452
submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by Alsephina@lemmy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml

The United States House of Representatives has overwhelmingly passed a bill that would expand the federal definition of anti-Semitism, despite opposition from civil liberties groups.

The bill passed the House on Wednesday by a margin of 320 to 91, and it is largely seen as a reaction to the ongoing antiwar protests unfolding on US university campuses. It now goes to the Senate for consideration.

If the bill were to become law, it would codify a definition of anti-Semitism created by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

IHRA’s working definition of anti-Semitism is “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities”.

According to the IHRA, that definition also encompasses the “targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity”.

The group also includes certain examples in its definition to illustrate anti-Semitism. Saying, for instance, that “the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor” would be deemed anti-Semitic under its terms. The definition also bars any comparison between “contemporary Israeli policy” and “that of the Nazis”.

Rights groups, however, have raised concerns the definition nevertheless conflates criticism of the state of Israel and Zionism with anti-Semitism.

In a letter sent to lawmakers on Friday, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) urged House members to vote against the legislation, saying federal law already prohibits anti-Semitic discrimination and harassment.

“Instead, it would likely chill free speech of students on college campuses by incorrectly equating criticism of the Israeli government with anti-Semitism.”

Archive link

(page 3) 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 1 points 6 months ago

Tens of thousands of civilian casualties is the price we are willing to pay for a strategic military asset the the middle east.

After all, tens of thousands of civilian casualties is the price we are willing to pay for the 2nd amendment.

We'd be hypocrites otherwise.

-- US Congress, probably.

[-] kaffiene@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

I claim the Hilltop Youth in Israel are not a million miles from the Hitler Youth. Am I now an antisemite?

[-] unreasonabro@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago

lol fuck off morons.

[-] IamSparticles@lemmy.zip -5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I'm a little confused why this is in the news. First off, it's just a House Resolution. It's has no legally binding repercussions. It's basically the House of Representatives as a group making a statement: "We don't like anti-Semitism". The definition of anti-Semitism they decided to point to is the thing that's really in contention. But again, this affects nobody but the US House of Representatives.

Secondly, the vote on this took place in December. So it seems kind of late to be raging over it.

Full text of the resolution: https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hres894/BILLS-118hres894ih.pdf
Summary of action: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/894/all-info

If you're in the US and it really bugs you, I'd suggest looking up how your district representative voted and let them know how you feel about it.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 02 May 2024
452 points (98.5% liked)

World News

32328 readers
497 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS