Connect with us

Indiana

Changes to Indiana antisemitism bill drains support from many in Hoosier Jewish community – Indiana Capital Chronicle

Published

on

Changes to Indiana antisemitism bill drains support from many in Hoosier Jewish community – Indiana Capital Chronicle


A major change to a bill that would define and ban antisemitism at Indiana’s public education institutions led to a reversal of support and opposition among those who testified on the proposal at the Statehouse Wednesday.

In contention is the removal of a definition of antisemitism adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), which was included in the original version of House Bill 1002

The IHRA’s “working definition” includes contemporary examples of antisemitism, like “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor,” and “holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the State of Israel.”

Rep. Chris Jeter, R-Fishers (Photo courtesy of Indiana House Republicans)

Lawmakers in the Senate education committee amended the legislation on Wednesday to remove mention of IHRA and its examples of antisemitism, however. The newest draft of the bill instead defines antisemitism as “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews.”

Advertisement

The measure was unanimously approved by the committee and now heads to the Senate floor.

“We’ve made some changes to try to ensure that we’re not referencing outside entities, but that we’re making the definition our own in the code, and the bill really tries to strike a balance of not impeding on any free speech, but just saying if we fund state education, we want that education to reflect our values as a body,” said Rep. Chris Jeter, R-Fishers, who authored the priority measure for the House GOP caucus.

“We wanted to be careful about referencing sort of outside groups, because if their definition changes, we don’t want anybody to impose that ours is supposed to be changed,” he continued.

But numerous members of Indiana’s Jewish community said they can’t support the bill unless it codifies the IHRA definition into state law.

“I’m extremely disappointed that the amendment that passed did not include reference to the IHRA statement. This essentially gutted the bill we wrote, and now leaves Jews without equal protection,” said Allon Friedman, president of the Jewish Affairs Committee of Indiana, which helped craft the bill. “This is essentially abandonment of the Indiana Jewish community and unwittingly rewards our enemies. … The Jewish community is absolutely united on this issue — we do not want the bill without IHRA.”

Advertisement

What is the IHRA definition?

Indiana law already bans discrimination on the basis of race and “creed,” which means religion. The legislation specifies that antisemitism — bias against Jewish people — is religious discrimination and is not allowed within the public education system.

The definition approved by the Senate committee is part — but not all — of IHRA’s overall definition of antisemitism. 

By removing reference to IHRA, the bill excludes the alliance’s examples of contemporary antisemitism that would have also been outlawed in Indiana, including:

  • Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
  • Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
  • Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
  • Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality 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 the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
  • Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
  • 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.
  • Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
  • Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
  • Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
  • Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.

Jeter filed an identical bill in 2023. It passed out of the House in a 97-0 vote but never received a committee hearing in the Senate, effectively killing the proposal. 

He conceded Wednesday “there was some issue with some of those examples,” though. 

“Anytime we do lists in bills and legislation, I feel like it gets a little iffy,” he told the Senate committee.

Advertisement

Before the amendment, critics of the proposal maintained it limits free speech and suggests criticism of a foreign government would count as anti-Jewish rhetoric.

More than two dozen people who testified against the original bill emphasized that criticism of the Israeli government does not amount to antisemitism. Some warned of witch hunts under the vague definition.

Many of those issues appeared to be resolved with the updated version of Jeter’s bill.

“Most of our concerns with this bill were related to very specific language that was in there that conflated antisemitism with criticism against the State of Israel. As this amendment stands now, most of those concerns have been addressed,” said Syed Ali Saeed, president of the Indiana Muslim Advocacy Network. “I don’t think the IHRA definition is the best definition. It’s not the most complete, most fluid definition that’s out there.”

Indiana lawmakers move forward with bills to ban antisemitism, expand workforce training funds

Advertisement

Maliha Zafar, executive director of the Indiana Muslim Advocacy Network, added that although the examples in the IHRA definition “undeniably address antisemitic sentiments,” the list is “concurrently overly broad and would have inadvertently stifled legitimate criticism and analysis of Israeli policies.”

