” he told JI, “she is demagoguing Israel without holding other countries to the same standard.”

Ansari, for her part, said that her views were more carefully considered than her critics speculated and dismissed accusations that she is playing politics on Israel. “I’m not somebody who jumps on any sort of bandwagon,” she insisted to JI. “I think very deeply about foreign policy.”

“We are having quite the reckoning within the Democratic caucus and Congress about all of these issues right now,” she said.

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), the ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said she’ll no longer accept support from AIPAC, a major break with the pro-Israel group by one of the key power players in the House.

As the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, in line to again be the committee chair if Democrats retake the House, DeLauro has significant sway on federal funding matters, including the provision of aid to Israel.

DeLauro has long publicly affiliated more closely with J Street than AIPAC, and has staked out some positions more critical of Israel, including floating conditions on U.S. aid. But AIPAC has maintained its support for and endorsement of the senior Democrat, whose voice can be crucial to advancing its priorities.

“Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro is taking no contributions from AIPAC. She did in prior years when she believed Israel was acting like a strategic partner & was committed to a two-state solution,” DeLauro’s campaign manager Allison Dodge said in a statement posted on X. “It is abundantly clear now that the Netanyahu government has no interest in either.”

Dodge emphasized that DeLauro has “repeatedly called out the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and Israel’s annexation of the West Bank,” as well as pushed for additional aid to Gaza and an amendment in the 2027 Defense Appropriations bill that would “ensure U.S. weapons and equipment are not being used in violation of the ceasefire.”

Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY), a pro-Israel Jewish Democrat who was unseated in a bitter primary on Tuesday, warned in his concession speech that antisemitism “will ultimately be the undoing of our democracy if we all don’t lean in and speak out.”

“Jews have given back so much to this country,” the two-term lawmaker said. “As history has taught us, antisemitic tropes and stereotypes, some of which I heard personally on this campaign, will ultimately be the undoing of our democracy if we all don’t lean in and speak out — even if it’s not politically expedient.”

Goldman, who was resoundingly defeated by Brad Lander, the former city comptroller backed by New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, faced blowback during the campaign over his support for Israel and ties to the pro-Israel lobbying group AIPAC — some of which invoked hostile antisemitic rhetoric.

In the final days of the primary, a Brooklyn coffee shop Goldman patronized wrote in an incendiary online post it was banning him over his pro-Israel views, calling him a “genocide enabler” and saying his purchase “probably” came from AIPAC — which endorsed him but did not engage directly in the race.

The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division said Monday it had opened an investigation into the cafe for discrimination, though Goldman clarified he did not believe the incident warranted legal scrutiny.

“Every day I tried to approach this job with integrity, with seriousness and courage to stand up for what is right, even when it was not politically expedient,” the ousted congressman said in his concession speech, in an apparent reference to his defense of Israel over the course of the primary.

Goldman, a former federal prosecutor who rose to national prominence as the lead counsel during President Donald Trump’s first impeachment, shared a range of progressive policy views with Lander, a fellow Jewish Democrat who identifies as a progressive Zionist. 

Despite their agreements on several key issues, the race ultimately became a referendum on support for Israel in the Democratic Party and Goldman’s refusal to disavow his Zionist ideals. He lost by more than 30 points, with 90% of the vote tallied as of Wednesday.

Lander, who accused Israel of genocide in Gaza and called for ending U.S. aid to the Jewish state, largely aligned his campaign with the anti-Zionist far left as he touted his endorsement from Mamdani, a key ally who also played a decisive role in helping elevate two democratic socialists with records of vocal anti-Israel activism to the nomination on Tuesday.

In his victory speech, Lander, who won a decisive 66% of the vote in New York’s 10th Congressional District, praised Goldman “for how he responded to some of the toxic rhetoric that he and his staff faced over the past couple days,” saying his opponent had acted “with grace and with gratitude.”

“That is something we need more of in our politics,” Lander added. 

Even as he raised alarms about antisemitism on the left, Goldman called on his supporters to “remember the enemy to all that we want and all that we hope for is in the White House, not in our own party.”

The Democratic Party, Goldman said, “has always been at its strongest when it has welcomed a broad coalition of voices united by those shared democratic values of equal rights, social justice, human rights.”

“We have never required unanimity of opinion to stand together against the forces that truly threaten our democracy,” he argued in his concession speech. “And we should not demonize, or push away, anyone who shares our mutual goals.”

A spokesperson for Goldman did not respond to a request for an interview on Wednesday.

Maryland state Del. Adrian Boafo prevailed on Tuesday in the crowded Democratic primary to replace retiring Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), who endorsed him, marking a legacy-burnishing victory for the veteran congressman and his pro-Israel allies.

The Associated Press called the race after Boafo had secured 32% of the vote with about one-half of ballots counted Tuesday night. His nearest competitor, businesswoman Quincy Bareebe, lagged well behind with 19% of the vote. 

Boafo’s win came after a forceful push by Hoyer, pro-Israel groups and establishment Democrats to help elevate the congressman’s hand-picked former campaign manager in a race that featured two dozen candidates vying to represent Maryland’s 5th Congressional District. 

AIPAC’s super PAC, United Democracy Project, was the biggest spender in the race, investing more than $5.7 million on ads boosting Boafo, including one featuring Hoyer in a direct-to-camera appeal in the closing stretch of the primary. Boafo was also backed by Gov. Wes Moore and Sen. Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), among others.

UDP’s involvement was a risk for the group, as well as a test of its influence, as it has faced scrutiny from Democrats over its engagement in recent primaries. But the super PAC’s support for Boafo demonstrated that it could still play a significant role in Democratic races, even as its brand has become toxic to a growing number of Democrats.

The group’s spending drew criticism in Maryland, most notably from Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), who accused AIPAC and crypto-aligned interests in the race of “trying to buy” the seat. But Van Hollen did not make an endorsement in the race as the left failed to unite behind one candidate.

In the final days of the race, three other Democratic contenders — Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn, former Prince George’s County Executive Rushern Baker and Bareebe — teamed up to decry the flood of outside spending that shaped the race. Barebee came in second on Tuesday, while Dunn came in third. 

Their pushback was not enough to thwart Hoyer’s choice for the nomination in a moderate district that has been amenable to the congressman’s close ties to AIPAC. Boafo, 32, was also endorsed by Democratic Majority for Israel’s super PAC, which is led by Brian Romick, a former senior aide to Hoyer, who is retiring after 45 years in the House.

In a statement to social media, AIPAC said that Boafo’s victory had “made clear his vision to carry forward the strong pro-Israel legacy of Rep. Steny Hoyer, one of Congress’s most steadfast champions of the U.S.-Israel relationship.”

“United Democracy Project was proud to support Boafo and help ensure this seat remains represented by pro-Israel leadership,” AIPAC added.

As Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) prepares to step down at the end of his current term, the former Democratic House majority leader is staking his pro-Israel legacy on a little-known candidate who he hopes will uphold his long-standing commitment to maintaining a close relationship with the Jewish state.

In throwing his support behind Adrian Boafo, a 32-year-old Maryland state delegate who is among nearly two dozen Democratic candidates running in Maryland’s 5th Congressional District primary on Tuesday, Hoyer, 87, is using his connections to establishment party leaders and ties with pro-Israel groups to boost his hand-picked choice to the nomination for a safely blue seat.

United Democracy Project, AIPAC’s super PAC, has emerged as the biggest spender in the race, investing more than $5.7 million as part of an aggressive effort to promote Boafo launched by Hoyer and his allies. 

The well-funded foray is a useful illustration of the degree to which planning and organization helped put Boafo in contention for the seat Hoyer has held for 45 years, in contrast with recent primaries where UDP and other pro-Israel advocacy groups have been relatively cautious with their engagement while being outflanked by the far left.

A UDP source, granted anonymity to speak candidly about the race, said polling showed Boafo was not in the lead when Hoyer endorsed him in January. “It’s a super close race that could go either way,” the source told Jewish Insider on Monday, stressing a high level of undecided primary voters. “Many candidates are in contention.”

One Jewish Democrat in Maryland told JI that Hoyer “put a heavy finger on the scale” in the race, calling in “chits” with influential Democratic officials who gave endorsements to Boafo, such as Gov. Wes Moore and Sen. Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD) — both of whom are featured in UDP’s ad blitz that began late last month. 

Boafo also gained support from Democratic Majority for Israel’s super PAC led by Brian Romick, a former longtime senior aide to Hoyer. The group backed him on its first slate of non-incumbent endorsements not long after Hoyer had expressed his preference in the race. Boafo is a former campaign manager for Hoyer.

In New York City’s closely watched primaries on Tuesday, meanwhile, UDP and DMFI PAC have largely been absent from key races where far-left challengers are threatening to unseat pro-Israel incumbents. Polling has indicated that Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) is facing long odds against Brad Lander, a former city comptroller, while Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-NY) hopes to fend off Darializa Avila Chevalier, a democratic socialist insurgent with a long record of anti-Israel activism.

Both Lander and Avila Chevalier have been buoyed by endorsements from New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani — who is using his own early political capital on a risky gambit to help lift a slate of candidates that has angered the Democratic establishment. 

Mamdani has also joined forces with the Democratic Socialists of America’s New York City chapter, which is flexing its local organizational muscle to help Avila Chevalier and Claire Valdez, a state assemblymember who is facing off against Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso, a progressive backed by retiring Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-NY). 

Even as far-left super PACs like American Priorities, a new group created to counter AIPAC’s spending in Democratic primaries, have been surging money into New York City, UDP has remained on the sidelines — with the exception of money it recently funneled to a pro-Espaillat super PAC disclosed in campaign filings late last week. Still, the pro-Israel group has not been directly engaged in New York City, despite its historic support for Goldman and Espaillat.

UDP has reason for caution, as AIPAC’s brand has become toxic among a growing number of Democrats who have vowed to reject its support and view it as a noxious presence in contested primaries.

Pro-Israel activists speculated UDP chose to stay out of a crowded House contest in New Jersey this month featuring some credible moderate candidates because it had earlier bungled its involvement in another race in the state with an aggressive spending strategy that inadvertently helped elevate a far-left Israel critic to a seat in the House. 

In the June primary, some Jewish leaders in New Jersey questioned if UDP’s lack of involvement had helped the nominee, Adam Hamawy, avoid credible opposition — even as he faced scrutiny over his past ties to a radical Muslim cleric convicted of terrorism.

Now, however, UDP is embracing a more proactive approach in Maryland as it seeks to push Boafo past the finish line on Tuesday, in a maneuver suggesting that it is comfortable courting a moderate voter base that Hoyer has represented as a staunch supporter of Israel as well as a close AIPAC ally. 

While UDP has faced backlash from the left, the response has been largely reactive. In recent weeks, for instance, the group has drawn criticism from Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), a vocal detractor of Israel, who has accused AIPAC and crypto-linked interests in the race of “trying to buy” the seat, which extends southward from the eastern Washington suburbs of Prince George’s County. Van Hollen has not made an endorsement in the race.

Meanwhile, three Democratic primary candidates, including Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn, former Prince George’s County Executive Rushern Baker and businesswoman Quincy Bareebe, teamed up to decry the flood of outside spending that is shaping the race. 

“Special interests don’t spend money out of civic goodwill,” Baker said last week. “They spend the kind of money that we see because they expect someone to work for them.”

Dunn, who faced opposition from UDP in a separate race last cycle, has claimed Boafo is “benefiting from the MAGA donors who fund AIPAC.”

In an unusual move, UDP released an ad last week seeking to counter the negative attention in which Hoyer himself spoke in a direct-to-camera appeal.

“You’ve probably seen the attacks on Adrian Boafo,” Hoyer said. “Let’s get something straight. Adrian is a man of deep integrity. He has the courage to stand up to any special interest. I trust him. You can, too.”

For his part, Boafo pledges on his campaign site to “strengthen the U.S.-Israel alliance and ensure” it “has the security assistance it needs to defend itself,” but has distanced himself from UDP, saying in response to Van Hollen’s remarks “that big money has no place in politics.”

His comments illustrate how even as AIPAC seeks to build new relationships amid declining support from Democratic members, its preferred candidates are — at least publicly — keeping the group at arm’s length.

If Boafo prevails in Tuesday’s primary, though, his victory could also help AIPAC to reset the narrative, while providing the group with a potential blueprint for engagement in future races as it seeks to fend off the anti-Israel left.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani doubled down on his rhetorical assault on AIPAC on Monday, after Jewish groups over the weekend criticized his comments about the pro-Israel organization at a Thursday rally last week that they argued evoked classic antisemitic tropes.

Mamdani defended naming AIPAC among the “monsters who move dark money,” maintaining that he was quoting 20th century Marxist philosopher Antonio Gramsci’s comment about living in a “time of monsters.” But the phrase is a notorious and widely known misquote of Gramsci’s, though the mayor evinced no awareness of the inaccuracy — and backed up his argument with statistics from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Health Ministry alleging the death of more than 1,000 Palestinians at the hands of the IDF since the ceasefire last fall.

“When I am speaking about AIPAC, I am speaking about an organization that has been supportive of the status quo, that has fought any attempt to actually deliver to not just people in Palestine but frankly through much of the region,” he asserted on Monday following an unrelated event at City Hall. “Oftentimes they also support the status quo through dark money, by filtering money that would’ve previously been directed from AIPAC, now through other shell organizations whose identities of their contributors are only made clear after the election.”

Candidates Mamdani has endorsed for Congress have received the backing of multiple large PACs, including Justice Democrats, that received money through organizations that mask the identities of their contributors through the exact mechanisms he lamented on Monday. 

Mamdani himself attended the April gala of one such organization, the Institute for Middle East Understanding — which Jewish Insider recently revealed had stood up a dark money arm of its own, the IMEU Policy Project. This has enabled the organization to pump hundreds of thousands of dollars from anonymous donors into the Justice Democrats PAC as part of a nationwide effort to defeat pro-Israel candidates for Congress. 

The mayor’s original remarks, which included claims that AIPAC and similar organizations are “turning us against one another,” sparked alarm among prominent Jewish groups, who connected them to tropes historically used to target Jewish and pro-Zionist individuals and movements.

“Soviet anti-Zionist campaigns and earlier antisemitic movements similarly portrayed Jewish organizations as pursuing power not to achieve political goals, but because Jews themselves were said to crave influence and control,” Jim Berk, CEO of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, said in a statement on Friday. “The suggestion that Jewish political participation is inherently suspect, illegitimate, or secretly manipulative is abhorrent. This is the same old story, retold in a new language.”

Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt voiced outrage on Sunday that the mayor had not walked back or clarified his statement.

“This is the kind of bigoted conspiracy mongering that you expect from unhinged streamers or white supremacists. It’s not the language that we should expect from the mayor,” Greenblatt posted to social media, highlighting the dramatic spike in antisemitic incidents in New York following the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel and the ensuing war in Gaza. “This is not a principled disagreement. This is prejudice pure and simple. It is deliberate, dangerous and disgraceful.”

Ted Deutch, CEO of the American Jewish Committee, wrote on X, “When you use your position to label people you disagree with as monsters — people who live and work and pay taxes in the city you lead, people who loved the Knicks championship parade as much as you did, people who spent yesterday celebrating their fathers and grandfathers — you are turning people against one another.”

“You want to debate ideas? Fine. But when you call people monsters, you’re not debating ideas, you’re dehumanizing the people you disagree with. And when that comes from a mayor, it creates an environment where people hear clearly who is being cast as outside the community, one where they wonder whether they can safely live and speak as themselves,” he continued.

And Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) noted that the mayor’s speech on Thursday included no words of criticism for Hamas or Hezbollah, or their sponsor Iran.

“Swap ‘AIPAC for ‘Jews’ and it’s the oldest antisemitic conspiracy theory in the books,” the Garden State lawmaker wrote on X. “That’s not criticizing a lobby. That’s laundering antisemitism from your podium as Mayor of a city with more than a million Jews. This bullshit is dangerous.”

