On May 25, 2023, the United States government published the U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism, a historic framework laying out a whole-of-society approach to combating what has been called the “oldest hatred.” Representing extensive consultation with the American Jewish community, the strategy came at a pivotal moment, as antisemitism had been on the rise in the United States, representing nearly two-thirds of reported religiously motivated hate crimes in the country. Yet only months after its publication, the October 7, 2023, attacks by Hamas on Israel and the resulting war in Gaza drove a further surge in antisemitism. This has raised deep concerns for the Jewish community even as the public’s perception of antisemitism has been complicated by fierce debates over Israel’s conduct in Gaza and its connection to political battles dividing the United States.
Now more than ever, the National Strategy’s whole-of-society approach to combating antisemitism is needed and must be further expanded to include actions that unify Americans against antisemitism—both by combating those drivers that are shared with other forms of hate and by tailoring responses to antisemitism’s unique characteristics. Similarly, the surge in antisemitism demands a response that protects the Jewish community, which is most acutely and directly affected by it; and safeguards America’s broader society, freedom, and democracy, which have historically provided a haven for Jews in the United States. Indeed, like with other forms of hate, a key facet of antisemitism that must be combated is that it fundamentally divides a society and scapegoats a group, eroding trust in institutions and neighbors.
This issue brief builds upon and extends the important work of the National Strategy, applying its principles to the current moment and extending the strategy with concrete recommendations and interventions that are urgently needed.
Background
Just this year, horrifying incidents of violent attacks against Jews have epitomized the surge in antisemitism experienced by American communities. In April, a man set fire to the Pennsylvania governor’s official residence, causing Gov. Josh Shapiro and his family to be awakened and evacuated to safety—just hours after celebrating the first night of the Jewish holiday of Passover—as one of the building’s wings was engulfed in flames. In May, two young Israeli Embassy employees in Washington, D.C., were killed outside the Capital Jewish Museum, where they had been attending an event. In June, a man is alleged to have thrown Molotov cocktails into a crowd at a Colorado event calling for the release of Israeli hostages in Gaza, injuring 12 people, including mostly senior citizens and a Holocaust survivor; one of the victims has since died from her injuries. Later that month, prosecutors allege that a car veered into the lane of Rep. Max Miller’s (R-OH) vehicle, with a 911 dispatcher recalling that Miller said the driver was threatening the Jewish congressman’s family and calling him a “dirty Jew.” These incidents come in the wake of multiple attacks on synagogues in the past decade, including the murder of 11 worshippers at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh in October 2018, the deadliest targeted attack on Jews in U.S. history.
Notably, these attacks appear to have been driven in part by views associated with both the far left and the far right. Whether motivated by white supremacist conspiracy theories or unjustly demanding personal accountability from Jews for their beliefs or for the actions of a foreign state, the result is the same: hateful acts that divide society. Unfortunately, this division has been stoked further as antisemitism has become politicized, with political leaders using the spread of antisemitism as justification for eroding free speech, due process, and the rule of law—core pillars of an inclusive democracy that has allowed the Jewish community and so many other minority groups to flourish in the United States.
Principles for confronting antisemitism
The recent surge in antisemitism and its increasing politicization by some to achieve other political goals suggest the importance of sharpening the principles that can drive recommendations for concrete steps to combat it.
Unsurprisingly, the surge in antisemitism has left Jewish communities fearful for their own safety. It is now common to see police vehicles outside of synagogues at times of worship and at other meeting places for community events. Although this additional security is warranted and has been supported by the federal Nonprofit Security Grant Program,* it also is a constant reminder of threat. The Jewish community must define its own narrative around the pernicious hate it is experiencing. And without exception, Americans must forge a culture in which Jews—and all other groups—feel safe coming together as a community to worship or socialize.
As the National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism made clear, a crucial way to combat antisemitism is to confront it head on and deeply educate people—particularly young people—who have less grounding in the long history of antisemitism the world over. It is also vital to address antisemitism as a form of hate, much like other forms of hate that dehumanize individuals for their membership in a group. The oft-repeated narrative that Jews as a group are powerful does not limit hatred toward the group, but can exacerbate it. Conspiracies about Jews’ wealth and power are representative of the central role conspiracy theories have played in antisemitism for centuries. Dating back to ancient times, Jews were falsely said to have killed Jesus, murdered Christian children (an accusation historically referred to as “blood libel”), started the Black Death, caused Germany’s defeat in World War I, spread Communism, or caused financial crises such as the Great Depression. Any strategy to combat antisemitism through education must defang these false conspiracy theories, with such efforts made more difficult by the wild proliferation of disinformation online.
