December 20, 2024
Kevin R. Wexler/Imagn Content Services
A bill that would establish a definition of antisemitism has been slow to progress through the New Jersey legislature, and now Assemblyman Gary Schaer is calling for it to move forward, arguing it is needed amid a rise in bias offenses. This photo from 2021 shows the state capitol building.
An Assembly lawmaker is calling for a bill incorporating a definition of antisemitism into state law to move after more than 10 months of stasis, arguing it is needed amid a rise in bias offenses.
The bill, sponsored by Assemblyman Gary Schaer (D-Passaic), would write the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition of antisemitism into state law and require officials to consider it when determining whether bias is a motivating factor in a crime or other violation.
"There's no universal common agreement in terms of exactly what antisemitism is. Without that understanding, at best you have a hodgepodge, inconsistency," said Schaer. "And we need that consistency, especially in light of the fact that antisemitism is at all-time highs."
Antisemitic incidents spiked following Hamas' Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel and Israeli military operations in the Gaza strip that followed.
In an April report, the Anti-Defamation League found reports of antisemitic incidents in New Jersey had more than doubled from 2022 to 2023, from 409 to 830, with more frequent harassment driving the largest share of the increases.
The Holocaust alliance defines antisemitism as "a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews," and lists a belief in a world government controlled by Jews, holocaust denial, and accusations of dual loyalty as examples of antisemitism, among others.
The legislation has broad support among lawmakers, winning sponsorships or co-sponsorships from a bipartisan group of 56 Assembly members, a veto-proof supermajority, but it has not advanced in the lower chamber since its introduction in early February.
Lawmakers on a Senate panel advanced a companion bill in a bipartisan 4-1 vote in June following a marathon nine hours of testimony across two separate hearings, but the bill never reached a full vote before the chamber.
At the hearings, its opponents argued the bill is an effort to limit freedom of speech and criticism of Israel.
"I believe all citizens of America deserve the right of freedom of religion. That said, criticizing any state's dangerous acts and ideologies is not a criticism of religion. These bills intend to infringe on our freedom of speech and shield Israel from any criticism," Zaina Ileiwat, a Clifton resident, told the panel during a June 20 hearing.
The bill would explicitly set no new limits on speech but would require investigators to use the alliance's definition when determining whether a violation is motivated by antisemitism. Schaer said he believes it would align authorities' bias determinations across different jurisdictions.
He questioned why the Legislature has left the proposal untouched for more than 10 months despite previously moving other contentious bills.
"The interpretation is what, exactly? That it's too controversial to deal with?" Schaer said. "But we dealt with the vaccine bill. We've dealt with a woman's right to choose and all of that. These issues, they need to be heard."
In late 2019, lawmakers considered legislation that would have eliminated a religious vaccination exemption for students attending public schools. The measure spurred days of protests by thousands of anti-vaccine activists before stalling on the floor of the upper chamber after failing to secure the 21 votes needed to pass it.
Schaer said his bill defining antisemitism should receive hearings, even if it draws similar levels of opposition.
"It gives people the opportunity to speak, to vent, to elaborate on their opposition or support," he said. "That's the democratic process. That's why we have committee meetings. That's why we have public participation,
A spokesperson for Assembly Speaker Craig Coughlin (D-Middlesex), the arbiter of which bills get heard in his chamber, declined to comment.
The Ohio Senate passed a similar bill last week by an overwhelming margin– 27-4 – with critics saying it "silences dissent."
New Jersey Monitor is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. New Jersey Monitor maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Terrence T. McDonald for questions: info@newjerseymonitor.com.