Vice President JD Vance warned pro-Israel advocates against seeing Israel and the U.S. as always aligned and cautioned against conflating criticism of the Israeli government with antisemitism, saying that “if everything is Jew hatred, then nothing is Jew hatred.”

In an episode of Christian conservative commentator Allie Beth Stuckey’s podcast podcast released on Friday, Vance said that “pro-Israel people in the United States make two critical mistakes. One … is not delineating between America’s interests and Israeli interests, because they’re not always the same.”

“But the second is conflating criticism of a particular government with Jew hatred. Because if everything is Jew hatred, then nothing is Jew hatred,” he continued. “And we have to be very careful not to, you know, in order to serve a certain foreign policy objective, try to criticize somebody as antisemitic when they’re just not.”

Asked by Stuckey if Israel has an “outsized influence in the U.S.,” Vance said, “I certainly think that Israel, like a lot of other countries, tries to influence American politics. I sort of take that as a given. And what I think is that American leaders have to be very careful that when we pursue something, we’re doing it for America’s best interest and not for any other country’s best interest.”

Vance added that the late conservative influencer Charlie Kirk “was very worried about Israeli influence in American politics. He also really disliked antisemitism.”

Stuckey raised the “the obsession that some people have, I would say on the right, with blaming all of their problems on Israel, all of their disagreements with Trump on some secret Israeli influence,” which she said she sees “more prominently on the right than I see the true ‘Israel first’ kind of obsession that you seem to be describing.”

“I see both, and I think both are bad,” Vance responded. But he said he’s “particularly sensitive” to what he views as the elevation of Israel’s interests because he’s “been defending the president’s decision to end the Iran [war], and I find often the arguments are, ‘Well, Israel doesn’t think this is good, therefore it’s bad.’ And my reaction is: Israel’s opinions matter, but fundamentally they are separate.”

“But you’re right. I mean, there are certainly people who take every frustration with the Trump administration, every policy disagreement becomes because of Israel, and that is absolutely wrong. And again, I think that that is one of those things that can bleed into some very dark places,” he continued.

Vance also defended the emerging deal with Iran, prior to departing over the weekend for direct negotiations with Tehran’s representatives in Switzerland. “You do still have terrorist elements within the regime, but you also have pragmatic elements within the regime who are actually affirmatively trying to have a better relationship with the United States,” he said.

Far-left antisemitic streamer Hasan Piker, replying to a video of Vance’s comments about criticism of the Israeli government and antisemitism, wrote on X, “I GOT BANNED FROM THE UK FOR SAYING THIS VERBATIM BTW.”

American Priorities, a new super PAC created as a progressive counterweight to pro-Israel spending in Democratic primaries, has drawn scrutiny in recent weeks for accepting contributions from donors who have given to Republicans — even as its allies on the far left have accused AIPAC, a chief rival, of serving as a Trojan horse to advance GOP-linked interests in safe blue districts.

Meanwhile, filings show that the anti-Israel group has received $250,000 from a tech executive whose firm is developing AI data centers in New York State. That money has boosted two democratic socialist House candidates in New York City who oppose efforts to expand data centers.

Claire Valdez, a state assemblymember running to succeed retiring Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-NY), and Darializa Avila Chevalier, an anti-Israel activist who is challenging Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-NY), have benefited from over $2 million in estimated support from American Priorities in the final stretch of their closely contested primaries set for next Tuesday.

But the source of the group’s spending has not neatly aligned with the values its preferred candidates have promoted during their campaigns, underscoring the degree to which American Priorities has become a liability as well as a financial lifeline while emerging as a dominant player in the midterms.

Both Valdez and Avila Chevalier, for instance, have advocated for a federal moratorium on AI data center construction — despite the significant contribution to American Priorities from Nazar Khan, the co-founder of TeraWulf, a bitcoin mining company pivoting to AI infrastructure development. The firm is now pressing to move forward with proposed construction of an AI data center in New York’s Finger Lakes region, which has faced local opposition from residents questioning its environmental impact. 

TeraWulf is also in the process of expanding another data center in western New York that “is expected to rank among the largest” facilities of its kind in North America, according to a February press release.

Khan did not respond to a request for comment from Jewish Insider, nor did campaign representatives for Valdez or Avila Chevalier.

Brad Lander, the former New York City comptroller mounting a challenge to Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY), has also said he favors an AI data center moratorium. American Priorities has indicated that it would spend on his behalf as part of a multimillion-dollar pledge to elevate Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s endorsed slate of far-left House candidates, but it has yet to do so as it has focused on Valdez and Avila Chevalier, who are also backed by the Democratic Socialists of America.

The anti-Israel group has helped elevate a range of House candidates on the left this election cycle. But its aggressive spending in New York City has stoked backlash, particularly in light of its small handful of donors who have also given to far-right Republicans such as former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) and recently ousted Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY).

For his part, Espaillat, a veteran incumbent backed by AIPAC, has accused Avila Chevalier of accepting support from “a millionaire in Texas” who “funded [Texas Gov.] Greg Abbott,” a reference to Hussein Mahrouq, who has contributed $525,000 to American Priorities in recent months.

Avila Chevalier, who vows to ban super PAC money from elections on her campaign website, has denied knowledge of American Priorities’ spending, though she has not discouraged the group from engaging in her primary. 

“I control my campaign and the money that my campaign receives,” Avila Chevalier, whose past inflammatory social media posts have featured in attack ads from pro-Espaillat groups, said recently.

Meanwhile, Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso and City Councilmember Julie Won, who are both facing Valdez in the primary in the 7th District, teamed up in a joint statement last week to accuse their opponent of reneging on her pledge to reject super PAC spending. 

“Claire has turned what should have been a race about our records and vision for the people of Brooklyn and Queens into a Super PAC-driven negative election,” Reynoso and Won wrote.

Valdez, who has sought to highlight small-dollar donations, has cautiously justified the super PAC investments as a response to heavy spending from the AI and crypto industries as well as AIPAC. “The way that some people are countering that is by also spending money,” she said last week.

Earlier this week, Valdez drew criticism for falsely speculating that AIPAC was behind a newly formed super PAC, Real Fight NYC, that is spending to boost Reynoso’s campaign. But AIPAC’s super PAC, United Democracy Project, said it had no involvement, while the American Federation of Teachers took credit for a large donation.

While AIPAC has been a regular source of attacks from Valdez and Avila Chevalier, the group’s super PAC has not been directly involved in their primaries.

The far left is gaining traction in its electoral battle against the mainstream pro-Israel political community, notching a recent string of victories in high-profile Democratic primaries as it now finds itself on stronger financial footing compared to past campaign cycles.

Thanks in part to a range of new super PACs created to counter AIPAC’s political spending, the far left has elevated several anti-Israel Democrats in New Jersey, Pennsylvania and California to the nomination in key congressional primaries, with its sights set on closely contested upcoming matchups in New York City and Michigan.

In some cases, the anti-Israel left — buoyed by public opinion that has swung against the Jewish state in the wake of the war in Gaza — has been at parity or outspending pro-Israel groups, marking a significant change.

The most prominent vehicle for such spending is the recently launched American Priorities super PAC — which has pledged to spend at least $10 million during the midterms. The group most recently helped lift Randy Villegas, a progressive vying to unseat Rep. David Valadao (R-CA), in California. He claimed victory in the primary over Jasmeet Bains — a state lawmaker supported by pro-Israel activists and national Democatic leaders. American Priorities had invested heavily on behalf of Villegas, going toe to toe with Democratic Majority for Israel’s political arm — whose $500,000 for Bains failed to help her advance to the November election.

The anti-Israel PAC also played a role in securing wins for Pennsylvania state Rep. Chris Rabb, who faced scrutiny for pushing an antisemitic conspiracy theory before his House primary in Philadelphia last month, and Adam Hamawy, a retired Army surgeon who claimed the Democratic nomination in a central New Jersey district despite past controversial links to a convicted terrorist. American Priorities spent over $1.5 million in the crowded race to bolster Hamawy’s campaign.

Notably, AIPAC’s well-funded super PAC, United Democracy Project, chose to stay on the sidelines in all three of those races, as the far left has capitalized on the pro-Israel group’s unpopularity within the Democratic Party, particularly in heavily progressive districts where American Priorities is engaging most significantly.

AIPAC’s relatively cautious approach to Democratic races this cycle reflects a changing political landscape for the formidable pro-Israel group, which has flexed its financial resources in consequential primaries that meaningfully shaped the House Democratic caucus.

Just two years ago, UDP and DMFI PAC had both engaged in a well-resourced effort to defeat two of the most prominent Israel critics in the House, Reps. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) and Cori Bush (D-MO), who were ousted by pro-Israel Democrats currently sitting in Congress.

By contrast, UDP has now been absent from major primaries where AIPAC-endorsed incumbents are facing serious challenges from the far left. In New York City’s June 23 primary, Reps. Adriano Espaillat (D-NY) and Dan Goldman (D-NY) are preparing to defend their seats in tough reelection fights against outspoken critics of Israel, backed by Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who have highlighted their ties to AIPAC as a top vulnerability.

American Priorities, in a joint effort with Justice Democrats — the far-left, incumbent-challenging group that helped propel the Squad to Congress in 2018 — is now investing aggressively in Espaillat’s race to help Darializa Avila Chevalier, a community organizer and anti-Israel activist whose past deleted extremist online posts have recently fueled attacks against her from super PACs backing the incumbent. 

Justice Democrats, which had struggled to raise money last cycle as it found itself on the defensive in primaries against UDP, has rebounded and become a driving force behind far-left candidates in the current election cycle — powered in part by a major donation from an anti-Israel dark money group also connected to American Priorities.

The super PAC, led by a progressive strategist who was previously the independent expenditure director for Justice Democrats, has raised about $5.4 million primarily through a small network of Arab American donors who have contributed significant amounts. It entered June with $1.2 million on hand, according to its latest filing — a total that is greatly overshadowed by UDP’s nearly $95 million war chest.

But even critics of American Priorities and affiliated groups in its loose fundraising network acknowledge that the super PAC is spending wisely in races where it believes it can have a potential impact — especially as AIPAC has ceded some ground to its opponents by staying out of contested primaries in places including New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

“They took a page out of the AIPAC playbook over the past 30 years, in terms of recruiting and maintaining relationships with members of Congress,” Sara Forman, a longtime Democratic operative and Jewish community activist, told Jewish Insider on Thursday. “They understood that this was all about funding.”

In many ways, American Priorities in particular has imitated UDP in both style and strategy, down to its vaguely patriotic-sounding name. The group has also accepted contributions from several donors who have given to Republicans, even as it has criticized AIPAC, which is bipartisan, as a Trojan horse advancing GOP interests in Democratic strongholds.

One donor, Hussein Mahrouq, a Texas businessman who has contributed $625,000 while also supporting far-right Republicans, told JI that he is “not affiliated with any political party,” and believes that “decisions affecting our country should be made based on what is best for the United States, independent of pressure from any foreign government, foreign interest group or partisan agenda.”

American Priorities is also involved with a new super PAC called Fighting for Michigan, which vowed this week to invest in “a multimillion-dollar” campaign to boost Abdul El-Sayed, a far-left Israel critic gaining momentum in the state’s three-way Senate primary set for Aug. 4.

“We know big-money groups representing the Israel lobby, corporate interests and AI billionaires are going to spend heavily against Abdul in the coming days,” Connor Farrell, a progressive strategist who is working with the super PAC, told Axios of its effort.

While AIPAC is viewed as a lightning rod in Michigan’s competitive Democratic Senate primary, UDP notably jumped into the race this week with an initial ad buy of around $2 million to help Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI), a pro-Israel moderate also favored by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY). 

It remains to be seen if AIPAC and other pro-Israel organizations will be matched or outnumbered by opposing groups amid a surge of new spending in the race, which is among the most closely watched in the country.

With the anti-Israel left emboldened by a growing Democratic skepticism of the U.S. relationship with Israel and a national political environment favorable to anti-establishment views, some Jewish and pro-Israel Democrats are raising concerns that their community is not meeting the moment in response.

“This should be a wake-up call to the Jewish community,” said Kenneth Baer, a former Obama administration staffer who leads a communications firm.

Sam Lauter, a veteran pro-Israel strategist in the San Francisco Bay Area and a DMFI board member, said simply that the “playing field has gotten bigger” over the past several years.

But he also attributed the left’s ascendance to a strategic miscalculation in the pro-Israel activist community that had long been a dominant force in elections.

“Where our community failed is seeing that our opposition has been building and preparing and getting ready for the moment where they could take the fight to us, and our community neglected to pay close attention to that,” Lauter told JI.

Experts said on Wednesday that the Trump administration has failed to adequately tap into pro-Western sentiment among the Iranian public following the regime’s violent crackdown on nationwide protests earlier this year, arguing that the White House is missing a key opportunity to cultivate internal pressure within Iran.

Robert Satloff, executive director of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, argued that the Trump administration should expand U.S. broadcasting into Iran, improve internet access for Iranians and ease pathways for dissidents seeking refuge in the U.S. to “lay the groundwork for the day when it becomes a much more real possibility to have this sort of regime change.” Satloff outlined his proposals during a Wednesday town hall hosted by Iran International, a U.K.-based Persian-language news network. “None of [the Iranian people] are being invested in in any significant way by the Trump administration,” he said.

In February, PBS reported that over 7,000 Iranians were killed during the regime’s violent crackdowns on nationwide protests that began in December. President Donald Trump at the time urged Iranians to keep protesting, declaring that “help is on the way.” Recent surveys inside Iran have shown that roughly 89% of Iranians support a “democratic political system.” 

However, with Trump rarely bringing up the human rights abuses of the Iranian government as he seeks a diplomatic deal with the Islamic Republic, the protesters who Trump initially promised to help have been deterred by the Iran’s intensive crackdowns and the lack of a response to counter them. 

That vacuum, Satloff argued, is what Washington should be working to fill. He elaborated on the three proposals, each aimed at strengthening the U.S. relationship with the Iranian public.

First, Satloff said the U.S. would benefit from providing “better and more American broadcasting” to Iranians and ensuring that they “have internet access and that they cannot be denied this by their capricious government.” 

To accomplish this, the Trump administration should “work with private companies,” Satloff told Jewish Insider.

“Much of this requires a shift of policy, not an allocation of money,” Satloff pointed out. “That is, to embrace U.S. international broadcasting as an important asset, not to try to run it out of business, as has been the case in this administration.” Following Trump’s 2025 attempts to dismantle Voice of America, including its Persian broadcasts, a federal judge ordered more than 1,000 laid-off staff reinstated this past March. 

Satloff also argued that the U.S. should “change our visa and asylum regulations” to provide Iranians fleeing the regime with “a welcoming home” and a “base” to continue organizing against the regime.

Alex Vatanka, senior fellow at the Middle East Institute in Washington, reaffirmed that the “Iranian public sentiment is anti-regime by and large,” during the panel, elaborating on the importance of the U.S. screening visa applicants carefully and avoiding becoming the “bad guys.” 

He called it “fair game” to deny a visa to someone with a background in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, but stressed the need for accuracy, warning that overbroad denials risk alienating the population the White House needs on its side. 

Panelists acknowledged that these measures won’t dislodge the Islamic Republic on their own. Satloff said that under the current state of affairs, “none of this is going to bring down the government.”

“I think the important thing for us is to change behavior,” Satloff continued, arguing that “as the Iranian people see the weaknesses of their own regime then maybe you will find more organized elements that come forward in leadership that challenges” its leadership.

“I don’t even see that foundation yet for us to work with,” he added.

Rachel Brandenburg, Washington managing director and senior policy analyst at the Israel Policy Forum, told JI that “among the reasons the U.S. would provide the Iranians with ways to circumvent an internet blackout” is to support their ability to “communicate with each other and with the world.” Brandenburg explained this is “among [the] tools that could help the Iranian people organize protests and other opposition to the regime, whether openly or privately.”

