A bipartisan bill designed to address antisemitism on college campuses has drawn sharp criticism from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which argues it could undermine First Amendment protections by equating criticism of Israel with antisemitism. The Antisemitism Awareness Act (S. 4127) directs the Department of Education to use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism when investigating harassment under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. While proponents claim the bill would help protect Jewish students, the ACLU warns it risks suppressing legitimate political speech critical of Israeli government policies.
The ACLU sent a letter to U.S. senators on Thursday, urging them to block the legislation. “Instead of addressing antisemitism on campus, this misguided legislation would punish protected political speech,” said Jenna Leventoff, senior policy counsel at the ACLU, who co-signed the letter with Christopher Anders, director of democracy and technology. “At a time when civil rights enforcement on campus could not be more critical, this bill risks politicizing these vital protections by censoring legitimate political speech that criticizes the Israeli government.”
The bill, which has already passed the House with bipartisan support, calls for the IHRA definition of antisemitism to be considered in determining whether campus harassment violates Title VI. Under this definition, antisemitism includes statements such as “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor,” “drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis,” and “applying double standards by requiring of [Israel] a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.”
Federal law already prohibits antisemitic discrimination under Title VI, which bars discrimination based on race, color, or national origin by federally funded entities. The Department of Education has interpreted this to cover discrimination against Jews, Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs based on shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics. The ACLU contends that the IHRA definition conflates political speech with discrimination and is unnecessary to address antisemitism.
“The right to criticize government actions is the most fundamental protection provided by the First Amendment—and this includes the actions of foreign governments,” Leventoff said. “Criticism of Israel and its policies is political speech, squarely protected by the First Amendment.”
The ACLU warns that the bill could have a chilling effect on campus activism and free expression, particularly on issues related to Palestinian rights. As the conflict between Israel and Palestine escalates, students across U.S. universities have organized protests and demonstrations, calling for institutions to divest from Israeli military actions in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon. Some administrations, under pressure from lawmakers, have responded by cracking down on protests, calling in law enforcement, or enacting policies to limit demonstrations.
“S. 4127 could result in colleges and universities suppressing a wide variety of speech critical of Israel or in support of Palestinian rights in an effort to avoid investigations by the department and the potential loss of funding, even where such speech is protected and does not qualify as harassment,” the ACLU’s letter stated. It also noted that “students and their organizations, faculty, and university staff may be deterred from speaking and organizing on these issues.”
The IHRA definition’s broadness is a key concern. Even Kenneth Stern, the lead author of the IHRA definition, has opposed its application to campus speech. Stern warned that codifying the definition could lead administrators to “fear lawsuits when outside groups complain about anti-Israel expression, and the university doesn’t punish, stop, or denounce it.”
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has faced mounting pressure to bring the bill to a vote as the current session of Congress nears its end. The Florence Avenue Initiative, a nonprofit organization that is not required to disclose its donors, has reportedly spent $5 million on an ad campaign urging Schumer, the highest-ranking Jewish lawmaker in Congress, to support the legislation. Axios reported that Schumer recently promised Jewish leaders he would attempt to pass the bill.
Supporters of the Antisemitism Awareness Act argue that it provides clarity for addressing antisemitism in higher education. Rep. Marcus J. Molinaro (R-N.Y.), a vocal proponent, singled out pro-Palestinian campus protest encampments as targets of the law. “The erection of encampments on college campuses isn’t an expression of speech,” Molinaro said during a House debate earlier this year. “It is a direct threat to Jewish students on college campuses.”
The bill comes amid heightened tensions surrounding the Israel-Palestine conflict. Since the Oct. 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel, antisemitic and Islamophobic incidents have surged on college campuses, as have protests against Israel’s military actions in Gaza. The ACLU has stated that it does not take a position on the conflict itself but remains committed to defending free speech. “The ACLU does not take a position on the conflict between Israel and Palestine, but it does staunchly defend the right of those in the United States to speak out on domestic and international political matters,” the organization emphasized.
The letter also pointed out that the bill could overwhelm colleges and universities with complaints about constitutionally protected speech, diverting resources from addressing genuine instances of harassment or discrimination. The ACLU warned, “The bill would also likely inspire an increasing number of complaints focused on constitutionally protected criticism of Israel, taking time away from ‘meritorious’ filings.”
Leventoff called on the Senate to reject the bill, saying, “The Senate must continue to block this bill and protect free speech.”
COMMENTS