The House of Representatives, amid a wave of anti-Israel demonstrations throughout the country's major universities, approved a bill that will expand the legal definition of antisemitism to apply anti-discrimination laws against hate movements that target Jews.

The legislation called the bipartisan Antisemitism Awareness Act received broad bipartisan support and was passed by a resounding majority of 320 votes in favor and 91 against.

The bill, which will now pass on to the Senate, establishes that the Department of Education must legally adopt the definition of antisemitism established in the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA ) when applying anti-discrimination standards.

The House approves a project... by emmanuel.rondon

Despite broad bipartisan support, progressive Democratic and conservative Republican factions within the House expressed their opposition to the bill because the legislation, in their view, could violate the First Amendment.

One of those who questioned the bill was the Republican legislator Thomas Massie, who stated that, although he condemns the rampant anti-Israel hate speech in the United States, he disagrees that the legal framework of the legislation does not adopt a definition of "antisemitism" that does not challenge the First Amendment.

"This is a poorly conceived unconstitutional bill and I will vote no," said this Republican representative.

Like Massie, Rep. Jerry Nadler — the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee — said the law is unconstitutional.

"This definition, adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance or IHRA, includes, quote, contemporary examples of antisemitism, close quote. The problem is that these examples may include protected speech in some context, particularly with respect to criticism of the state of Israel," said Nadler, who is Jewish, is part of the House Democratic progressive faction and led the opposition on the legislation.

While some lawmakers questioned the bill for a potential violation of the First Amendment, the vast majority agreed to expand the definition of antisemitism to protect Jews from rampant discrimination on college campuses.

"When people engage in harassment or bullying of Jewish individuals where they justify the killing of Jews or use blood libel or hold Jews collectively responsible for the actions of the Israeli government — that is antisemitic. It's unfortunate that needs to be clarified, but that's why this bill is necessary," Republican Congressman Mike Lawler told Fox News Digital. Lawler is one who promoted the bill.

What is antisemitism according to IHRA?

According to the IHRA, antisemitic actions or rhetoric include "targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity."

However, within its definition, it clarifies that "criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic."

"Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for 'why things go wrong.' It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits," the IHRA definition reads. It also provides several examples of modern antisemitism, such as:

- Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined evil actions committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.

- Denying the fact, extent, mechanisms (e.g., gas chambers), or intention of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).

- Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel or to the supposed priorities of Jews around the world than to the interests of their own nations.

- Apply a double standard by demanding behavior that is not expected or required of any other democratic nation.

- Using symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (for example, claims that Jews killed Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.

Critics, while expressing their disdain for antisemitism, pointed out that the Constitution protects some of the examples cited by IHRA and, therefore, should not be punished, as noted by Republican Representative Matt Gaetz, one of the few who did not support the legislation.