Satloff tied his proposals back to potentially dismantling the IRGC — a goal the administration has stated but, in his telling, done little to pursue. Without sustained engagement with ordinary Iranians, he argued, there may be no constituency for Washington to work with when the moment for a regime change comes.

“All of this would expand U.S. engagement with ordinary Iranians,” Satloff told JI, “which is a necessary prerequisite for any serious effort at empowering Iranians to do what President Trump said he hoped they would do — take back their country.”

Some pro-Israel members of the United Teachers Los Angeles House of Representatives are condemning the union for bypassing its own policies to expel a Jewish teacher and Zionist activist. 

During a June 3 meeting held on Zoom, the union’s House of Representatives — the highest voting body in the union — voted to expel Amy Leserman, who retired as a Los Angeles public school teacher last year and now works at a local Jewish day school. 

Leserman chairs JewTLA, a group that seeks to help Los Angeles students, teachers and families combat classroom antisemitism through legal filings and complaints. However, she remains a polarizing figure even among some pro-Israel members of the community, who say she has personally and publicly targeted individuals she considers antisemitic and pushed union members to resign.

Still, some of those same members argue her removal violated the constitution, alleging it stemmed solely from Leserman’s personal beliefs.

“Amy has done many things in her private time against those she perceives as antisemitic and anti-Israel. She’s done many things that I don’t agree with. She’s gone after people personally, holding them accountable for their antisemitic beliefs. However, in the House of Representatives, she was simply an observer. She was allowed to be there. She never opened up her mouth, she did nothing,” Scott Mandel, a Los Angeles Unified School District teacher for 41 years who has been on UTLA’s board of directors for almost two decades, told Jewish Insider. 

“When the antisemites saw she was there, they demanded she be kicked out because of actions she took,” continued Mandel. “However, she broke no rules according to our constitution.”

Mandel, who attended the meeting, said he spoke up at the time, asserting that “if you want to start judging people because of actions in their personal life, you need to make new rules. Put that in the constitution.”

“If someone is taken out of a meeting because of what they’ve done on their own, you have to make new rules — but this is wrong. Amy is seen as very pro-Israel, so the antisemite coalition — which is big — said out with the rules and demanded her gone. For the first time in my 18 years, I saw somebody expelled for their personal beliefs.” 

UTLA, the labor union of more than 35,000 public school educators in LA, did not respond to a request for comment from JI. 

Leserman, who was a UTLA member for more than 20 years, also asserts the meeting suddenly became “an anti-Israel tirade” with participants “saying they felt threatened by my presence, they couldn’t have me there and that I was a danger to them by being in the meeting.”

She said “the president of the union let this go on for 30 to 40 minutes. [Then] they voted to expel me.” 

“There are people in the union that really resent [my involvement with JewTLA]. I don’t mind them resenting that,” said Leserman, who told JI that the rise of antisemitism in district public schools following Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, terror attacks and ensuing war in Gaza did not factor into her decision to retire. She did not elaborate on what led to that decision.  

The incident received condemnation from other Jewish union members — who also see Leserman as a controversial figure — as well as the regional chapter of the Anti-Defamation League, which called reports of the expulsion “deeply troubling.” 

A pro-Israel source familiar with the union told JI the expulsion followed months of internal tension. 

“The problem with Amy, and why she became toxic within UTLA is that when she retired she was explaining to people how to quit the union,” said the source. “She wound up getting entangled with Right to Work people, whether intentional or not. To the union as a whole, both pro-Israel and anti-Israel unionists, she became kind of toxic because of her association with Right to Work people. To what extent that played a role in what happened with the House of Representatives, it’s not clear. But it’s not black and white or that this came out of the blue.”

The source added: “She’s managed to get herself portrayed as the victim here. Everything the House of Representatives did is wrong, but the history [is important]. It’s not like she walked in as a longtime supporter of Israel and got smacked down. The anonymosity was there because of months and months of trying to get people to quit the union.” 

“I think if people quit the union it just increases the strength of the Israel and Jew haters,” the source added. 

Gregg Solkovits, a former UTLA officer and a retired teacher who has been a member of the union for 38 years, asserted that “without a doubt, it was wrong for the union to expel her.”

“What we have is intolerance from a radical minority of the union who espouses anti-Zionist rhetoric,” Solkovits, who was not on the call, told JI. “The union just elected an officer who is blatantly anti-Israel, and I say antisemitic. It’s wrong on a moral level and I think on a legal level [to expel her]. I don’t think UTLA followed its own procedures on this. It’s unfortunate that union leadership, from the president on down, chose not to say a word when it’s wrong.” 

Mandel and Leserman both pointed to a pervasive anti-Israel obsession within the union.

“This is a group that for the last two years has voted every anti-resolution possible,” said Mandel. “They’ve gotten to the point where they voted that if any politician has ever voted for arms for Israel, UTLA cannot support them. Even if you have a politician who has been the most pro-education, pro-labor person, but one time in their career voted for arms for Israel, UTLA will no longer endorse them. That’s how ridiculous they’ve gotten. They put their personal feelings ahead of what’s good for the union.”  

Leserman said, “The union does not currently have a teachers contract, the district hasn’t signed the one that they agreed on. That should have been the focus of the meeting. Instead, six out of 10 of the items on the schedule had to do with Israel and how bad Israel is. They need to deal with the problems on their doorstep — they’re about to have 6,000 teachers laid off. None of that was discussed.” 

Los Angeles Unified School District, which serves more than 560,000 students across Los Angeles County, has been accused of failing to address antisemitism — including within teachers’ unions. The district was named in a February lawsuit that highlighted several complaints from Jewish parents and children in districts across California. 

One of the eight anti-Israel activists indicted on Wednesday over allegedly threatening University of Michigan officials seen as pro-Israel and vandalizing local Jewish organizations was on the staff of far-left U.S. Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed as recently as April.

The federal indictment lists Mariam Odeh, 24, of Dearborn, Mich., as one of the defendants who allegedly carried out a series of coordinated actions targeting university leaders or organizations with connections to Israel following the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas terrorist attacks. 

On the one-year anniversary of the attacks, they vandalized Detroit’s Jewish federation building and spray-painted businesses, with words including “intifada,” according to the indictment.  

The defendants also forcibly entered and occupied university buildings, defaced property and disrupted campus events — and placed fake bloody corpses outside the homes of multiple university leaders, including then-President Santa Ono, over their perceived support for Israel. 

According to a statement in the indictment from Jennifer Runyan, special agent in charge of the FBI’s Detroit field office, the perpetrators — while masked and hooded — “allegedly threw noxious chemicals through the windows of families’ homes and taped demand letters to their front doors” and also “discussed methods by which to harm the targets and their families, including poison, bombs, and psychological torture.”  

Odeh, who is listed in the indictment as president of the organization Students Allied for Freedom and Equality, was paid $154 by El-Sayed’s campaign on March 3 and $593 on March 13, according to fundraising disclosures first obtained by The Detroit News, which reported that the payments were described as salary disbursements. 

El-Sayed’s spokesperson, Roxie Richner, told the paper that Odeh was an hourly employee on the campaign for two weeks and has not been affiliated with it since April 15. Odeh was charged with one count of conspiracy to transmit threats in interstate and foreign commerce, which carries a penalty of up to five years in prison. 

El-Sayed is one of three candidates in Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary, alongside Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI) and state Sen. Mallory McMorrow.

Seen as the most progressive candidate in the race, El-Sayed told Jewish supporters last month that he struggles to answer whether he believes Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state. He said in an interview with CNN in April that he believes the Israeli government is just as evil as Hamas.

A spokesperson for Rep. Stevens’ campaign, Arik Wolk, told JI on Thursday, “Haley condemns all forms of hate and political violence…antisemitism and political intimidation — especially violence that seeks to silence the voices of others — has no place in Michigan.”

Neither El-Sayed’s nor McMorrow’s campaigns responded to requests for comment from JI about the indictment or about Odeh’s employment on the campaign.

The Congressional Dads Caucus is hosting children’s influencer Rachel Griffin-Accurso, better known as Ms. Rachel, as a featured guest at a reception in Washington on Tuesday, according to an invitation obtained by Jewish Insider. Griffin-Accurso has faced scrutiny and criticism over antisemitic activity and for hosting a pro-Hamas Palestinian journalist on her social media accounts.

Griffin-Accurso is one of 10 “special guests,” including “leaders, advocates, creators, entertainers, and changemakers who are helping redefine fatherhood and caregiving in America,” at the Tuesday reception. 

The reception is co-hosted by the Dads Caucus, founded by Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-CA), to advocate for policies including childcare affordability and accessibility, paid family leave and the child tax credit, ahead of the group’s Dad Ambassador Awards. The event is co-hosted by Equimundo, which describes itself as a nonprofit focused on promoting gender equality and preventing violence.

Gomez, whose office sent the invitation email to staffers for other Dads Caucus members, did not respond to a request for comment.

Griffin-Accurso faced criticism in early 2026 for liking an Instagram comment reading “Free america from the Jews.” She later apologized and said that the “like” was accidental. But she also engaged with conspiracy theories framing the incident as a set-up.

Griffin-Accurso responded, “ooooooooooohhhhh,” to a comment from an anti-Israel account about the incident asserting, “Spoiler alert: They left the comment themselves.”

She also came under fire for featuring Palestinian journalist Motaz Azaiza in a video on her Instagram account. Azaiza defended the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel, and posted a message on Telegram praising Hamas terrorists. He also compared Israeli Cabinet leaders to Adolf Hitler.

Rep. Greg Landsman (D-OH) told JI that inviting Griffin-Accurso to the event was a “bad decision” and he did not plan to attend. Rep. Jake Auchincloss (D-MA) also does not plan to attend.

Several other outspoken Jewish and pro-Israel members of the nearly 50-member caucus — which includes prominent moderates like Reps. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) and Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) — did not respond to requests or declined to comment on the invitation.

Caucus membership can often be a largely symbolic gesture and most members of the group would not necessarily have been involved in planning the event or been aware of the guest list.

Good Thursday morning.

In today’s Daily Kickoff, we talk to local Jewish leaders in New Jersey about the decision by pro-Israel PACs to sit out the Democratic primary in NJ-12, in which a candidate with past terror ties eked out a small plurality that sets him on a glide path to Washington, and talk to Sens. Dave McCormick and John Fetterman about their concerns over rising antisemitism. We cover comments made by a senior State Department official blaming the Oslo Accords for the rise in global Islamist terrorism, and have the exclusive on a new Senate bill that would coordinate Middle East air-defense acquisitions. Also in today’s Daily Kickoff: Ambassador Charles Kushner, Nirel Zini and Argentine President Javier Milei.

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

• President Donald Trump is slated to meet today at the White House with Theophilos III, the Greek Orthodox patriarchate of Jerusalem, who will present the president with the Great Bearer of the Cross of the Order of Cross-Bearers of the Holy Sepulchre, one of the church’s top honors.
• The Senate will begin a series of votes this morning on a range of issues — known on the Hill as a “vote-a-rama” — that is expected to last for hours.
• The House Armed Services Committee is holding its markup of the 2027 NDAA this morning. 
• The House Ways and Means Committee will hear from Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent this morning, a day after Bessent appeared before the Senate Finance Committee. (Of note: Bessent clarified an exchange that occurred last summer between himself and acting Director of National Intelligence Bill Pulte in which Bessent said he told Pulte that he “was going to kick his a**.”)
• New York’s PIX11 will host a debate for candidates in the NY-12 Democratic primary, a day after candidates Alex Bores, Laura Dunn, Micah Lasher, Jack Schlossberg and Nina Schwalbe participated in a debate hosted last night by the Jewish Democratic Council of America. Bores, Lasher and Schlossberg will be joined by George Conway at tonight’s debate.
• New York City Council Speaker Julie Menin is slated to mark Holocaust Survivor Day at the headquarters of UJA-Federation of New York, where she’ll meet with survivors and their families.
• Elsewhere in New York, Tech Tribe is hosting a dinner tonight with Yossi Farro and Rabbi Mordechai Lightstone on the sidelines of NYC Tech Week.
• In Geneva, Switzerland, UN Watch is holding its annual gala dinner. This year’s dinner will feature French journalist Abnousse Shalmani and activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

What You Should Know

A QUICK WORD WITH JI’S MELISSA WEISS

It’s a strange moment when the leader of the free world explains to a reporter why he cursed out the prime minister of a major ally.

But we live in an increasingly strange moment, one in which President Donald Trump confirmed to the New York Post this week that he had indeed called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “f***ing crazy” during a discussion about Israel’s plans to expand operations in Lebanon, even as he stressed that he and the Israeli leader have “worked very well together.” (Trump’s confirmation came after Netanyahu’s office denied the remarks.)

The tense nature of the Trump-Netanyahu call this week underscores the increasingly divergent tactics the two are taking to ongoing conflicts in the Middle East as Trump leans into diplomacy while Netanyahu pushes for intensified military action — and as questions loom over the future of U.S. aid to Israel.

With the House’s passage of a war powers resolution yesterday (with four Republicans breaking with House GOP leadership), and a Senate vote on the issue still pending, the Trump administration’s appetite for a resumption of hostilities is even smaller than it was last month (when, as we reported, it was already quite low, owing to rising gas prices and the approaching midterms). 

On paper, Washington and Jerusalem do appear in lockstep — alongside Beirut — on deepening relations between Israel and Lebanon and rooting out Hezbollah. To that effect, the White House announced in a joint statement with Lebanese and Israeli officials on Wednesday that the parties had agreed to a renewed ceasefire — though it is contingent on the cooperation of Hezbollah, which did not take part in the talks and continues to launch drones and missiles at northern Israel.

But even as officials in Washington reach an accord on Lebanon, the challenges on the ground remain much the same. It was, after all, the issue of Lebanon — and Netanyahu’s announcement that the IDF would attack Hezbollah strongholds in Beirut — that triggered Trump’s expletive-laden outburst on Monday, causing Netanyahu to walk back Israel’s military plans in Lebanon.

And while Netanyahu needs to stay in Trump’s good graces, it is voters in Israel — including those in the country’s north who are living under daily Hezbollah fire — whom Netanyahu will need to sway ahead of the fall elections. 

Read the rest of ‘What You Should Know’ here.

SITTING IT OUT

UDP faces questions from N.J. Jewish leaders why it stayed on sidelines against Hamawy

Adam Hamawy’s victory on Tuesday in a closely watched congressional primary in New Jersey, which elevated an outspoken critic of Israel whose past ties to a convicted terrorist had drawn scrutiny during the campaign, is raising questions over why the far-left Democrat did not face outside opposition from the pro-Israel group AIPAC or its well-funded super PAC,Jewish Insider’s Matthew Kassel reports. Hamawy, who won 28% of the vote in New Jersey’s 12th Congressional District, prevailed with a modest plurality over the multi-candidate primary field competing to succeed Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ).

Sitting it out: With 93% of the vote counted on Wednesday, Brad Cohen, the mayor of East Brunswick and a Jewish Democrat who touted his support for Israel while identifying as an AIPAC member, placed second with 15%. Despite a double-digit deficit, Cohen’s performance exceeded many expectations, indicating that he likely could have finished in a stronger position with help from AIPAC’s super PAC, United Democracy Project, some local Jewish leaders suggested in interviews on Wednesday.

Read the full story here.

Capitol concerns: Some lawmakers are warning that Hamawy’s past terrorist ties could pose a national security risk and that he should be barred from serving on sensitive committees working on national security issues, JI’s Marc Rod reports.

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

KEEPING IT GOING

Israel and Lebanon agree to extend ceasefire, establish joint security zones

Israel and Lebanon agreed on Wednesday to extend their ceasefire — which in practice has been tenuous — on the condition that Hezbollah disarms and withdraws from Israel’s northern border, and to jointly establish “pilot zones” where the Lebanese Armed Forces “will take exclusive control of the territory,” Jewish Insider’s Emily Jacobs reports.

Pushing forward: The parties, together with the U.S., announced the developments in a joint statement at the conclusion of the second and final day of the fourth round of peace talks between Israeli and Lebanese officials at the State Department. The group will reconvene for the next round of talks the week of June 22 “with a view toward reaching a comprehensive agreement,” the statement said. A State Department official told JI that the exact time and venue for the upcoming discussions have not yet been decided. 

Read the full story here.

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

SUPPORTIVE VOICE

Stutzman introduces resolution backing Netanyahu’s call to wind down U.S. aid

Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-IN) introduced a resolution on Wednesday endorsing and praising Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s call to wind down U.S. aid to Israel over the next decade, the latest twist in the rapidly evolving U.S. conversation over the future of the U.S.-Israel relationship and U.S. aid to Israel, Jewish Insider’s Marc Rod reports.

Major moves: Few Republicans, at this point, have publicly endorsed Netanyahu’s effort, which comes amid talks between the U.S. and Israel over the next memorandum of understanding on military aid. Top U.S. officials have confirmed in recent days that ending U.S. aid to Israel is part of those discussions. Netanyahu himself offered a letter of support for the resolution, which Stutzman publicized alongside the resolution.

Read the full story here.

Setting a timeline: Netanyahu said in an interview with CNBC’s Sara Eisen on Wednesday that he wants to start the process of winding down U.S. aid to Israel in the final two years of the Trump administration, JI’s Emily Jacobs reports.

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

PEACE PARADOX

At AMIA commemoration, State Department official blames Oslo Accords for wave of terrorism

The State Department’s top legal advisor on Wednesday drew a direct connection between the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993 — which sought to bring peace between the Israelis and Palestinians — and the global rise in Islamist terrorism, in remarks delivered at an event in Washington marking the anniversary of the deadly 1994 terror attacks on the AMIA Jewish Center in Buenos Aires, Jewish Insider’s Gabby Deutch reports.

What he said: Reed Rubinstein, the State Department legal advisor, used his remarks to herald President Donald Trump’s efforts to fight terrorism, which he described as a course correction from decades of failed leadership. “The fruit of those accords paradoxically included a massive increase in brutal terrorism,” Rubinstein said, referring to the Oslo Accords. “Oslo led to an unprecedented wave of suicide bombing and death.”

Read the full story here.

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

SHARED ASSESSMENT

Fetterman, McCormick say Democrats have worse antisemitism problem than GOP

Sens. John Fetterman (D-PA) and Dave McCormick (R-PA) told Jewish Insider’s Emily Jacobs and Marc Rod on Tuesday that they believe antisemitism is worse on the left than on the right, arguing that the electoral success of far-left candidates with antisemitic records in Democratic primaries distinguished the left from the right, as similarly controversial candidates have struggled in GOP primary contests.

A pox on both houses: The Pennsylvania senators spoke to JI on the sidelines of the American Jewish Committee’s Global Forum. While both men acknowledged onstage and to JI that antisemitism exists within the conservative movement, they rejected the notion that it had taken hold of the GOP, arguing that the rise of Graham Platner’s Senate campaign in Maine and Pennsylvania state Rep. Chris Rabb’s nomination for a Philadelphia-area House seat showed that the Democratic Party had already normalized antisemitism within their party. 

Read the full interview here.

Tehran talk: Fetterman also told JI’s Emily Jacobs 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.

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

EXCLUSIVE

Senate lawmakers introduce bill to establish coordinated Middle East air-defense acquisitions

Sens. Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Joni Ernst (R-IA) and James Lankford (R-OK) are set to introduce a bill on Thursday directing the Pentagon to develop a coordinated air- and missile-defense acquisition strategy with Israel, Abraham Accords members and other Middle East allies, Jewish Insider’s Marc Rod reports.

Details: The Optimizing Acquisition Strategies for Integrated Security (OASIS) in the Middle East Act, which expands on existing legislative and administrative efforts to establish a coordinated air- and missile-defense system throughout the Middle East to protect the U.S. and its partners, would aim to ensure that the necessary resources are in place to protect the U.S. and its allies in future conflicts, sponsors said.

Read the full story here.

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

Worthy Reads

War Gains: In The Wall Street Journal, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice considers the accomplishments of the U.S. and Israeli war against Iran. “The three-month military campaign degraded Iran’s ability to project power by significantly damaging its conventional forces, missile stockpiles and proxies. It drew America, Israel and the Arab states closer together through defense cooperation and intelligence sharing. In this regard, Israel has never been more secure. … The war demonstrated that the Iranian regime’s leaders were physically vulnerable to U.S. military power and allied intelligence.” [WSJ]

Hands Off AI: In the Financial Times, Argentine President Javier Milei argues in favor of unregulated AI. “At the beginning of the industrial revolution, Adam Smith illustrated the potential of technology and economies of scale in his celebrated recollection of the pin factory. And, as much as the industrial revolution freed us from the constraints of the human muscle, AI will free us from the constraints of the human brain, pushing productivity beyond our wildest dreams.”  [FT]

The Center Holds: Puck’s Peter Hamby suggests that the results of California’s primaries this week underscore the degree to which many voters prefer moderate Democrats over candidates from the more extreme wing of the party. “As with other elections around the country dating back to last year, Democrats won or advanced by focusing on the basics. Yes, there were promises to stand up to Trump — table stakes for any Democratic messaging. (‘California is bigger than Trump,’ [former HHS Secretary Xavier] Becerra said in his primary night speech. ‘Our values are undeniable — and undeportable.’) But Tuesday’s winners, generally, ran on the cost of living, safe streets and playgrounds, good schools, and healthcare costs. Not exactly peak woke.” [Puck]

No Strait Jacket: In The New York Times, Christopher Smart, who served as a Treasury Department official during the Obama administration, posits that the closure of the Strait of Hormuz is prompting a readjustment of global supply chains less dependent on the waterway. “The longer the Strait remains blocked, however, the less important oil from the Strait becomes. The S&P 500 is setting records not because investors believe peace is at hand, but because corporate earnings continue to grow and American consumers, particularly wealthier ones, are still buying. … The winners of this adjustment include U.S. oil and natural gas producers that can fill the Strait’s shortfall, as well as nuclear and renewable energy providers. ” [NYTimes]

Word on the Street

Federal officials announced charges against a resident of Newport Beach, Calif., alleging that the man, the CEO of an Iran-based tech company, provided “computer technology to Iranian companies and Iran’s government — including technology to help with Iran’s military and nuclear program”…

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) became the first Republican to co-sponsor the Block the Bombs Act, arguing the U.S. is “morally obligated to end support of Israel’s devastation of Gaza and its people” — going beyond his usual arguments against foreign aid generally. The bill now has 71 co-sponsors…

Rep. Max Miller (R-OH) on the House floor accused Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) of “advocat[ing] for terrorists on a daily basis” and of “hang[ing] out with” with Hezbollah “butchers”; Miller’s remarks were ultimately struck from the record with Tlaib’s objection, but he said in a statement read on the House floor by a colleague that he stood by his comments…

California Democrat Ammar Campa-Najjar, who has made several failed runs for Southern California-area congressional seats, said that after falling short in his latest bid, in the state’s 48th District, his “political career is permanently over”…

The NYPD arrested an NYU student Wednesday for raising a flag that displayed swastikas and a Star of David atop a university building last month, JI’s Haley Cohen reports…

Former President Joe Biden, making a surprise appearance at his wife’s debut book event at the 92nd Street Y, told attendees he has a book coming out in September…

Bill Ackman’s Pershing Square is set to sell its remaining stake in Universal Music Group — amounting to approximately 80.6 million shares — in a deal that will garner Pershing Square at least $600 million, following failed attempts to take over the company…

The Qatar Foundation announced the launch of new study abroad partnerships for students at Hampton University, Xavier University and Prairie View A&M University — all HBCUs — to study at the Gulf state’s Education City…

Former Columbia University President Katrina Armstrong will step down as the CEO of the Columbia University Irving Medical Center to launch the Vagelos Institute for Basic Biomedical Research within the medical school… 

The U.K.’s National Health Service will implement a series of measures designed to address what a new government-authorized report calls “routine ostracism” faced by Jewish patients and staff in the British healthcare system, including limiting the political symbols that staff can wear on their uniforms and requiring antisemitism training for the heads of the country’s health trusts…

Companies operating under Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund are seeing the departures of foreign CEOs and being replaced by locals as the fund focuses on domestic financial priorities ahead of the Gulf state’s hosting of the World Cup in 2034…

Israel’s High Court ruled against a government policy banning Red Cross officials from visiting Palestinian security prisoners, citing violations of both Israeli and international law… 

Israeli forensic specialists are conducting DNA testing on bones found in Kfar Aza by relatives of Nirel Zini, who was killed during Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks; Zini, whose girlfriend, Niv Raviv, was also killed, was decapitated during the attack, and his family buried his partial remains…

Kuwaiti officials said that one person was killed and more than 60 injured in an Iranian drone attack early Wednesday that caused significant damage to parts of the passenger terminal of the Gulf nation’s main airport; the airport reopened Wednesday evening…

Miami-based LGBTQ activist Ruth Shack died at 94…

Pic of the Day

U.S. Ambassador to France Charles Kushner participated in a ceremony earlier this week organized by Operation Benjamin at the Meuse-Argonne American Military Cemetery in Romagne-sous-Montfaucon, France, to replace the headstones of five fallen Jewish servicemembers with Stars of David.

Birthdays

Lineman for the Miami Dolphins for 12 seasons, which included three Super Bowl appearances and four Pro Bowls, then a judge on the Miami-Dade County Court, Ed Newman turns 75… 

Co-founder of Boston Properties and owner of U.S. News & World Report, Mort Zuckerman turns 89… Professor emeritus of organic chemistry at the Weizmann Institute of Science and winner of the 2012 Israel Prize, David Milstein turns 79… Retired chief justice of the Michigan Supreme Court, Stephen J. Markman turns 77… Former judge on the Court of Common Pleas in Philadelphia, he was the longest tenured member of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, Mark B. Cohen turns 77… British journalist, author of 11 books and socially conservative columnist for The Times of London, The Jerusalem Post and The Jewish Chronicle, Melanie Phillips turns 75… First-ever Jewish governor of Hawaii and then COO of Illinois, she serves on the board of directors of the Republican Jewish Coalition, Linda Lingle turns 73… President and CEO of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in NYC until 2023, now president and CEO of the Philadelphia Museum of Art, Daniel H. Weiss turns 69… Co-founder of Ripco Real Estate, Todd Cooper… Artist and art educator, she was born in Kibbutz Beeri, where she currently resides, Ziva Jelin turns 64… Chair in human cancer genetics at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Dr. Matthew Langer Meyerson turns 63… Law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, Ayelet Shachar turns 60… U.S. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) turns 55… French-Israeli entrepreneur, angel investor in over 360 startups, Jeremie Berrebi turns 48… Party photographer in Washington for the Washingtonian, Daniel Swartz… National politics reporter at The Washington Post, Colby Itkowitz… Israeli supermodel, Bar Refaeli turns 41… Clean energy portfolio planning program manager at Orange and Rockland Utilities, Adam E. Soclof… Director at Dentons Global Advisors, Jason Hillel Attermann… Managing editor at eJewishPhilanthropy, Judah Ari Gross turns 37… Gena Wolfson… Coordinating producer at MS NOW, Emily Gold… VP of government relations at UJA-Federation of New York and former Member of the New York state Assembly, Daniel Rosenthal turns 35… Ken Moss… 

Adam Hamawy’s victory on Tuesday in a closely watched congressional primary in New Jersey, which elevated an outspoken critic of Israel whose past ties to a convicted terrorist had drawn scrutiny during the campaign, is raising questions over why the far-left Democrat did not face outside opposition from the pro-Israel group AIPAC or its well-funded super PAC.

Hamawy, who won 28% of the vote in New Jersey’s 12th Congressional District, prevailed with a modest plurality over the multi-candidate primary field competing to succeed Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ). With 93% of the vote counted on Wednesday, Brad Cohen, the mayor of East Brunswick and a Jewish Democrat who touted his support for Israel while identifying as an AIPAC member, placed second with 15%. Hamawy is all but assured a seat in Congress next year as the district heavily favors Democrats.

Despite a double-digit deficit, Cohen’s performance exceeded many expectations, indicating that he likely could have finished in a stronger position with help from AIPAC’s super PAC, United Democracy Project, some local Jewish leaders suggested in interviews on Wednesday.

While Cohen posted relatively robust fundraising figures, pulling in $700,000 over the course of the race, he struggled to keep up with Hamawy, a plastic surgeon and Army veteran who claimed just over $1 million. Notably, Hamawy also drew support from a newly created super PAC, American Priorities, launched as a left-wing counterweight to AIPAC, which spent more than $1.5 million in the primary to bolster his ascendant campaign.

UDP’s conspicuous absence as American Priorities aggressively promoted Hamawy during the final days of the primary allowed the new group to shape the narrative as he drew skepticism over his efforts to downplay a decades-old association with a radical Muslim cleric convicted of inspiring the 1993 World Trade Center bombing as well as his work for a now-shuttered al-Qaida-linked front group in Bosnia.

Such vulnerabilities were the sort that UDP would presumably have been eager to exploit to thwart an extreme detractor of Israel who had argued against the country’s Iron Dome missile-defense system that protects civilians from attacks.

UDP, which looked at all of the candidates in the crowded field, had considered backing Cohen but ultimately determined he did not have a credible chance of winning, according to a source familiar with the situation who spoke on the condition of anonymity to address a confidential matter.

Patrick Dorton, a spokesperson for UDP, defended the group’s choice not to engage. “We play in races where we have a reasonable opportunity to win,” he explained in a brief interview with JI on Wednesday. “This was a multi-candidate field with obviously the anti-Hamawy vote very split.”

“We didn’t see a path to victory,” Dorton said broadly of the primary. “We did a careful analysis of the race, including polling, and came to the conclusion not to get involved.”

Steve Klinghoffer, a Jewish community leader and philanthropist and a former AIPAC board member, strongly disagreed with UDP’s assessment. He said he had “numerous conversations” with AIPAC to try to convince the group to get involved in the primary but declined to share what he had been told in response.

“If they stay out there’s a good reason,” noted Jason Shames, CEO of the Jewish Federation of Northern New Jersey, who said he spoke with AIPAC about the primary and got the sense that the group did not “see much upside” in being directly involved. “I give them the benefit of the doubt,” he told JI, calling the group “very careful” and “more strategic” than critics might think.

“In my assessment, this was a missed opportunity, and it’s greatly disturbing,” Klinghoffer told JI, calling the primary “highly winnable” and citing “private polling that showed it would be closer” if AIPAC had devoted its resources to the contest.

Still, Jewish and pro-Israel leaders in New Jersey were largely divided about AIPAC’s decision, with some saying they trusted UDP’s calculus and others expressing more skepticism about its motivations.

“If they stay out there’s a good reason,” noted Jason Shames, CEO of the Jewish Federation of Northern New Jersey, who said he spoke with AIPAC about the primary and got the sense that the group did not “see much upside” in being directly involved. “I give them the benefit of the doubt,” he told JI, calling the group “very careful” and “more strategic” than critics might think.

Ben Chouake, the president of NORPAC, a pro-Israel advocacy group in New Jersey that endorsed Cohen, said there were more complex challenges at play that had influenced the result beyond AIPAC’s decision to hold its powder. 

“We supported Brad Cohen and raised a fair amount of money for him and tried to put together a ground game within the Jewish community,” he told JI. “But I don’t think our community, as a whole, is as unified as it needs to be.”

But he believed AIPAC’s involvement “absolutely” could have made a difference in the race, saying the vote tally was not insurmountable. “I think it was a worthwhile effort for us,” he stressed. “I’m not upset that we did it.”