The fact is that antisemitism thrives when other forms of hate are allowed to flourish. A fundamental characteristic of many forms of hate—including antisemitism—is that they seek to divide society and scapegoat one or more groups. Efforts to combat hate in all its forms ultimately help combat antisemitism, just as combating antisemitism can help fight other forms of hate. Studies have shown that education about the Holocaust, for example, can create durable “tolerance and sympathy toward minorities.”
Additionally, democracy and its guardrails, including rights around speech and protest and due process, also provide crucial protections for the Jewish community. Strong democracies provide legal and societal protections to minorities. And Jewish people have been a minority in every country in which they have resided save one. Thus, efforts to erode these democratic protections, which often accompany scapegoating of one or more out-groups, must be rejected.
One final related consideration is that policymakers must be careful to ensure that actions taken to combat antisemitism do not come at the expense of other minority groups. Examples of responses that raise this concern range from deporting Muslim students for exercising their First Amendment rights to new prohibitions that ban groups receiving federal security grants from engaging in “illegal DEIA” activities, helping undocumented immigrants, and related efforts to allegedly disqualify Muslim groups from receiving these grants. Under the banner of combating antisemitism, efforts to trample on the freedoms and rights of others will only stoke additional forms of hate and divide society—a key goal of the perpetrators of hate. Moreover, doing so would risk a direct blowback on Jews as they are scapegoated for the degraded rights of others.
Executive branch actions
With these and related principles in mind, the National Strategy laid out more than 100 concrete actions and recommendations to be taken by federal, state, and local governments; teachers and academics; companies; and civil society and faith leaders to combat antisemitism. Its approach is centered around four key pillars: (1) increasing awareness of antisemitism and appreciation of Jewish American heritage, (2) improving safety and security for Jewish communities, (3) reversing the normalization of antisemitism, and (4) building cross-community solidarity and action to counter hate. The strategy and its whole-of-society approach have been praised by most major Jewish groups and led to a sharp increase in concrete actions by the Biden administration, such as having eight federal agencies clarifying for the first time that discrimination based on shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics—which can include antisemitism—is prohibited by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
The Trump administration also has placed a significant public focus on antisemitism. Soon after taking office, President Trump signed an executive order directing his administration to take aggressive action to combat antisemitism, with a particular focus on university campuses. Since then, the administration has opened a number of high-profile investigations while simultaneously threatening to and frequently cutting federal funding to universities—often to the tune of hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars to individual institutions. These actions have successfully spurred quicker action by universities to address antisemitism, such as placing time, manner, and place restrictions on public protests so they do not impede normal education activities for other students. But the actions have also come at a significant cost.
The Trump administration’s aggressive tactics have raised four significant sets of concerns. First, cutting billions of dollars in science and medical research has absolutely nothing to do with antisemitism and threatens efforts to find treatments for devastating diseases affecting Jews and non-Jews alike. Second, when taken in the context of unrelated efforts by the Trump administration’s Office of Management and Budget to slash science and education funding, it is hard not to come to the conclusion that antisemitism may only be a pretext for some or most of these cuts. Third, the demands made by the government—including imposing government influence on the hiring and firing of faculty members, the criteria for admissions decisions, and on curriculum—appear in many cases to be unconstitutional, intruding on academic freedom protected by the First Amendment. Finally, statements from senior Trump administration officials have made clear that the demands made by the government go far beyond complaints around antisemitism and the safety of Jewish students to include unrelated ideological goals, such as extinguishing civil rights programs; eliminating transgender rights; and shifting the ideological makeup of faculty, students, and campus speech.
Notably, in the government’s ongoing battle with Harvard University, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) at one point expressed concern that the government had gone too far with cutting billions in funding, suggesting that such an action should be rare and that Harvard had made improvements according to the ADL’s own measures.
