IHRA Definition Remains The Standard for Fighting Antisemitism

by Farley Weiss, Chairman

5/7/2025, 4:24:51 PM

Under the widely accepted International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism, those opposed to the existence of the one Jewish state of Israel are antisemitic. It also calls those who impose a double standard when it comes to Israel’s actions as being antisemitic as well.

Since the IHRA definition was created in 2016, it has been adopted by 46 countries and 37 states throughout America,15 of which have legally established the definition in state statutes. It has also been adopted by many more municipalities and groups.

Yet, much of the Democratic Party has moved away from this bipartisan-supported and well-accepted definition of antisemitism in favor of the “Nexus Document” and its definition of antisemitism. The Nexus definition allows for conduct that would not be permissible under IHRA, particularly as it relates to Israel and Zionism.

For instance, the Nexus definition says that “Opposition to Zionism and/or Israel does not necessarily reflect specific anti-Jewish animus nor purposefully lead to antisemitic behaviors and conditions.” It also says that “Paying disproportionate attention to Israel and treating Israel differently than other countries is not prima facie proof of antisemitism” as there are “numerous reasons for devoting special attention to Israel and treating Israel differently.”

“Using accusations of antisemitism as a tool to suppress criticism of Israel is dangerous on many levels,” the Nexus definition states. “It distracts attention from bona fide antisemitism, infringes on the principle of freedom of expression, and militates against constructive dialogue and debate among people with differing opinions.”

The Senate committee that was set to vote on the Antisemitism Awareness Act failed to do so last week because the Democratic members, with the support of Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), opposed the IHRA definition of antisemitism included in the legislation.

The now-infamous House hearing in which the presidents of Harvard University, the University of Pennsylvania and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology claimed that the answer to the question is calling for the genocide of Jews antisemitic depended on the context, crystalized the success of the Nexus definition of antisemitism, in essence claims that statements and actions that are blatantly antisemitic under the IHRA definition are no longer antisemitic.

Harvard recently released the reports from task forces studying antisemitism and Islamophobia on campus. The “Presidential Task Force on Combating Antisemitism and Anti-Israel Bias” report on antisemitism proved that the IHRA definition was accurate, as acts of “anti-Zionism” included attacks on Jews attending Harvard. There were 70 days of protests against Israel during the 2023-24 year at Harvard, and 60% of Harvard Jews reported being discriminated against, with 44% reporting feeling mentally unsafe on campus and 26% feeling physically unsafe on campus.

In an April 24 letter to President Donald Trump signed by five Jewish senators—Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)—urging him to “stop weaponizing antisemitism,” the senators wrote: “Is the administration applying immigration enforcement tools—such as revoking visas and beginning deportation proceedings—against students based solely on their expressed views and speech, which the administration has identified as antisemitic?”

It is the IHRA definition that deems the actions of these foreign students in the United States on student visas as being antisemitic. These students are the leaders of antisemitism on college campuses, and yet these Jewish senators are trying to keep them on college campuses, where they will continue to lead in harassing Jews. It is common sense that the first step to making colleges safe for Jews is to kick out these foreign antisemitic student leaders, and yet these Jewish senators oppose such efforts.

It was not surprising to learn that the 34-year-old Columbia student and protest leader Mohsen Hahdawi, who was released by an immigration judge, told a gun store in Vermont while purchasing a gun that he had used guns “to kill Jews while he was in Palestine.” This statement was in a filing by the U.S. Department of Justice.

This is the type of student that the Democrats have been defending and trying to keep on college campuses. The fact that some of these Democrats are using their Jewishness as part of this defense makes their arguments even more sickening.

The Trump administration has the right approach to try and stop antisemitism on college campuses, and there has been a sharp decrease in antisemitism on these campuses as a result.

The adoption of the IHRA definition of antisemitism is the only way antisemitism can be properly fought. The Democratic Party’s efforts to oppose the adoption of the IHRA definition and Trump’s efforts in fighting antisemitism show that it has become an obstacle to fighting antisemitism on college campuses.