Cohen, who sought to draw attention to Hamawy’s controversial past ties in the closing stretch of the race, did not respond to messages from JI seeking comment.

Even as UDP now sits on a nearly $95 million war chest to use in the midterms, it also has reason to stay on the sidelines, as the AIPAC brand has become increasingly toxic among Democrats who have vowed to reject its support. 

The super PAC had also endured an embarrassing setback in March in a nearby northern New Jersey Democratic special election, where it spent heavily to block Tom Malinowski, a moderate former congressman who had expressed interest in conditioning U.S. aid to Israel. The foray backfired, however — propelling a progressive activist with far more antagonistic positions on Israel to the House.

The reputational damage stemming from that effort still lingers in New Jersey, according to some Jewish leaders. One pro-Israel leader speculated that AIPAC simply “got gun-shy,” after its handling of the March election. Outside the state, UDP has otherwise shown a penchant for caution — most recently investing in a Democratic congressional race in a Maryland district home to a more moderate constituency.

“My guess is they probably were afraid this time that by coming in to support Brad, it might have harmed a very good candidate,” a Jewish Democrat told JI, noting it “raises a question of what AIPAC’s strategy” is going forward. “I think they need to also look in the mirror” and “assess this terrain very carefully” in weighing “what they’re going to do in the future.”

“Unfortunately, it’s a tougher climate for AIPAC and other pro-Israel PACs, especially on the Democratic side,” Mark Levenson, a Jewish community leader in New Jersey, told JI. “The environment has changed.”

Amid a national political landscape now favoring anti-establishment, left-wing sentiment of the sort espoused by Hamawy and his progressive allies in other key races, AIPAC likely “understood its brand had taken a hit, particularly in New Jersey,” said one Jewish Democrat who viewed Hamawy’s election as a troubling sign of the party’s direction. “AIPAC called it wrong previously.”

“My guess is they probably were afraid this time that by coming in to support Brad, it might have harmed a very good candidate,” the activist said on Wednesday, noting it “raises a question of what AIPAC’s strategy” is going forward. “I think they need to also look in the mirror” and “assess this terrain very carefully” in weighing “what they’re going to do in the future.”

Dan Cassino, a political scientist and pollster at Fairleigh Dickinson University, said it was “hard to imagine that there were a lot of Hamawy supporters who would have turned against him because AIPAC was opposed to him,” given their already jaundiced view of the group.

“If AIPAC had gotten involved very early, and thrown around enough money to dissuade some candidates from running, they could have made a difference,” he told JI. “But once that field was set, I don’t think they could have changed the result,” he said, pointing out the “risk that getting involved in a race that led to another win for a disfavored candidate would hurt AIPAC’s credibility even more.”

Micah Rasmussen, the director of Rider University’s Rebovich Institute for New Jersey Politics, argued it “would be foolish to blame AIPAC for the results of the election,” saying the “single thing that could have changed the outcome is for the field of candidates to have consolidated behind one candidate as a viable alternative to Adam Hamawy.”

“Whatever else might be said about AIPAC, they are not political novices,” he told JI. “No one can believe they sat on their hands because they couldn’t think of anything else to do.”

“You’re really left to wonder,” Rasmussen mused, “whether they view Adam Hamawy as a foil or a lightning rod for Jewish voters across the country.”

Democrats nominated a mix of pro-Israel moderates and anti-Israel ideologues in Tuesday’s primaries across the country, but the biggest red flag for the party is the emergence of a New Jersey nominee with past terror ties prevailing in a closely watched congressional contest. 

Plastic surgeon Adam Hamawy prevailed with 28% of the vote in a crowded Democratic primary field in the race to succeed retiring Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ). 

Hamawy was a former associate of Omar Abdel Rahman, also known as the Blind Sheikh, who was convicted of inspiring the terrorists who engineered the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Hamawy later served as a defense witness during Abdel Rahman’s 1995 trial, and volunteered around the same time in Bosnia with a group later shuttered as a front for al-Qaida. 

Hamawy, with the support of left-wing groups, some progressive lawmakers and the anti-Israel American Priorities super PAC, defeated his opponents with regional bases but limited support outside their local communities. No pro-Israel groups or other moderate-minded outside PACs decided to spend money on anti-Hamawy attack ads, allowing him to consolidate enough backing from his base to prevail with a relatively small plurality. 

Despite his baggage, Hamawy is expected to win election to Congress in November, given the central New Jersey district’s heavily Democratic electorate. 

In more favorable news for pro-Israel moderate voters, Democrats nominated former Navy pilot Rebecca Bennett, who flew missions over the Straits of Hormuz, to run against Rep. Tom Kean Jr. (R-NJ) in a major battleground district.

“I just feel very strongly that Israel has a right to defend itself and has a right to exist, and that the United States needs to be able to support Israel, and it shouldn’t be partisan,” Bennett told Jewish Insider last August. “I think we should be supporting Israel as an ally, regardless of political party.” She also told JI she supports continuing U.S. aid to Israel without restrictions or conditions.

Kean, who has represented the 7th Congressional District since 2022, has been missing from Congress for the last several months with an undisclosed illness. His uncertain personal circumstances have made Democrats bullish about their prospects in the swing district, which Kean only won by five points in 2024.

Democratic voters in the neighboring 11th Congressional District overwhelmingly renominated left-wing Rep. Analilia Mejia (D-NJ), who was the surprise winner in a special election primary earlier this year after AIPAC’s super PAC spent money attacking the more moderate former Rep. Tom Malinowski (D-NJ).

But while Mejia won a whopping 82% of the Democratic vote against her long-shot opposition, there was a significant protest vote against her in the towns with a large Jewish constituency: Livingston and Millburn.

Meanwhile, Rep. Robert Menendez Jr. (D-NJ), a pro-Israel Democrat, comfortably brushed back a challenge from far-left, anti-Israel candidate Mussab Ali, winning 70% of the primary vote. 

New Jersey wasn’t the only state holding consequential primaries. In Iowa, the high-stakes Senate race is all set after Democrats nominated the more moderate state lawmaker Josh Turek, the favorite of the party establishment, over progressive state Sen. Zach Wahls. 

Turek will face Rep. Ashley Hinson (R-IA) in the race to succeed retiring Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA). Iowa has lately been a reliably Republican state, but given President Donald Trump’s depressed approval ratings, Democrats are optimistic they can put the seat in play.

In California, the first wave of results suggest the likelihood of a general election matchup between Democratic former state Attorney General Xavier Becerra and former Fox News host Steve Hilton, a Republican who was backed by President Donald Trump, though there are many ballots remaining to be counted. Former hedge fund manager Tom Steyer, a Democrat, lags behind the top two vote-getters in third place.

In the Los Angeles mayor’s race, it’s looking likely that Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, a Democrat, will be facing Republican former reality show star Spencer Pratt in the general election. DSA-aligned City Councilmember Nithya Raman so far is trailing Pratt in third place. 

In the race to succeed former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), state Sen. Scott Wiener will face Connie Chan, a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors — with the virulently anti-Israel Saikat Chakrabarti lagging far behind Chan.

Meanwhile, at least one of the two Democrats endorsed by the pro-Israel Democratic group DMFI is heading into a general election. The DMFI-backed San Diego Councilwoman Marni von Wilpert is comfortably ahead of Ammar Campa-Najjar, who was viewed as a less reliable supporter of the U.S.-Israel alliance. Von Wilpert will face Republican Jim Desmond, a San Diego County supervisor, in the swing district. 

But in the battleground district of Rep. David Valadao (R-CA), the DMFI-endorsed candidate, state Assemblywoman Jasmeet Bains, is narrowly trailing her left-wing, anti-Israel challenger Randy Villegas.

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro warned of the dangers of efforts within the Democratic Party to single out AIPAC, telling Politico in a new interview that painting the pro-Israel group as “toxic” could be seen as silencing Jewish voices in the American political system.

“I think it’s been used cynically by some to try and silence certain voices, to try and say that certain people participating in politics shouldn’t count, or should be viewed in a toxic way,” Shapiro said in the interview, which was released on Tuesday. 

Where some Democrats have recently distanced themselves from AIPAC, Shapiro declined to do so. 

“Do I agree with every political decision they’ve made, every endorsement they made? Of course not,” said Shapiro. “I think what we have seen is a weaponization of that. And I think that is a danger for our system. When you have people who are advocating for issues that they feel strongly about and they are having their voices silenced, I think that’s a problem in our system.”

Shapiro, a potential 2028 presidential contender, declined to say whether he would accept support from AIPAC, which does not get involved in state or presidential races, nor did he address AIPAC’s tactics or its involvement in any particular race. 

He cautioned that efforts to vilify the group have sometimes crossed a line into targeting American Jews’ political advocacy, noting that sometimes Jewish donors who currently or have in the past supported AIPAC are tarred just for being part of the political process. 

“I think it does get blurred because now what you are seeing is not ‘AIPAC money,’” said Shapiro, “but you’re getting the Jews who give to that candidate who also support AIPAC. I think it’s very dangerous in our system, if you are trying to silence certain voices based on their race, based on their faith, based on their particular ideology.”

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro is warning about the dangers of efforts within the Democratic Party to single out AIPAC.

“I think it’s been used cynically by some to try and silence certain voices, to try and say that certain people participating in politics shouldn’t count, or… pic.twitter.com/uighmwoMgu

— Jewish Insider (@jewishinsider) May 26, 2026

Shapiro, who is one of the most prominent Jewish politicians in the U.S., described a “dramatic spike in antisemitism across this country.” He condemned the Islamophobic attack on a mosque in San Diego last week in which three people were killed while also pointing out that, overall, antisemitism is a much larger problem than other forms of hate.

“There is rising hatred and bigotry targeting people across the board, but it is also undeniable, and no one’s pain is greater or more important than others, but from a data perspective, there has been a dramatic spike in antisemitism that is unmatched elsewhere, and that’s a problem,” said Shapiro. 

Asked whether he plans to run for president, Shapiro declined to answer. But he said his family had to consider whether he should run for reelection this year in Pennsylvania after an arson attack on the governor’s mansion last year on the first night of Passover.

“My family and I spent a bunch of time thinking about running for reelection. It is hard for me as a dad to know that doing this job I love, this job I find great purpose in where I get to help people, puts my kids’ lives at risk,” said Shapiro. “I’m not going to cower. I’m not going to be fearful.”

The final version of the New York state “buffer zone” legislation passed by the state Legislature on Tuesday makes it a Class B misdemeanor — one of the lowest levels of criminal offense — to “knowingly” infringe on the right of access or egress to a religious institution, or to cause those entering or exiting to fear for their safety from a distance of less than 50 feet.

The language is less punitive than the legislation that Gov. Kathy Hochul initially endorsed, which would have made it a low-level felony for demonstrators to obstruct doorways and driveways at houses of worship. But the 50-foot enforcement zone in the final draft is twice as large as the one described in the earlier versions of the bill, and would apply to sidewalks as well as private parking lots and other entry points.

The measure explicitly covers community centers, as well as any other sort of facility that “a reasonable person would know that religious adherents collectively recognize as a place to regularly gather for or hold religious services, observance, prayer, assembly, education, instruction, or devotional practice” — indicating that the bill also shields religious schools.

UJA-Federation of New York, which became a leading proponent for the measure following pro-Hamas protests that targeted synagogues in Manhattan and Queens, applauded the measure ahead of its passage as part of the legislative package around the New York state budget. 

The Jewish advocacy group particularly praised Hochul — as well as state Sen. Sam Sutton and Assemblymember Micah Lasher — for championing the proposal.

“We commend Governor Hochul and the state legislature for taking decisive action to protect New Yorkers by passing ‘buffer zone’ legislation, ensuring that safety and security remain a top priority across our communities,” the group said in a statement to Jewish Insider. “Governor Hochul, Senator Sutton, and Assemblyman Lasher have demonstrated strong leadership in their unwavering effort to help ensure safe access to critical community institutions and safeguard the right to worship free of harassment and intimidation.”

The state legislation is distinct from a recently passed city law compelling the NYPD to develop formal protocols for deploying security perimeters around houses of worship during protests. Both measures, as well as a separate New York City bill to establish security perimeter policy around schools — vetoed by Mayor Zohran Mamdani, but since modified and reintroduced in the New York City Council — have received criticism from civil liberties groups, who allege they could interfere with First Amendment protections.

Hochul, for her part, heralded the measure as a victory for freedom of worship. The measure goes under her pen Tuesday evening, her office told JI.

“Every New Yorker should be able to enter their house of worship and practice their religion without fear,” the governor said in a statement. “As we’re witnessing an alarming rise in hate-fueled attacks and blatant antisemitism, I’m grateful our buffer zones legislation has passed and New Yorkers will be safer because of it.”

Late last month, AIPAC circulated what seemed at first glance like a relatively anodyne memo stressing its support for the current 10-year memorandum of understanding between the United States and Israel, which guarantees $3.8 billion in annual military aid and missile-defense funding to Israel through 2028.

“Congress must fulfill America’s commitment by providing full security assistance and missile defense funding to Israel for the remainder of the MOU,” the group wrote in its missive published on April 28. 

The memo was notable, however, for what it left out: calling to negotiate a follow-up MOU — the future of which has been a topic of ongoing speculation among analysts and lawmakers beginning to think about the contours of a potential new agreement in a changing political landscape.

That AIPAC had only urged the implementation of the final two years of the current deal was in many ways a tacit acknowledgement of shifting attitudes against U.S. military aid even among supporters of Israel.

The omission, intentional or not, was otherwise reflective of uncertainty around an agreement that has drawn scrutiny not only among Israel critics on the far left and right but also moderate defenders of Israel in both parties who are openly questioning the necessity of U.S. military assistance to a longstanding Middle East ally.

Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has called for winding down U.S. financial aid over the next decade, saying that the Jewish state has “come of age” and matured economically to continue on its own. In an interview with CBS’ “60 Minutes” earlier this month, he confirmed that he wanted to immediately begin the process of weaning Israel off of U.S. aid, noting the future of the U.S.-Israel alliance should be focused on joint projects equally funded by Israel and the United States.

“Each U.S.-Israel MOU to date — negotiated by Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama — has laid the framework for the decade ahead, strengthening an alliance that advances American interests, supports a strong and capable ally in an unstable region, and drives a remarkable ecosystem of joint development and cooperation between two reliable allies,” Deryn Sousa, a spokesperson for AIPAC, told Jewish Insider in a recent statement.  

Some pro-Israel Republican lawmakers — including Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), John Thune (R-SD), the Senate majority leader, and Roger Wicker (R-MS) — have welcomed the idea, even as the GOP has long touted its staunch support for such funding. Rahm Emanuel, the former Chicago mayor and Democratic presidential prospect who holds close personal ties to Israel, has advocated for immediately ending military aid to Israel, arguing it is not worth expending the “political capital” to promote spending that is facing mounting opposition in Congress and among voters.

But Jewish and pro-Israel groups seem at pains to clarify how they are now assessing an issue that has long been key to their advocacy — particularly as the conversation around such funding and the possibility for a new MOU, which remains an open question, has rapidly evolved in recent months.

“Each U.S.-Israel MOU to date — negotiated by Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama — has laid the framework for the decade ahead, strengthening an alliance that advances American interests, supports a strong and capable ally in an unstable region, and drives a remarkable ecosystem of joint development and cooperation between two reliable allies,” Deryn Sousa, a spokesperson for AIPAC, told Jewish Insider in a recent statement.  

She added, “We appreciate the Trump administration working closely with the Israeli government toward a new agreement that will strengthen and define the mutually beneficial partnership in the years ahead.”

“We’re figuring it out ourselves,” said Michael Makovsky, the president and CEO of the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, adding that he believed Israel “made a mistake” in choosing to forgo U.S. financial aid. He suggested that the U.S. sign “one more” MOU with Israel to cover the next 10 years and help Israel replenish its munitions stocks amid the war against Iran, which he believes is key to advancing American interests in the region. “It zeroes down at the very end,” he explained to JI.