These aggressive actions also pose a risk to successfully combating antisemitism by fundamentally discouraging a whole-of-society approach and risking significant blowback to Jews, who may be blamed for scapegoating other groups for the surge in antisemitism, and by eroding the very freedoms of speech, religious expression, due process and equal protection rights that have allowed Jews to thrive in America. Tellingly, despite taking aggressive action to quell antisemitism on college campuses, the Trump administration has virtually abandoned other central recommendations of the National Strategy that promote a whole-of-society approach to tackling hate.
It is also troubling that the administration has remained silent on antisemitism by its own appointees, in some cases promoting appointees or giving broad remits to senior advisers who have made public antisemitic statements or have ties to neo-Nazis. The White House has also reportedly put its thumb on the scale for making the artificial intelligence (AI) tool Grok available to federal agencies, despite the chatbot calling itself “MechaHitler” and spewing vile antisemitic responses. The administration has not done much better in holding close political allies to account for their own explicit antisemitism. Vice President JD Vance offered excuses for extensive and deeply antisemitic and racist messages—including praise for Adolf Hitler; love of Nazis; and talk of putting political opponents in gas chambers—shared by some Republican leaders in a group chat. The White House did not immediately act to withdraw the nomination of Paul Ingrassia to head the Office of Special Counsel after his texts were made public saying he has a “Nazi streak in me from time to time.” It also did not weigh in on reports that the Capitol police were called to investigate a swastika embedded in an American flag hanging in the cubicle of a staffer to Rep. Dave Taylor (R-OH).
Policy recommendations
In the context of the surge in antisemitic incidents in America and the executive actions detailed above, the Center for American Progress offers seven recommendations that expand or build upon the comprehensive recommendations included in the National Strategy:
- Expand education around the Holocaust and its causes; Jewish history and culture; and antisemitism, including contemporary forms of antisemitism. Fewer than half of Americans know that 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust or that Adolf Hitler became the leader of Germany through a democratic process. Even more concerning is that an even higher share of Millennials and Gen Z—63 percent—do not know that 6 million Jews were killed, and shockingly, nearly 20 percent of the members of those generations in New York incorrectly believe Jews caused the Holocaust. At the same time, only 30 states require that students are taught about the Holocaust. In some cases, education around the Holocaust is limited to what happened without an exploration of Jewish history and culture, antisemitism and its central role in causing the Holocaust, what antisemitism looks like today, and an inoculation against the false conspiracy theories that drive it. Thus, states should pass legislation requiring education about the Holocaust and what caused it, Jewish history and culture, and antisemitism in present-day society. Additionally, research suggests it is important to invest in innovative storytelling approaches, such as the Dimensions in Testimony program that allows Americans to directly interact with digital recordings of Holocaust survivors, and initiatives that physically bring Americans across the country face-to-face with members of the Jewish community.
- Prohibit the banning of books, including nonfiction or fiction books about the Holocaust, for political reasons. It is well known that the Nazis organized book burnings across Germany and that they targeted books not just by Jewish authors but also those about democracy or left-wing ideologies, or literature viewed as immoral or indecent. With multiple instances of books and graphic novels about the Holocaust being banned or pulled from library shelves, there is a significant risk to effective Holocaust education going forward as well as to democracy, and state legislation should reverse and prohibit such practices.
- Expand antisemitism training for federal law enforcement, the military, and veterans, and ensure that antisemitism among their ranks is monitored and not tolerated. The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, in partnership with the ADL, has developed and run the Law Enforcement and Society: Lessons of the Holocaust education program, which has helped 160,000 officers learn about “the role of police in Nazi Germany and to reflect on their role in a democratic society.” Congress should mandate that all federal law enforcement officers participate in the program. Congress can also create a grant program to help states and localities leverage the program and bring its training to their own police forces. Additionally, given the crucial role of law enforcement in protecting communities in a democracy, federal agencies—and Congress if necessary—must maintain their longtime high recruitment standards and avoid any efforts to lower them. Perhaps most importantly, agencies such as the Department of Defense should avoid granting moral waivers that make exceptions for past offenses or otherwise overlook troubling hateful conduct, which could lead to antisemitic or other hateful behavior on the job. Finally, as the National Strategy calls for, the Department of Veterans Affairs should lift up contributions by Jewish veterans and employees and encourage veterans to speak out forcefully against antisemitism and other hate-based violence.