Daniel Segal, representing Jewish Voice for Peace – Indiana, said the group “strongly objected” to the IHRA definition’s examples of anti semitism and its “confusing criticism of the State of Israel, and its policies, with antisemitism.”

“We believe that the amendments that have been made render this bill acceptable — the harmful elements have been removed,” Segal said. “The previous bill, we thought, was harmful to our Arab brothers and sisters, and we committed as Jews to ensuring that ‘never again’ is for everybody. And that includes Palestinians. As Jews, that is part of our faith and is part of what we learned from the horrible experience of the Holocaust.”

Jewish community withdraws support

Although originally in support of the bill, many from Indiana’s Jewish community said “hateful” and “harmful” acts of semitism will continue across the state’s colleges and universities unless the IHRA definition is added back in.

“As a Jewish student, we navigate a world where concealing our identity has become a necessity. On a campus where 10 to 12% of students are Jewish, incidents of antisemitism have skyrocketed by over 800%,” said Indiana University junior Kaylee Werner, who is also chair of the school’s Antisemitism Prevention Task Force. 

Advertisement

She pointed to vandalism and swastikas “stained” on campus walls, as well as “unfair treatment” against Jewish students by some professors.

“This is the harsh reality that we face daily. The House-passed IHRA statement offers a beacon of hope in this darkness. It equips our administration with the necessary tools to combat antisemitism effectively and educate our community,” Werner said. “In this conversation, there is no room for ambiguity. There is either hate, or there is acceptance. There’s either right, or there’s wrong. We urgently need this statement to clearly identify and denounce these acts as antisemitism.”

Rabbi Sue Silberberg, executive director at IU Hillel, additionally emphasized that “we need the bill as passed through the House in order to protect the Jewish students on campus who are suffering every single day.”

In this conversation, there is no room for ambiguity. There is either hate, or there is acceptance. There’s either right, or there’s wrong. We urgently need this statement to clearly identify and denounce these acts as antisemitism.

Advertisement

– Indiana University junior Kaylee Werner

“We must recognize that Jewish students are marginalized, hated and discriminated against based on their spiritual connection, and this is antisemitism. … They are being harassed, they are being bullied, and they are being marginalized,” she said, noting that — since the Hamas attack in October — she has been “working with and seeing students who are facing severe antisemitism on campus every single day, in a way that I have not seen in the past 35 years.”

Even so, Sen. John Crane, R-Avon, said antisemitism and mistreatment of “Jews or any ethnic or racial group” is “absolutely abhorrent, the challenge is whether “government will be able to solve that.” 

Advertisement

“I don’t think so,” Crane said. “I’m of a mind of a gentleman named Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, who survived in the Russian Gulag, who said the line separating good and evil runs straight through the human heart. And at the end of the day, it’s a human problem that we’re going to have to be able to address, irrespective of whatever steps we attempt to take through governmental action.”

Several other Republican senators said Wednesday they were concerned about the amended bill, citing oppositional testimony from those in the Hoosier Jewish community. 

Those lawmakers still voted in favor of the bill but said they want additional changes on the chamber floor to address those grievances.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Advertisement



Source link

Advertisement

Indiana

Indiana’s Curt Cignetti Wins Coach of the Year Award for 2nd Straight Season

Published

on

Indiana’s Curt Cignetti Wins Coach of the Year Award for 2nd Straight Season


For the second consecutive season, Indiana head coach Curt Cignetti has been named college football’s Coach of the Year following a magical 2025 campaign.

Cignetti, who joined Indiana last November, won the Home Depot Coach of the Year Award on Friday night, making him the first coach to win the award in back-to-back seasons. He is also just the second coach to win the honor twice, joining Brian Kelly, who won it in 2009, 2012 and 2018.

Cignetti’s Hoosiers delivered an encore worthy of recognition following his successful first year in Bloomington where they fell in the first round of the College Football Playoff after going 11-2 overall and 8-1 in the Big Ten. Unlike 2024, however, the 2025 season will go down as the best in program history with Cignetti and California transfer quarterback Fernando Mendoza leading the way.

Advertisement

Indiana went undefeated (13-0) for the first time since 1945 and won its first outright Big Ten championship since 1967 with a win over Ohio State en route to clinching the No. 1 seed in the CFP for the first time. The Hoosiers enter the CFP as the favorites to win their first-ever national title.