In lieu of an agreement, Makovsky floated “non-monetary” alternatives, for instance, a U.S.-Israel mutual defense treaty — though he questioned whether such a pact could gain enough support in the Senate, where most Democrats recently voted in favor of resolutions to block arms sales to Israel.

Former U.S. and Israeli officials have also recently called for building closer technological ties between the two countries, in anticipation of an era in which financial aid is not a defining feature of the alliance.

“The model in which Israel is assisted by the United States and receives aid has a very small chance of continuing under any future administration,” former IDF intelligence chief Amos Yadlin said this month while promoting a new strategic technology alliance with Tom Nides, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel. “And perhaps even under the Trump administration, so we need to find a new basis for the relationship that is a transition from aid to partnership.”

Even as analysts had indicated last year that the U.S. should begin considering what the next MOU entails, it is unclear if the process is now seriously underway, as Netanyahu’s remarks have complicated the effort. One Hill staffer to a pro-Israel House member told JI he had no knowledge of discussions at the moment.

President Donald Trump was initially surprised when Netanyahu first proposed winding down U.S. funding late last year and did not immediately lend support to the move, JI has previously reported. 

A White House spokesperson declined to comment on the prospects for a future MOU, the framework for which first went into effect in 1998 during the Clinton administration. The current agreement was finalized in 2016 near the end of the Obama administration — which touted the deal as “the largest single pledge of military assistance in U.S. history” at the time.

Tal Naim, a spokesperson for the Israeli Embassy in Washington, referred JI to Netanyahu’s comments to “60 Minutes” this month.

Looking ahead, Brian Romick, the president of Democratic Majority for Israel, said “there can and should be a discussion about how the U.S.-Israeli security relationship should change with the times, how our partnership must evolve as Israel’s own capabilities grow and its security needs change, and how we can align on a long-term vision for the region.”

“While a new MOU should reflect that Israel’s economy has grown, it should also recognize that Israel’s defense requirements have too, and Israel may struggle to fill the gap in its defense budget that the loss of FMF would create,” Justin Leopold-Cohen, a senior research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ Center on Military and Political Power who specializes in U.S.-Israel security cooperation, said.

But, he added, “that debate must bring a serious analysis grounded in prioritizing America’s interests and Israel’s security. It cannot shift with political changes or in the middle of a war, especially when American troops are actively deployed in the region. Ultimately this will be a negotiated agreement between two democratically elected governments.”

A spokesperson for the American Jewish Committee likewise used broad strokes to discuss a future MOU, saying it is “far more than a financial commitment.”

The agreement “is a cornerstone of a broader strategic relationship that advances both U.S. and Israeli national security interests, strengthens deterrence against shared adversaries, and reinforces America’s commitment to the security of its closest ally in the Middle East,” the spokesperson told JI. “At a time of growing regional volatility and evolving security threats, maintaining strong and sustained U.S.-Israel security cooperation remains critically important.” 

Justin Leopold-Cohen, a senior research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ Center on Military and Political Power who specializes in U.S.-Israel security cooperation, said that “there will likely be a new, heavily modified MOU following the current agreement’s expiration.” 

Netanyahu, he told JI, “already revealed his desire to phase out American military aid, granted primarily as Foreign Military Financing,” which typically must be used to purchase U.S. defense products and services.

“While a new MOU should reflect that Israel’s economy has grown, it should also recognize that Israel’s defense requirements have too, and Israel may struggle to fill the gap in its defense budget that the loss of FMF would create,” Leopold-Cohen said.

Dan Shapiro, a U.S. ambassador to Israel in the Obama administration who served as a top defense official in the Biden administration, speculated that “the next MOU — if there is an MOU — will look very different from the current one.”

“It will likely phase out FMF, which both Prime Minister Netanyahu and Americans from the left and right are calling for,” Shapiro added. “It will likely emphasize joint research and development, sharing technological advances, and expanded co-production to answer President Trump’s question of what’s in it for the United States. To garner bipartisan support, it should include a consultative mechanism to ensure U.S. weapons are only used in ways consistent with American laws and values and that minimize civilian casualties.”

Daniel Silverberg, a former top foreign policy advisor to Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), characterized the MOU as “mutually beneficial,” saying that “it does not need to be exclusively assistance-based.”

“There are many ways to expand cooperation that involve more than giving aid,” he said. “The MOU is a key framework to do so, and it’s crucial to spell that out for a skeptical U.S. audience.”

But, he emphasized to JI, “We can’t want the MOU more than the Israelis want it.”

Former Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Herzog said on Thursday that he does not view J Street, the progressive Israel advocacy group, as a pro-Israel organization, weighing in on the escalating war between his successor, Ambassador Yechiel Leiter, and J Street.

Leiter said earlier this week that he views J Street as a “cancer within the Jewish community,” citing its calls for restricting arms sales and U.S. aid to Israel, and calling group “two-faced” for purporting to be pro-Israel. J Street’s president, Jeremy Ben-Ami, has also accused Israel of genocide.

“To me, to be pro-Israel is to draw a clear line between criticizing Israeli government policies — and supporting anti-Israel agendas and libels de-legitimizing the State of Israel,” Herzog said on X. “To be pro-Israel is to go from pronouncing support for Israel’s right to exist (thank you for the generosity…), to supporting the provision of the means critical to defending that very existence.”

“To be pro-Israel is to listen to Israelis; In our vibrant democracy, most Israelis share the view that j-street doesn’t qualify as pro-Israel,” Herzog continued.

J Street did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Unlike Leiter, a longtime close political ally of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Herzog was appointed to his role by former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, after Bennett’s coalition defeated Netanyahu in 2021, though Herzog remained in his role after Netanyahu was elected, until January 2025. Herzog’s brother, Isaac, is Israel’s president.

His comments criticizing J Street underscore the skepticism that Israeli leaders from across the ideological spectrum have towards the progressive advocacy organization. 

The comments came as J Street rallied more than 500 Jewish leaders calling on Leiter to rescind his remarks and apologize for using language that “dehumanizes fellow Jews.” Signatories include Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY); former U.S. Ambassadors to Israel Dan Kurtzer and Tom Nides; Rabbis Rick Jacobs and David Saperstein, leaders of the Reform movement; and National Council of Jewish Women CEO Jody Rabhan.

At the same time, Leiter on Thursday morning offered a strong defense of the Reform movement, condemning Likud MK and Social Equality Minister Mai Golan for comments lambasting the denomination and telling a prominent Reform rabbi, “You’re marrying dogs in your delusional synagogues.”

Leiter said on X that he condemns “in the strongest terms Minister Mai Golan’s verbal attack on MK Gilad Kariv and on Reform Judaism in general.”

“As an Orthodox Jew and as Israel’s representative to the United States I find her words disgusting and reprehensible, worthy of excoriation and rebuke,” Leiter said. “Theological, political, and ideological differences are fine, even necessary for a healthy people. But there is a line that cannot be crossed, it is a line that divides debate from hate and separates altruism from populism. Too many are crossing the line.”

Leiter said he plans to meet in person with Reform leaders to apologize on Israel’s behalf.

Pro-Israel and Republican Jewish groups helped oust one of their leading GOP antagonists on Tuesday night, aligning with President Donald Trump to defeat Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) in the most expensive House primary in recent memory. 

Ed Gallrein, a military veteran and farmer recruited by the Trump White House to challenge Massie, decisively defeated the congressman by 10 points, 55-45%. Massie, a libertarian lawmaker who long cast lonely Republican votes against Israel funding and resolutions condemning antisemitism, increasingly trafficked in bigoted rhetoric in the closing weeks of the campaign. 

In his concession speech, Massie continued his antisemitic vitriol against his opponent, telling the crowd: “I had to call my opponent and concede, and it took a while to find Ed Gallrein in Tel Aviv.” Even though Trump’s outspoken opposition was the leading factor behind his demise, he routinely blamed Jewish and pro-Israel donors like Miriam Adelson for costing him his seat and insinuated that Israel was buying seats in Congress. 

Massie first drew the ire of Trump for voting against his “big beautiful” reconciliation bill last year, and the anger was exacerbated by his work with Democrats to force the Department of Justice to release all of the files involving Jeffrey Epstein. 

Outside groups, including a Trump-aligned super PAC (MAGA KY) and those affiliated with the Republican Jewish Coalition, AIPAC and Christians United for Israel, spent aggressively with ads and billboards attacking Massie over his record, with several pointing out his opposition to Israel and Trump’s foreign policy.

Massie’s defeat also underscores Trump’s strong and continued support within the party, with his endorsements in primaries almost always translating into his candidate’s victory. His opposition to Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) led to his defeat last week, and he successfully ousted most of the Indiana GOP state senators who opposed his redistricting efforts.

Trump’s next test will come next week In Texas, after he just endorsed Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s intraparty challenge against Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX). 

While pro-Israel leaders were encouraged by the defeat of a leading GOP antagonist in Kentucky, many watched warily as state Rep. Chris Rabb, a DSA-endorsed candidate with a long record of extremist rhetoric and conspiratorial views, prevailed in a Philadelphia-area Democratic primary for the seat of retiring Rep. Dwight Evans (D-PA). 

During the campaign, Rabb called Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza a genocide, and attacked his opponents for not doing the same.

Rabb comfortably led state Sen. Sharif Street by 14 points (44-30%), with surgeon Ala Stanford finishing in third with 24% of the vote. Rabb, who was endorsed by leading progressive lawmakers like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) and Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), also spent time campaigning and fundraising with antisemitic streamer Hasan Piker. 

Rabb’s sharing of an Instagram post claiming the Bondi Beach terror attack that killed 14 Jews at a Chanukah celebration in Australia was a “false flag” perpetrated by Zionists did little to stunt his support. It also didn’t prevent Ocasio-Cortez from campaigning with him in the campaign’s closing days. (He claimed a former staffer was responsible for the post.)

Election results indicated that Rabb performed best in the whitest and wealthier precincts in the city, while Street and Stanford’s base was in the majority-Black working-class parts of Philadelphia. 

Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY), a pro-Israel Democrat facing a formidable primary challenge from former New York City Comptroller Brad Lander next month, won a key endorsement on Thursday from the United Federation of Teachers, a union representing around 200,000 members.   

“Dan Goldman has the integrity we need in Washington,” UFT President Michael Mulgrew said in a statement. “He fought to curb Trump’s abuses and supported raising taxes on the wealthy — like himself — to level the playing field so all Americans can live with dignity. We are proud to support Dan Goldman for New York’s 10th Congressional District.”

Goldman, a two-term congressman who represents a heavily Jewish district covering parts of Brooklyn and Lower Manhattan, has been racking up labor support as he seeks reelection in the June 23 primary against Lander, an outspoken progressive endorsed by New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

On Monday, Goldman joined New York Gov. Kathy Hochul at a labor rally in Lower Manhattan, where she touted his role as lead prosecutor in President Donald Trump’s first impeachment and called him a “go-to man” in Washington.

Despite such high-profile support, Goldman is still eyeing a tough primary in his progressive-leaning district. A recent poll commissioned by a super PAC backing his campaign, for instance, showed Goldman with 42% of the vote, trailing Lander by five points.

Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) and Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) urged the Jewish and pro-Israel communities to go on the offensive against antisemitism and anti-Israel attacks, in remarks on Wednesday at an event hosted by the Israeli Embassy in Washington, D.C., commemorating the 78th anniversary of Israel’s founding. 

Both lawmakers said they were fed up with constant attacks against the Jewish and pro-Israel communities — and against themselves and other pro-Israel lawmakers personally — for their stances, and urged the audience to forcefully push back and put those attacking the Jewish community and Israel on the defensive.

“No defense, only offense,” Gottheimer said. “I am sick and tired of people apologizing, of making excuses. We should feel proud of the U.S.-Israel relationship, of the independence, of what it’s done for America, of the bipartisan nature, historically, of the relationship and thank God we have Israel to help us fight terror, to stand for freedom and to stand for democracy.”

Moskowitz emphasized that lawmakers who support Israel are being held to a drastically different standard than they are about any other global conflict, just as, he argued, Israel is held to a different standard than other countries.

“We have to stop the defense. We as Jews feel like, ‘Oh, if we just educate them, if we just educate people, if we just give them the information, if we just talk to them, they’ll finally understand,’” Moskowitz said. “We have to flip the script. It’s enough of defending what Israel does. … We have to make the other side defend.”

He said that members of Congress should be grilled aggressively on their support for and relationships with extreme figures such as Hasan Piker and Tucker Carlson, and they should be forced to defend or justify the stances such figures have taken.

“We need all of you … to stand up, to fight back, to play offense, whether that’s against Hasan Piker, whether it’s Candance Owens, we need to make it very clear that’s not going to fly. You’re not going to mess with us. We’re coming for you,” Gottheimer agreed.

Other speakers at the event included Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Yechiel Leiter. Wright drew comparisons between President Harry Truman’s decision to recognize the state of Israel and President Donald Trump’s decision to attack Iran.

“The United States and Israel will prevail, and we will remove a massive threat, and we will bring years and decades of peace, prosperity and restoring confidence in the economic, social and cultural progress of this awesome region, the Middle East, anchored by the state of Israel,” Wright said.

He paid homage to Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim, the two Israeli Embassy staffers gunned down last year in an antisemitic attack at the Capital Jewish Museum, not far from the location of Wednesday night’s event.

Wright also highlighted Israel’s technological and energy sector successes and innovations.

Other lawmakers in attendance at the event included Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) and Reps. Brad Schneider (D-IL), Randy Fine (R-FL), Don Bacon (R-NE), Mike Lawler (R-NY) and Virginia Foxx (R-NC).

Other administration officials who attended the event included Sebastian Gorka, Josh Gruenbaum and Rabbi Yehuda Kaploun.

The annual event also included, for the first time, a dance floor, DJ and live music, to highlight and celebrate the end of the yearslong Gaza hostage crisis — following through on a slogan that emerged following the Hamas massacre at the Nova Music Festival on Oct.7, 2023: “We will dance again.”

When a group of Jewish Democratic activists and donors convened in Washington this week for the annual leadership summit of the Jewish Democratic Council of America, the message seemed to be one of defiance: defiance against President Donald Trump, to be sure, but also a defiant attitude pushing back against some of the recent shifts within the party. 

JDCA’s primary objective is to elect Democrats. But as more Democrats have taken positions critical of or outright hostile to Israel, JDCA’s top activists made clear this week that another major concern is making sure pro-Israel Jews continue to be welcome in the party. 

“We are fighting to ensure that the views and values of Jewish Americans continue to find their political home in the Democratic Party in Michigan and beyond, and we have work to do,” Halie Soifer, the group’s CEO, said on Tuesday night. She noted that the JDCA hopes to help defeat Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, a far-left candidate who appears to be rising in the polls. 

“It’s clear there’s one candidate whose views are antithetical to ours, and we want to ensure he’s defeated,” said Soifer, though she did not name El-Sayed directly. JDCA has not endorsed either of his opponents, state Sen. Mallory McMorrow or Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI). 

“We at JDCA only support Democrats, but we do not support them all,” Soifer told the summit. “We understand it’s not just about electing Democrats. It’s about electing Democrats who align with us, and this includes efforts to ensure that candidates who have espoused anti-Israel and/or antisemitic views are defeated before November.” 

Over the two-day gathering, a parade of high-profile speakers from Democratic leadership — Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), along with Reps. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Steny Hoyer (D-MD), respectively the former House speaker and majority leader — addressed the convening. Their appearances seemed designed to affirm that Democrats remain pro-Israel and committed to fighting antisemitism. 

“We have to decisively confront antisemitism from wherever it comes from,” said Jeffries. “I will always hold firm in my support for the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state and eternal homeland for the Jewish people.” 

Schumer did not specifically discuss Israel but raised concerns about the increasing use of the word “Zionist” as a slur. 

“I’ve long said we must fight antisemitism wherever and whenever it appears, even if it’s in our own party. I’ll continue to do so,” said Schumer. “Today, antisemitism takes all different forms: Holocaust denialism, conspiratorial delusions of Jewish or Zionist control of the world, replacing the word ‘Jewish’ with the word ‘Zionist’ to demonize Jewish communities.”

The outgoing Democratic leaders were not as sanguine, instead offering a note of caution about how the dynamic towards Israel has shifted within the Democratic Party. 

“Always, but right now, we really have to work together to make sure that support for Israel is, without question, bipartisan,” Pelosi said. “It doesn’t mean we don’t have our differences of opinion … but it should not weaken the fact that we have bipartisan support. That has always been the tradition, and we must make sure we get through this place where we are, where there may be some doubt in people’s minds as to whether that is a value.” 

Pelosi is retiring at the end of this year, as is Hoyer, who was even more blunt: “How many of you have been anxious yourselves about rhetoric heard from some Democratic officials and candidates? We ought to be,” he said. 

Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) said he hoped to prove that Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) does not speak for the party on matters related to Israel, though he noted with worry that Sanders’ attitude — one that is deeply critical of Israel — appears to be on the rise.

“It’s clearer and clearer to me that there is real alarm about a fundamental break between Democrats as a party and Israel as a nation, and I’m going to do everything I can to resist and oppose that break, while criticizing [Benjamin] Netanyahu and his values and decisions,” said Coons. “I’m trying to be an effective and engaged voice with a perspective that you just heard and not have Bernie Sanders be the only senator whose perspective and attitude is heard across the country.” 

Forty Senate Democrats voted last month for a Sanders-authored resolution attempting to block some arms sales to Israel, a record high. Coons said he knows those senators still support Israel’s right to exist, but cautioned that being too critical of Netanyahu can give cover to people who are actually anti-Israel. 

“I strongly support Israel’s right to exist, its right to be a Jewish homeland and a democracy, and its value to the American people as a partner and ally,” said Coons. “I think we are at risk of some of my colleagues, in trying to send a message to Netanyahu or in opposition to his policies and stances, to be misunderstood as abandoning that commitment.” 

Coons said that on the campaign trail, and on recent trips around the country, he hears “profound concern about where’s the Democratic Party going on Israel.” Some Jewish politicians who addressed the JDCA summit expressed a deeper sense of unease and discomfort about their Jewish identity, against the backdrop of rising antisemitism. 

Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), who spoke at a cocktail reception Tuesday evening, talked about how challenging it is to be a Jewish elected official in the current environment.

“It has become deeply, deeply complicated to be a Jew in America,” said Slotkin. “There’s not a single day that goes by for myself representing the state of Michigan that I am not feeling torn.” 

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey delivered a jolt of energy to the room with an impassioned speech about his community’s support for immigrants in the face of ICE enforcement activity, which resulted in the killing of two American citizens by ICE agents in his city in January. When a JDCA member asked him for advice on how to respond to others in the Democratic Party who have made anti-Zionism a political litmus test, he expressed concern. 

“It has been deeply concerning for me personally, as a proud Jew,” Frey said. “I am a great supporter of the endurance of our American Republic, a big believer that America should continue to exist, and an adamant opponent of Donald Trump. The same thing can apply to Israel.”

Ultimately, though, the gathering was a political pep rally — a chance for Democratic activists and donors to hear from politicians at all levels of government and gin up excitement ahead of this year’s midterm elections. Everyone who addressed the gathering all but guaranteed that Democrats would take back control of the House and Senate. 

The conversations seemed meant to ressure Jewish Democrats about both the party’s fortunes for November and its treatment of pro-Israel Jews. One JDCA activist described the group’s work as “grasstops,” which was demonstrated by the appearances from top party leaders. 

But the anti-Israel sentiment that has steadily grown within the party over the past three years is not coming from party leaders; it is driven by far-left activists. Whether JDCA has a plan to counter that grassroots energy remains to be seen — and the answer will only come at the ballot box later this year. 

Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), a pro-Israel stalwart and a former House majority leader, said on Tuesday that Jewish Democrats “ought to be” concerned about the critical way that some of their Democratic colleagues talk about Israel.

“How many of you here tonight have been trying to convince a family member, a friend, a neighbor not to abandon the party that has long been their political home?” Hoyer said in remarks at the Jewish Democratic Council of America’s annual leadership summit, where he was honored with an award marking his upcoming retirement, after 45 years in Congress. 

He was introduced by three of his current and former Jewish senior staffers, including Brian Romick, the CEO of Democratic Majority for Israel. 

“How many of you have been anxious yourselves about rhetoric heard from some Democratic officials and candidates? We ought to be,” said Hoyer. “I will stand up and say, ‘I do not agree with that.’”

Hoyer, a longtime champion of pro-Israel legislation, used the speech to reiterate his commitment to the Jewish state and explain why he thinks Democrats should support Israel. But even as he acknowledged issues of antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment in the party, he also pitched American Jews to maintain their historic support for Democrats and urged those who are unhappy with the party’s leftward shift on Israel to allow room for nuance, and to work to reverse it. 

He said he disagreed with the 40 Senate Democrats who voted in April against certain arms sales to Israel, but added that he still believed those lawmakers would support the Jewish community. He encouraged JDCA activists to keep calling those senators to push them to change their minds. 

“Those same 40 senators will stand up for you all the time. I disagree with them, but the fact of the matter is, keep in mind, it is not day to day. It is long-term commitment that counts. They need to keep hearing from you,” said Hoyer. “They need to keep seeing us fight to keep our party strong and pro-Israel, and consistent with its values. And they need to see our passion and our resolve.” 

Reflecting on his 22 visits to Israel over the last five decades, Hoyer called the trips particularly meaningful due to his Baptist faith. Still, he said he could not distill into words the reason for his deep-rooted affection for Israel.

“I really can’t put my finger on why, but I know that’s what I feel. I know that I feel that the Jewish community … for millennia has been the object of scorn, derision, prejudice, hate and violence,” said Hoyer. “At a very early age, I thought that was wrong, and I am so proud that I had the opportunity to not only say it was wrong, but to try and make it right.”

Hoyer described himself as “a champion for Israel,” a title he said made him proud. He insisted he is not alone in that category among Democrats.  

“The majority of Democrats still stand, in my view, and will continue to stand with Israel and with the Jewish people,” said Hoyer. “I’m confident we will be able to overcome this moment and defeat Trumpism at the ballot box, while defeating antisemitism and anti-Zionism in our politics.”

In the speech, Hoyer praised American Jews for the leading role they have played in Democratic politics. He insisted that he will make sure they are still welcome even as he leaves office.

“The Democratic Party has long stood for the same values that Jewish tradition teaches: caring for the sick and hungry, ensuring equal opportunity for all, freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, freedom of choice, freedom for workers to organize and justice for all under the rule of law,” said Hoyer.

“​​For as long as I am in office, and even in retirement,” he continued, “I will stand with you in strong support, strong foundation for our party as the warm and welcoming home for pro-Israel Jewish voters who care deeply about equal rights, justice and opportunity for all Americans.”

Good Tuesday morning.

In today’s Daily Kickoff, we look at the implications of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ proposed new congressional map on a handful of Sunshine State seats currently held by pro-Israel Democrats, and profile acting Labor Secretary Keith Sonderling, who prior to his appointment played a role in federal efforts to counter antisemitism. We look at the challenges facing Jewish voters in the Democratic primary in NJ-12, where Israel critic Adam Hamawy is drawing national attention, and interview cookbook author Adeena Sussman about her new book Zariz, out today, that was inspired by the need for quick and easy recipes as Israelis faced disruptive wars. Also in today’s Daily Kickoff: Roy Altman, Liron Fanan and Sergey Brin.

Today’s Daily Kickoff was curated by JI Executive Editor Melissa Weiss and Israel Editor Tamara Zieve, with an assist from Danielle Cohen-Kanik. Have a tip? Email us here.

What We’re Watching

• Talks between the U.S. and Iran remain at an impasse, with the Islamic Republic’s hard-liners reportedly at odds with each other over how the regime should approach negotiations with the West, and whether those talks should include issues related to Iran’s nuclear program.
• King Charles III is set to deliver an address to a joint session of Congress — the second time in history that a British monarch has done so — this afternoon, before a state dinner tonight.
• Education Secretary Linda McMahon will appear before the Senate Appropriations Committee this morning as the committee holds its budget hearing for the Department of Education.
• The Zionist Rabbinic Coalition kicks off its three-day annual conference today, with speakers including Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Yechiel Leiter, State Department antisemitism envoy Yehuda Kaploun, the Justice Department’s Harmeet Dhillon and the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ Jonathan Schanzer. The group also plans to honor Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) today with the “Pillar of Zion” award.
• Israel Tech Week continues today in Miami.

What You Should Know

A QUICK WORD WITH JI’S matthew kassel

The hyperpartisan gerrymandering arms race is threatening to derail the careers of several of the strongest allies to the Jewish community within the Democratic Party. 

A newly redrawn congressional map proposed by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday targets four seats held by pro-Israel Democrats, raising concerns among many Jewish leaders at the state and national levels about the implications of losing pivotal voices helping moderate the Democratic Party’s rhetoric on Israel and antisemitism. 

The aggressive redistricting plan, the broad outlines of which were first shared with Fox News, appears to eliminate a pair of South Florida House seats held by two of the most vocal pro-Israel Jewish Democrats in Congress, Reps. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) and Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), as well as two districts in Tampa and Orlando held respectively by Reps. Kathy Castor (D-FL) and Darren Soto (D-FL), both of whom are viewed as dependable voices in support of Israel.

The map, which comes amid nationwide redistricting efforts from both parties, is expected to pass the Republican-controlled Legislature in a special session this week, though Democrats have said they intend to challenge it in court. Democrats currently hold seven of the state’s 28 congressional seats, after Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL) resigned last week amid a House ethics investigation. Her seat did not seem to be affected by the map, which is facing accusations of partisan gerrymandering that could run afoul of state laws.

DeSantis has cast the new map as a necessary corrective meant to reflect the state’s changing population. But Jewish Democrats questioned the Republican governor’s motives, while expressing alarm that his plan threatens pro-Israel members, especially as the party has grown increasingly divided on Middle East policy and the rise of antisemitism.

The new congressional lines “risk drawing out members who have represented large Jewish constituencies for decades and dedicated their careers to combating antisemitism and strengthening the U.S.-Israel relationship,” Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), a Jewish Democrat who is one of his party’s most outspoken supporters of Israel, told Jewish Insider on Monday. “Losing them would be a massive blow to Congress.”

Read the rest of ‘What You Should Know’ here.

NORTH STAR

Acting Labor Secretary Keith Sonderling guided by Holocaust survivor grandparents

Keith Sonderling’s path to leading the Department of Labor, a role he assumed last week, was relatively straightforward, professionally speaking. But for Sonderling, working to set American labor policy has a more personal resonance, too. He said in his Senate confirmation hearing to serve as deputy secretary that his Jewish grandparents faced religious discrimination at work once they arrived in the United States, after surviving the Holocaust, Jewish Insider’s Gabby Deutch reports. 

History lessons: “Although more than willing to work, my grandparents lost employment opportunities based solely on their religious beliefs and life circumstances,” Sonderling, 43, said last year. “It was only through their tenacity and relentless hard work that they overcame the barriers put before them, ultimately paving the path for me to appear here, before you, today.”

Read the full story here.

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

JERSEY JOSTLING

New Jersey’s 12th District Democratic primary poses tough choices for Jewish voters

The wide open Democratic primary in New Jersey’s 12th Congressional District could pose a difficult dilemma for local Jewish voters and national pro-Israel groups, given the candidacy of Adam Hamawy, a physician who served in Gaza and has made criticism of Israel a centerpiece of his campaign, Jewish Insider’s Marc Rod reports.

State of play: With a crowded field of candidates staking out a range of views on the U.S.-Israel relationship, the race poses tough strategic questions for the pro-Israel community — if it wants to block Hamawy from becoming the Democratic nominee. With such a divided field, a candidate could win the nomination in the June 2 primary with a small plurality. 

Read the full story here.

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

EYE ON ISLAMABAD

U.S. lawmakers voice caution on Pakistan’s new middleman role

Lawmakers are expressing skepticism over Pakistan’s expanding role in the Middle East, cautiously welcoming its involvement in U.S.-Iran negotiations while questioning its defense aspirations in the region and whether it can truly serve as an impartial intermediary — even as the Trump administration increasingly engages with the country, Jewish Insider’s Matthew Shea reports.

Proceed with caution: “I think the approach has to be: don’t trust, but verify,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) told JI. “[Pakistan] has certainly been a somewhat ambiguous force in many ways. They’ve been disruptive to some relationships. They’re a nuclear-armed power, but they are definitely a force, and if they can play a constructive role here we should welcome it. It doesn’t mean that we have to accept their word on everything they do or say.”

Read the full story here with additional comments from Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) and Reps. Tim Burchett (R-TN) and Brad Sherman (D-CA).

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

LEGAL APPROACH

Judge Roy Altman, in new book, takes on Israel critics, one legal claim at a time

U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of Florida Roy Altman decided to apply the same legal methodology that judges, lawyers and juries have deployed in courtrooms across America for centuries to address six legal accusations being wielded against Israel by its detractors, in a new book called Israel On Trial: Examining the History, the Evidence and the Law. Altman sat down with Jewish Insider’s Haley Cohen, just ahead of the book’s release today, to make the case for examining Israel through a legal lens.

Providing perspective: “Legal questions allow us to pare back the vitriol, emotion, bias and prejudice. That’s what we do with jurors every day in this country,” Altman told JI. “For hundreds of thousands of years, human beings have been accustomed to living in small groups. It was really important in the context of that environment to tell the truth and for the group as a whole to be able to decide whether the person was telling the truth.”

Read the full interview here.

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

HUSH-HUSH

Brad Lander stays mum on Mamdani buffer bill veto

Congressional hopeful and former New York City Comptroller Brad Lander — Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s favored candidate to dislodge sitting Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) — refused to comment on Mamdani’s veto of a bill that would set NYPD policy around security perimeters at educational facilities during protests, even as a Jewish group Lander co-founded denounced the mayor’s move, Jewish Insider’s Will Bredderman reports. 

Unreachable: Lander has not issued a public statement on the move and failed to respond to calls or text messages on his personal cell phone from JI, while his campaign did not answer queries sent via phone and email regarding Mamdani’s controversial Friday veto, the first of his mayoralty. 

Read the full story here.

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

BOOKSHELF

Adeena Sussman’s new cookbook spotlights simple cooking for complicated times

Adeena Sussman’s Tel Aviv kitchen is a chef’s dream. The long marble countertop next to the stove extends out from the gas range, perfect for preparing ingredients, pouring drinks and entertaining. “This is my safe room,” Sussman half-jokingly told Jewish Insider’s Melissa Weiss. Her actual safe room is a floor below, used frequently during the war with Iran, in the midst of which JI visited the cookbook author last month, weeks before the release of her third book, Zariz: 100 Easy, Breezy, Tel Aviv-y Recipes, out today.

Comfort food: The first sentence of the introduction of Zariz begins: “When the going gets tough, the cooking gets easy.” Sussman began writing the book in the weeks after the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas terror attacks, amid regular rocket fire that frequently sent Israelis, including Sussman, who made aliyah a decade ago, to their shelters. “It’s simple cooking for complicated times,” Sussman explained of the book’s origins. Nearly two and a half years after she began writing the book, “it hasn’t gotten any less complicated.”

Read the full interview here.

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

Worthy Reads

The Common Foe Theory: In Foreign Policy, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ Ahmad Sharawi posits that the U.S. could play a role in bringing Syria and Israel together over their shared opposition to Hezbollah, which poses threats to both countries. “Now, the United States could help pressure both sides to work together more effectively. Indirect coordination or tacit understandings about red lines could significantly reduce friction while tightening constraints on Hezbollah’s movement in Syria. Crucially, Israel could provide Damascus with intelligence that would help it crack down on Hezbollah-linked networks, particularly those tied to weapons transfers and cross-border operations.”[ForeignPolicy]

Tying Mossad’s Hands?: In his Substack “Between Us,” Nadav Eyal looks at the degree to which the Mossad’s plans to target Iran — which so far have left the regime damaged but in power — were hamstrung by the U.S. and other regional actors. “The plan included, as was widely reported in The New York Times, a massive deployment of Kurdish forces in a broad invasion of Iran. This was thwarted by Turkey, which successfully used its influence to prevent the plan from being activated. Had such an invasion taken place, the Islamic Republic would have faced a severe crisis — forced to divert resources to suppress both an internal uprising and an armed incursion.” [BetweenUs]

Israel is Real: In the “Boundless Insights” Substack, Adam Hummel argues that the debate over Zionism ignores the reality of Israel’s existence. “Israelis don’t owe anyone an argument for their existence. They don’t need to win the debate about whether Zionism was the right idea in 1897. They don’t need to persuade Ezra Klein or Hasan Piker or the student encampments that their country’s creation in 1948 was just. The debate is over, not because one side won, but because the thing itself came into being. They are a people. They speak a language. They live on a piece of land and have mortgages. That is what peoples do. The Greeks do it. The Poles do it. The Québécois do it. The arguments about whether they should are, at this point, a leisure activity for people who live elsewhere.” [Boundless]

Word on the Street

German Chancellor ‌Friedrich Merz said that the U.S. is being “humiliated” by Iran amid stalled talks, adding that the “Iranians are clearly stronger than expected and the Americans clearly have no truly convincing strategy in the negotiations either”…

President Donald Trump, speaking to CBS News’ “60 Minutes Overtime,” said, in response to conspiracy theories swirling around the attack at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, that people who say “Oct. 7 didn’t happen, and World War II didn’t happen and the Holocaust didn’t happen — and many things didn’t happen” are “more sick than they are con people”…

The California man accused of opening fire at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner on Saturday night made his first court appearance on Monday, where he was charged with attempting to assassinate Trump, as well as two firearms charges; Cole Tomas Allen, who did not enter a plea, is expected to face additional charges…

The Wall Street Journal does a deep dive into the recent spike in domestic anti-government violence, finding that attacks and plots targeting the government are at their highest levels in more than three decades…

The New York Times looks at how Google co-founder Sergey Brin has begun to move to the right, citing the Democratic Party’s leftward shift on a variety of core issues, including Israel; Brin told the Times, “I fled socialism with my family in 1979 and know the devastating, oppressive society it created in the Soviet Union. I don’t want California to end up in the same place”… 

David Ellison’s Paramount filed a request for approval from the FCC for Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, the Qatar Investment Authority and Abu Dhabi’s L’imad Holding Co. to collectively take a nearly 50% stake in Paramount’s equity interests…

All five of Pennsylvania’s living former governors, both Republicans and Democrats, released a statement on Monday calling on state officials to prioritize the safety and security of Gov. Josh Shapiro; the letter comes days after Pennsylvania Treasurer Stacy Garrity — Shapiro’s leading Republican opponent in this year’s gubernatorial race — said the state would not pay for security upgrades at Shapiro’s private home, Jewish Insider’s Gabby Deutch reports… 

Amir Makled, who earlier this month beat Jordan Acker in the race for the Democratic nomination to the University of Michigan’s Board of Regents, defended sharing social media content praising Hezbollah and demonizing Israelis, while saying he “disavow[s] antisemitism completely”…

A federal judge in Pennsylvania delayed an order that would have required the University of Pennsylvania to turn over information to the Trump administration by Friday about Jewish faculty and individuals affiliated with Jewish campus organizations…

Security experts speaking to eJewishPhilanthropy’s Jay Deitcher warned that philanthropic and Jewish organizations are increasingly at risk as AI enables the proliferation of cyberattacks…

Jewish Community Relations Council of New York’s Mark Treyger, the Met Council’s David Greenfield, UJA-Federation of New York’s Eric Goldstein, Jewish Voters Action Network’s Maury Litwack and Teach Coalition’s Sydney Altfield were among those named to City & State New York’s New York City Power 100 list…

Ynet interviews Liron Fanan, the general manager of the NBA G League’s Cleveland Charge, shortly after she was named the league’s first female executive of the year…

Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry summoned Israel’s ambassador in Kyiv amid reports that Israel had allowed a second Russian ship carrying grain looted from Ukraine to dock in the port of Haifa; Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar clashed on X with his Ukrainian counterpart over the allegation, saying, “Evidence substantiating the allegations have yet to be provided”…

Bahrain revoked the citizenships of dozens of people accused of “glorifying or sympathizing” with Iran; Manama revoked 69 total citizenships, including relatives of those alleged to be supporting Tehran…

Adam Safran, who served as legislative director for former Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL), has joined AIPAC as director for policy and government affairs…

Eugene Kontorovich is joining Advancing American Freedom as a senior legal fellow…

Shayndi Raice, who was previously The Wall Street Journal’s deputy bureau chief for the Middle East and North Africa based out of Israel, was tapped by CBS News to serve in a newly created foreign editor role based out of London; Claire Day, the outlet’s London bureau chief, is set to depart her role next month…

Disability advocate Matan Koch died at 44…

Australian novelist David Malouf, whose writings focused on the country’s dual historical identities as a British empire colony and a rugged outback, died at 92…

Pic of the Day

Israeli President Isaac Herzog met this morning with leaders of Central Asian Jewish communities during his visit to the Beit Rachel synagogue in Astana, Kazakhstan’s capital city.

Birthdays

Actress and film critic, she is the writer and star of the CBC comedy series “Workin’ Moms,” Catherine Reitman turns 45…

Former Israeli ambassador to the U.S., he also served four terms in the Knesset, Zalman Shoval turns 96… White House chief of staff for Presidents Reagan and Bush 41, secretary of the treasury and secretary of state, James Baker turns 96… Retired judge of the Maryland Court of Appeals (now known as the Supreme Court of Maryland), Judge Irma Steinberg Raker turns 88… Retired four-star United States Marine Corps general, Robert Magnus turns 79… Retired SVP and COO of IPRO and former president of the Bronx/Riverdale YM-YWHA and the Riverdale Jewish Center, Harry M. Feder… Cantor who has served in Galveston, Texas, Houston and Buffalo, N.Y., Sharon Eve Colbert… Criminal defense attorney, his clients have included Hunter Biden and Jared Kushner, Abbe David Lowell turns 74… Author of 28 books, lecturer, podcaster, tour guide in Jerusalem and film producer, Rabbi Hanoch Teller turns 70… Director of congregational engagement at Temple Beth Sholom of Miami Beach, Fla., Mark Baranek… Associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, Elena Kagan turns 66… American-born Israeli writer and translator, director and senior fellow at Z3, David Hazony turns 57… Director of criminal justice innovation, development and engagement at USDOJ during the Biden administration, Karen “Chaya” Friedman… Comedy writer, television producer and showrunner, Daniel Joshua Goor turns 51… Retired soccer player, she played for the U.S. Women’s National Soccer Team from 1997 to 2000, Sara Whalen Hess turns 50… Founder of GlobeTrotScott Strategies, Scott Mayerowitz… Model, actress and TV host, known for her role in the soap opera “Fashion House,” Donna Feldman turns 44… CEO and founder of The Branch, Ravi Gupta… Freelance journalist, formerly at ESPN and Sports Illustrated, Jason Schwartz… Senior editor at Politico Magazine, Benjamin Isaac Weyl… President of Saratoga Strategies, a strategic communications and crisis management firm, Joshua Schwerin… Head coach of the women’s soccer team at Yeshiva University, Ryan Alexander Hezekiah Adeleye turns 39… Israeli artist and photographer, Neta Cones turns 38… Marketing director at College Golf Experience, Jeffrey Hensiek… Associate in the finance department of Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson, Robert S. Murstein… Senior reporter for Cybersecurity Dive, Eric J. Geller… Founder and CEO of Diamond Travel Services, Ahron Fragin… Midfielder for Major League Soccer’s St. Louis City, Daniel Ethan Edelman turns 23…

The wide open Democratic primary in New Jersey’s 12th Congressional District could pose a difficult dilemma for local Jewish voters and national pro-Israel groups, given the candidacy of Adam Hamawy, a physician who served in Gaza and has made criticism of Israel a centerpiece of his campaign.

With a crowded field of candidates staking out a range of views on the U.S.-Israel relationship, the race poses tough strategic questions for the pro-Israel community — if it wants to block Hamawy from becoming the Democratic nominee. With such a divided field, a candidate could win the nomination in the June 2 primary with a small plurality. 

The seat is currently held by the retiring Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ).

Hamawy, who posted strong first-quarter fundraising and is winning support from national progressive groups and leaders, is now being championed by American Priorities, an anti-Israel group that aims to counter AIPAC. American Priorities has indicated it’s prepared to spend $2 million supporting Hamawy. 

Pro-Israel groups are thus far uninvolved in the race and aren’t indicating  any plans to engage.

But a Hamawy victory would create red flags in the Jewish community, given his outspoken anti-Israel stance. Despite his extreme views on Israel, he has a compelling personal biography — he is a veteran combat physician credited with saving Sen. Tammy Duckworth’s (D-IL) life. 

A New Jersey Jewish leader told JI that the race presents tough choices for the Jewish community, predicting that Jewish voters are likely to be split among several of the candidates, including Sue Altman, a former state director for Sen. Andy Kim (D-NJ), and East Brunswick Mayor Brad Cohen.

Other candidates, including state Rep. Verlina Reynolds-Jackson, could also prove to be viable challengers, with the support of local political machines.

In addition to recent comments on far-left streamer Hasan Piker’s show in which he said he does not support Israel’s Iron Dome missile-defense system because it insulates Israel from the consequences of war, Hamawy is now also facing scrutiny for comments he made in 2024 after volunteering at the European Gaza Hospital in the enclave during Israel’s war with Hamas.

The Washington Free Beacon resurfaced past comments by Hamawy saying definitively that Gaza’s hospitals were not being used as bases or hideouts for Hamas terrorists, saying that he saw “no fighters at all,” no guns, no combatants and “definitely no tunnels underground.”

A year later, Hamas leader Mohammed Sinwar was killed in a strike on a tunnel that ran directly under the European Hospital’s emergency department during a meeting with other top Hamas leaders. Israel has said that the hospital served as a command center during Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks on Israel and that it found evidence that Hamas hostages were held under it.

Altman ran on a pro-Israel platform in 2024 in a neighboring district but now says she opposes U.S. financial aid for Israel and wants to restrict and condition weapons sales, while arguing strongly in defense of the Iron Dome system and stridently criticizing Hamawy for opposing it. The former progressive organizer is trying to stake out a middle ground to attract both progressives critical of Israel  and more pro-Israel Jewish voters. 

Cohen is Jewish and has been the strongest supporter of Israel in the field, facing criticism and, in some cases, antisemitic attacks for that position. He once described himself as a member of AIPAC and faced criticism from Watson Coleman over his stance on Israel — she called him a “hard-line supporter of [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu” and specifically urged voters to reject him.

Both candidates, the Jewish leader said, are “reasonable people” who are willing and able to have nuanced conversations about Israel and the Jewish community — though they hold differing views on Israel. Jewish voters, they said, could play a significant role in the election, particularly in Cohen’s home area of East Brunswick.

“They both have their followings, and they’re both, I would argue, relatively well-liked both in and out of the Jewish community,” the leader said, highlighting that both also have experience in government.

The leader predicted that Cohen, given his strong and clear support for Israel and his positive reputation in the Jewish community statewide, is likely to be able to unify much of the Jewish vote.

Though he has the support of the local Democratic county organization, whether Cohen can win district-wide remains a question.

A Sunday night debate highlighted the range of views among the candidates on Israel, and the specific nuances that some candidates are trying to capture.

Hamawy, asked about potential conditions on U.S. aid globally, said that “this isn’t about defense.”

“Every country has a right to defend itself, but what we have from the International Criminal Court, what we have from Human Rights Watch, from Amnesty International and what I have seen and experienced in my own eyes isn’t self-defense,” Hamawy said. “It’s a country that is committing genocide and continues to bomb innocent people every day.”

He suggested that, in addition to cutting off aid to Israel, the U.S. should also cut off aid to the United Arab Emirates over its alleged support of a faction in the Sudanese civil war that the U.S. has determined is committing genocide.

Hamawy, who largely agreed with Piker’s positions on various issues when he appeared on his stream, distanced himself from Piker’s recent comments in a New York Times interview advocating for shoplifting.

“We have to abide by the laws. There’s no room for crime. We have to be able to make food affordable for people when they need it,” Hamawy said, “but crime is not the way to go about it, and so I disagree with that.”

Altman emphasized that she was “the only candidate in this race that AIPAC has actually endorsed against” — when she ran against incumbent Rep. Tom Kean Jr. (R-NJ) in 2024. 

She said that she believes Israel should exist and that Netanyahu is a war criminal.

“I believe that we should not be sending our taxpayer money to Israel to kill civilians. But I also think the Iron Dome should exist,” Altman said. “Israel’s a prosperous country, however, it doesn’t need our money to support the Iron Dome. It can pay for it on its own.”

She condemned the “atrocities” in Gaza and the war in Lebanon, but she also emphasized that Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis “are terrorist organizations, and Israel should be allowed to defend itself against those organizations.”

Altman also emphasized that antisemitism and Islamophobia at home are not an acceptable reaction to the conflict in the Middle East.

Reynolds-Jackson took criticism from a fellow candidate over past affiliations with AIPAC, and for a trip she took to Israel in 2018.

She said that the “world is a different place” than it was at the time, and emphasized that she visited both Israel and the “Muslim side,” describing them both as “beautiful.” But she also emphasized that a kibbutz she visited in 2018 had been destroyed.

“When we talk about protecting the right for Israel to defend itself, when we talk about the innocent lives that [have] been lost, I am not afraid to say that I am pro-Israel and I am pro-Muslim. These are people that deserve to live in peace,” she said.

Asked earlier in the event about whether she would support suspending any U.S. aid to Israel, Reynolds-Jackson said, “I support Israel, I support the two-state solution,” before criticizing the amount the U.S. spends on military aid in Israel and elsewhere, and emphasizing her opposition to the war in Iran.

Cohen took the most unequivocally pro-Israel stance of the group.

“I believe very strongly in Israel’s right to exist, and not only exist, but to thrive in the Middle East, along with its neighbors. Everybody in that region of the world deserves to live in peace,” Cohen said. “The U.S. has always been an ally of Israel, and we have allies throughout the world that we support with military aid. That aid should not only be for defense, which Israel uses to defend its citizens, 20% of which are Muslim, it also must be able to fight back when attacked, just like we do for every other U.S. ally that we have around the world.”

He emphasized that Israel is a democracy facing threats from terrorists that want to destroy both it and the United States, even as he said he strongly disagrees with Israel’s current leadership.

Cohen also said that his disagreements with Watson Coleman, in spite of her criticism, are “really very few compared to the multiple things which we’ve agreed upon.” He praised her record and legacy in Congress.

Plainfield Mayor Adrian Mapp, also running for the seat, said he firmly believes that U.S. aid to Israel should be conditioned, while also calling Israel “a very important ally of the United States” with “the right to defend itself against terrorism.”

“I believe that Israel should exist within secure borders and should continue to be a very important ally and partner of the United States,” Mapp said. “On the other hand, I do believe that Palestinian people have a right to exist and a right to defend [themselves] within secure borders, and so we must make sure that we negotiate a peace agreement that will bring the Palestinians and the Israelis together, existing in borders of their own.”

Jay Vaingankar, a 28-year-old former Department of Energy official, also struck out a strongly anti-Israel stance and went on the attack against several other candidates on the stage over their alleged views on the issue or ties to the pro-Israel community.