- Codify the applicability of Title VI to antisemitism and prescribe a clear process and penalties for educational institutions that fail to take adequate action to protect their students. Although Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does not explicitly cover religion, for some time the federal government has adopted the position that it guards against antisemitism and other forms of similar discrimination when it is based on shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics. This view should be codified in statute to shore up protections for Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, and other religious minorities. Additionally, such a codification should be clear about the obligations of institutions of higher education in particular to protect their students and to circumscribe the scope of federal investigations and penalties to ensure that they remain solely focused on addressing those specific obligations. For example, investigations and enforcement to ensure a school is protecting Jewish students from harassment must not be directly tied to campus ideological balance or other legally unrelated matters, and remedies and penalties must be narrowly tailored to combating harassment and discrimination. Finally, universities should be encouraged to expand—not eliminate—programs promoting inclusion and belonging for minority students, and such programs should explicitly include Jewish students.
- Ensure the full funding of hate crimes programs, including those designed to better collect data. Combating hate crimes, including antisemitic acts, requires a full accounting of their prevalence, nature, and of communities in which they are taking place. Unfortunately, systems of data collection and reporting in the United States remain an uneven patchwork. Federal laws such as the COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act and the Jabara-Heyer NO HATE Act have been passed to improve reporting and collection, but they must be adequately funded on an annual basis. Other programs and grants, such as one through the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, the Community Relations Service, and Community Approaches to Advancing Justice, help communities reduce the potential for conflict and violence, promote awareness and preparedness for hate crimes, help investigate and prosecute hate crimes, and help victims. These programs must all be funded robustly, and Congress should conduct oversight to ensure that hate crime-related grants are not improperly terminated. State and local governments must also take steps to significantly improve their reporting and their engagement with targeted communities. Finally, Jewish organizations and communities should continue to find ways to build stronger relationships with partners across faiths and demographics to build unity against hate.
- Promote accountability on digital platforms and digital tools and strengthen digital literacy programs in K–12 schools. Digital platforms unfortunately play a dangerous role in the propagation of antisemitism by promoting extremist messages, trafficking in antisemitic conspiracy theories and tropes, and radicalizing users. The rapid adoption of generative AI in particular—and its ability to create believable deepfake images, audio, and, increasingly, videos—poses a significant danger to increase the spread of disinformation and conspiracy theories central to antisemitism. While the trend over the past two years has been for digital platforms to reduce—not increase—their content moderation and management, it is more important than ever for digital platforms to be held accountable for antisemitic content that their algorithms amplify. Congress should pass legislation providing robust access by academic researchers into digital platforms, their content, and algorithms, as well as curtailing civil liability shields for platforms based on their own algorithmic choices around which content to amplify. Public and private consumers, including the federal government, should refuse to use or purchase AI tools that promote hate and related biases and demand that their developers make fundamental changes to avoid the kind of dangerous antisemitism that has been propagated by a version of Grok.
- Partner across ideological divides to consistently and quickly condemn antisemitic acts. The spate of violent attacks against Jews over the past few months—and an at-times uneven response by elected officials—suggests the need for developing a coordinated cross-partisan communications plan in partnership with elected and other public figures to respond forcefully and with a single, non-political voice to any future violent antisemitic attacks. It is particularly critical for highly visible CEOs and business leaders, faith leaders, community leaders, and elected leaders to speak out when antisemitic speech and/or conduct happens in their own communities. In particular, it is vital that politicians call out antisemitism even when it occurs within their own parties, not just when it is perpetrated by those seen as political rivals. Political movements across that spectrum must understand antisemitism and be able to identify it among their ranks, demonstrating both self-awareness and taking action to ensure antisemitism is given no quarter. Indeed, it is insufficient—and harmful—to solely point fingers when antisemitism is perpetrated by one’s political opponents. Polarizing the issue will only serve to make it harder to galvanize the whole-of-society approach that is needed and that is central to the National Strategy—and ultimately risk blowback to Jews from segments of society that feel their own rights and safety are being jeopardized by such efforts.
Conclusion
Antisemitism is a scourge that must be met head-on by a whole-of-society effort. While it presents an immediate danger to Jews, it also hurts society more broadly and poses a threat to our democracy. The National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism provides a strong foundation for action and a clear road map for all levels of government and the private sector to combat it. Building on the strategy to ensure the safety and well-being of the Jewish community is urgently needed, as are the collateral benefits of promoting empathy and understanding across our citizenry.
* Congress appropriated $274.5 million for the Nonprofit Security Grant Program in fiscal year 2025.