While Indiana was one of CFB’s most well-rounded teams, Mendoza proved to be a major catalyst behind the success. In his first season with Cignetti, the redshirt junior earned the right to call himself a Heisman Trophy favorite after leading the nation with 33 touchdown passes to just six interceptions, and completing 71.5% of his passes (226-of-316).

Mendoza has won multiple awards, including the Davey O’Brien (top QB) and Maxwell (Player of the Year) Awards, entering Saturday’s Heisman Trophy ceremony. Should he win the coveted honor, Mendoza would be the first Hoosier to ever win the Heisman, giving Cignetti another feather in his cap as top-seeded Indiana looks to make CFP history, starting with its first-round game on Jan. 1.

Want great stories delivered right to your inbox? Create or log in to your FOX Sports account, and follow leagues, teams and players to receive a personalized newsletter daily!



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Indiana

Indiana’s rejection of new voting map shows Trump’s might is not unlimited

Published

on

Indiana’s rejection of new voting map shows Trump’s might is not unlimited


The Indiana legislature’s rejection of a new map that would have added two Republican seats in Congress marked one of the biggest political defeats for Donald Trump so far in his second term and significantly damaged the Republican effort to reconfigure congressional districts ahead of next year’s midterm elections.

The defeat showed that Trump’s political might is not unlimited. For months, the president waged an aggressive effort to twist the arms of Indiana lawmakers into supporting a new congressional map, sending JD Vance to meet in person with lawmakers. Trump allies also set up outside groups to pressure state lawmakers.

Heritage Action, the political arm of the Heritage Foundation, which has close ties to the Trump administration, issued a dramatic threat this week ahead of the vote: if the new map wasn’t passed, Indiana would lose federal funding. “Roads will not be paved. Guard bases will close. Major projects will stop. These are the stakes and every NO vote will be to blame,” the group posted on X. The state’s Republican lieutenant governor said in a since-deleted X post that Trump administration officials made the same threat.

All of that may have backfired, as Republican state senators publicly said they were turned off by the threats and weathered death threats and swatting attempts as they voted the bill down.

Advertisement

“You wouldn’t change minds by being mean. And the efforts were mean-spirited from the get-go,” Jean Leising, an Indiana Republican state senator who voted against the bill, told CNN. “If you were wanting to change votes, you would probably try to explain why we should be doing this, in a positive way. That never happened, so, you know, I think they get what they get.”

Nationally, the defeat complicates the picture for Republicans as they seek to redraw districts to shore up their majority in an increasingly messy redistricting battle. The effort began earlier this year when Trump pushed Texas Republicans to redraw the state’s congressional map to pick up GOP seats, a highly unusual move since redistricting is usually done once at the start of the decade.

“This isn’t the first time a Republican state legislature has resisted pressure from the White House, but it is the most significant, both because of the over-the-top tactics President Trump and speaker Johnson employed, and also the fact that there were two seats on the line,” said Dave Wasserman, an expert in US House races who writes for the non-partisan Cook Political Report. “It changes the trajectory of this redistricting war from the midpoint of possible outcomes being a small, being a modest Republican gain to a wash.”

Republicans in Texas and Democrats in California have both redrawn their maps to add as many as five seats for their respective parties, cancelling each other out. Republicans in North Carolina and Missouri have also redrawn their congressional districts to add one Republican seat apiece in each of those states. The Missouri map, however, may be blocked by a voter initiated referendum (Republicans are maneuvering to undercut the initiative). Democrats are also poised to pick up a seat in Utah after a court ruling there (state lawmakers are seeking a way around the ruling).

Ohio also adopted a new map that made one Democratic district more competitive, and made a new Democratic friendly and Republican friendly district out of two different competitive districts.

Advertisement

The biggest remaining opportunity to pick up seats for Democrats is in Virginia, where they currently represent six of the state’s 11 congressional districts. Don Scott, the House speaker, has said Democrats are considering adding a map that adds four Democratic seats in the state. Republicans could counter that in Florida with a new congressional map that could add as many as five Republican seats. There is also pending litigation challenging a favorable GOP congressional map in Wisconsin.

The close tit-for-tat has placed even more significance on a supreme court case from Louisiana that could wind up gutting a key provision in the Voting Rights Act that prevents lawmakers from drawing districts that weaken the influence of Black voters. After oral argument, the court appeared poised to significantly curtail the measure, which could pave the way for Louisiana, Alabama, and other southern states to wipe out districts currently represented by Democrats. It’s unclear if the supreme court will issue its decision in time for the midterm elections.

“The timing of that decision is a huge deal with two to four seats on the line,” Wasserman said. “We haven’t seen the last plot twist in this redistricting war, but the outlook is less rosy for Republicans than it was at the start.”



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Indiana

Indiana redistricting: Senate Republicans side with Democrats to reject Trump’s voting map

Published

on

Indiana redistricting: Senate Republicans side with Democrats to reject Trump’s voting map


Indiana Republicans have defied intense pressure from President Donald Trump by rejecting his demands that they pass a voting map meant to favour their party in next year’s midterm elections.

In one of the most conservative states in the US, 21 Republicans in the Senate joined all 10 Democrats to torpedo the redistricting plan by a vote of 31-19. The new map passed the House last week.

If it had cleared the legislature, Republicans could have flipped the only two Democratic-held congressional seats in the state.

Trump’s call for Republican state leaders to redraw maps and help the party keep its congressional majority in Washington next year has triggered gerrymandering battles nationwide.

Advertisement

Republican-led Texas and Democratic-led California, two of the country’s largest states, have led the charge.

Other states where redistricting efforts have been initiated or passed include Utah, Ohio, New Hampshire, Missouri and Illinois.

Republican state Senator Spencer Deery said ahead of Thursday’s vote: “My opposition to mid-cycle gerrymandering is not in contrast to my conservative principles, my opposition is driven by them.

“As long as I have breath, I will use my voice to resist a federal government that attempts to bully, direct, and control this state or any state. Giving the federal government more power is not conservative.”

Indiana Governor Mike Braun, a Republican, said he was “very disappointed” in the outcome.

Advertisement

“I will be working with the President to challenge these people who do not represent the best interests of Hoosiers,” he said on X, using a popular nickname for people from the Midwestern state.

The revolt of Indiana Republicans came after direct months of lobbying from the White House.

On Wednesday, Trump warned on his social media platform Truth Social that Republicans who did not support the initiative could risk losing their seats.

He directly addressed the Republican leader of the state Senate, Rodric Bray, calling him “the only person in the United States of America who is against Republicans picking up extra seats”.

To liberals, it was a moment of celebration. Keith “Wildstyle” Paschall described the mood on Thursday as “jubilant”.

Advertisement

“There’s a lot of relief,” the Indianapolis-based activist told the BBC. “People had thought that we would have to move on to a legal strategy and didn’t believe we could defeat it directly at the statehouse.”

The new map would have redistricted parts of Indianapolis and potentially led to the ouster of Indiana’s lone black House representative, André Carson.

In the weeks before Thursday’s vote, Trump hosted Indiana lawmakers at the White House to win over holdouts.

He also dispatched Vice-President JD Vance down to Indiana twice to shore up support.

Nearly a dozen Indiana Republican lawmakers have said they were targeted with death threats and swatting attacks over the planned vote.

Advertisement

Ultimately, this redistricting plan fell flat in another setback for Trump following a string of recent Democratic wins in off-year elections.

The defeat appears to have added to Republican concerns.

“We have a huge problem,” said former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon during his podcast, The War Room.

“People have to realise that we only have a couple opportunities,” he said.

“If we don’t get a net 10 pickup in the redistricting wars, it’s going to be enormously hard, if not impossible, to hold the House.”

Advertisement

Texas was the first state to respond to Trump’s redistricting request.

After a lower court blocked the maps for being drawn illegally based on race, the Supreme Court allowed Texas Republicans to go ahead.

The decision was a major win for Republicans, with the new maps expected to add five seats in their favour.

California’s map is also expected to add five seats for Democrats.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending