The Louis D.

Brandeis Center
FAQs About Defining Anti-Semitism
The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law

This fact sheet offers insight on the importance of of California Board of Regents adopted the land-
defining anti-Semitism, highlights previous efforts mark Statement of Principles Against Intolerance,
to define anti-Semitism, and provides guidance on which includes a contextual statement declaring
what further steps are needed in order to adopt a that, “Anti-Semitism and anti-Semitic forms of anti-
uniform definition of anti-Semitism in the United Zionism are forms of discrimination, and will not
States today. be tolerated at the University of California.” The
Regents explained how historic manifestations of
anti-Semitism have changed over time, and that
Why do we need a uniform definition of anti- “expressions of anti-Semitism are more coded and
Semitism? difficult to identify. In particular, opposition to Zion-
If anti-Semitism is to be addressed, it must be ex- ism often is expressed in ways that are not simply
plained; and if it is to be explained, it must first be statements of disagreement over politics and policy,
defined. Valid monitoring, informed analysis, and ef- but also assertions of prejudice and intolerance
fective policy-making start with uniform definitions. toward Jewish people and culture.” Student gov-
ernments at several institutions (e.g., UC Berkeley,
The use of a uniform definition serves several im- UCLA, UC Santa Barbara, Indiana University, Ryer-
portant public policy objectives: son University, and Capital University) have recently
adopted resolutions condemning anti-Semitism and
• Enhancing clarity of policy and predictability of adopting the U.S. State Depart-ment Definition of
enforcement; Anti-Semitism (see below).
• Improving prevention by increasing consistency;
and
• Facilitating comparison of intervention and pre- What is the U.S. Department of State’s Definition
vention programs across jurisdictions and data of Anti-Semitism?
collections.
The U.S. Department of State’s definition of anti-
The U.S. Department of Education uses formal Semitism is the single most authoritative definition
definitions of other forms of discrimination, such as of anti-Semitism in the United States. It shapes the
sexual harassment and disability discrimination, and State Department’s approach to efforts to monitor
has invested resources into developing a uniform and combat global anti-Semitism. The State Depart-
definition of bullying. Uniform definitions are espe- ment has explained that, “it is especially important
cially important for anti-Semitism, because so much to define anti-Semitism clearly to more effectively
confusion surrounds the line between anti-Semitism combat it.” (See U.S. Department of State, Special
and legitimate criticisms of the State of Israel. Envoy to Monitor & Combat Anti-Semitism Ira For-
man, “Combating Global Anti-Semitism in 2016,”
What are American universities doing to define Berlin, Germany, March 2016.)
anti-Semitism?
There has been a recent trend on campus, often led For this reason, the State Department found it
by students or trustees, to provide uniform defini- necessary to “encourage European governments to
tions of anti-Semitism. In March 2016, the University adopt a working definition of anti-Semitism, ideally,
one which would include a section on how anti-

The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law 1

 The Louis D. Brandeis Center
FAQs About Defining Anti-Semitism
The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law

Semitism relates to Israel, to improve the safety and “Anti-Semitism is a certain perception of Jews, which
well-being of Jewish communities in Europe.” may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetori-
cal and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are
Unfortunately, the federal government does not directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/
or their property, toward Jewish community institutions
always practice what it preaches. Specifically, other
and religious facilities.”
federal agencies do not apply the State Depart-
ment’s definition, nor do they have a definition of Contemporary Examples of Anti-Semitism:
their own. In other words, our own administrative 1. Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or
agencies have not done the basic work that our harming of Jews (often in the name of a radical
State Department has lectured European govern- ideology or an extremist view of religion).
ments to do.
2. Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demon-
What distinguishes the State Department defini- izing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews
tion is its examples, especially the examples relative as such or the power of Jews as a collective—
to Israel. The definition includes several illustrative especially but not exclusively, the myth about
examples of anti-Semitism in public life, the media, a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews control-
schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere ling the media, economy, government or other
and brings an appropriately broad variety of anti- societal institutions.
Semitic acts and words under the concept of “anti-
Semitism.” 3. Accusing Jews as a people of being respon-
sible for real or imagined wrongdoing com-
Notably, the State Department’s definition closely mitted by a single Jewish person or group, the
mirrors the International Working Definition of state of Israel, or even for acts committed by
Anti-Semitism, also known as the “EUMC Working non-Jews.
Definition,” and the International Holocaust Re-
membrance Alliance’s (IHRA) Working Definition of 4. Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a
Antisemitism. These definitions are all partly based state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holo-
on the “3D Test of Anti-Semitism” developed by caust.
Natan Sharansky. The “3D Test” distinguishes legiti-
mate criticism of Israel from actions that Delegiti- 5. Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal
mize, Demonize, or apply Double standards against to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews
the Jewish State. The State Department definition worldwide, than to the interest of their own
emphasizes, in what has become a nearly universally nations.
adopted caveat, that “criticism of Israel similar to
that leveled against any other country cannot be What is Anti-Semitism Relative to Israel?
regarded as anti-Semitic.” Examples of the ways in which anti-Semitism mani-
fests itself with regard to the state of Israel,
The U.S. Department of State’s Definition of taking into account the overall context could
Anti-Semitism, including its examples, provide in include:
full, as follows:

The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law 2

 The Louis D. Brandeis Center
FAQs About Defining Anti-Semitism
The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law

DEMONIZE ISRAEL: ing anti-Semitism. For this reason, if an incident

• Using the symbols and images associated with occurs on a university campus in Paris or Berlin, the
classic anti-Semitism to characterize Israel or U.S. government can determine whether or not it
Israelis should be characterized as anti-Semitic. But if the
• Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli same incident happens in New York or Los Angeles,
policy to that of the Nazis the federal government is ill-equipped to address it.
• Blaming Israel for all inter-religious or political
tensions This is unfortunate, because American campus anti-
Semitism is, as the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
DOUBLE STANDARD FOR ISRAEL: has observed, a “serious problem” requiring closer
• Applying double standards by requiring of it attention. In 2015, the Brandeis Center and Trinity
a behavior not expected or demanded of any College published a joint study finding that 54%
other democratic nation of over 1,100 self-identified Jewish students on 55
• Multilateral organizations focusing on Israel only campuses nationwide reported having experienced
for peace or human rights investigations or witnessed anti-Semitism on their campus in only
a six-month period during the 2013-2014 academic
DELEGITIMIZE ISRAEL: year. Recently, a Brandeis University study of over
Denying the Jewish people their right to self-deter- 1,000 Jewish college students found that nearly 3/4
mination, and denying Israel the right to exist of respondents had been exposed during the past
year to anti-Semitic statements.
However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against
any other country cannot be regarded as anti-Semitic. What is the status of the International Working
Definition of Anti-Semitism?
Does the State Department Definition apply to The International Working Definition is widely re-
American campus anti-Semitism? spected worldwide, as we explain below.
Yes, the State Department’s definition of anti-Sem-
itism can be applied to university campuses as well EUMC Working Definition
as to any other institution. Moreover, the Ottawa Serious international efforts to combat anti-Sem-
Protocols of the Inter-parliamentary Coalition for itism gained momentum in 2005, when the Euro-
Combating Antisemitism specifically urged univer- pean Union Monitoring Centre (EUMC) on Racism
sities to use “the EUMC Working Definition . . . as and Xenophobia adopted a working definition of
a basis for education, training and orientation…” anti-Semitism in response to the growing preva-
and to “define antisemitism clearly, provide specific lence of anti-Semitism in Europe. The definition was
examples, and enforce conduct codes firmly” so as composed in close collaboration with the Organiza-
to “combat antisemitism with the same seriousness tion for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s Office
with which they confront other forms of hate.” of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, and
a number of international experts on anti-Semitism.
The federal government applies the State Depart- Although the website of EUMC’s successor, the Fun-
ment definition only in foreign affairs, because the damental Rights Agency, removed the working defi
State Department does not have jurisdiction over nition from its website, numerous other institutions
domestic matters. In general, domestic federal and international governments have subsequently
agencies have no comparable tools for understand adopted the working definition. and international

The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law 3

 The Louis D. Brandeis Center
FAQs About Defining Anti-Semitism
The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law

governments have subsequently adopted the work- national signal by aiding in the identification and
ing definition. combatting of antisemitism. Also in April 2017, the
European Commission added the working defini-
IHRA Working Definition tion to its official website, referring to it as a “useful
In May 2016, the International Holocaust Remem- tool for civil society, law enforcement authorities and
brance Alliance (IHRA), a 31-member state intergov- education facilities to effectively recognize and fight
ernmental body, with ten observer countries and all forms of antisemitism.” In May 2017, the Roma-
seven international partner organizations, whose nian government officially pledged to apply the IHRA
purpose is to place political and social leaders’ sup- working definition, and in June 2017, the European
port behind the need for Holocaust education, ad- Parliament approved a resolution calling on Euro-
opted a working definition of anti-Semitism. In doing pean Union (EU) member states and EU institutions
so, the IHRA included examples of criticism of Israel to adopt and apply the IHRA working definition.
that might be regarded as anti-Semitic, such as: “Ac- The text of the resolution urges EU member states
cusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of to protect their Jewish citizens and Jewish institu-
inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust”; “Denying tions from hate crime and hate speech; support law
the Jewish people their right to self-determination, enforcement efforts to identify and prosecute anti-
e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Semitic attacks; appoint national coordinators on
Israel is a racist endeavor”; “Applying double stan- combating anti-Semitism; among other things.
dards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or
demanded of any other democratic nation”; and London Declaration on Combating Antisemitism
“Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy Over 100 parliamentarians and NGO representatives
to that of the Nazis,” among other things. Then- from 35 different countries adopted the “London
IHRA Chair Ambassador Mihnea Constantinescu Declaration on Combating Antisemitism” in 2009,
stated: “All IHRA Member Countries share concern which asserted the need for global cooperation in
that incidents of antisemitism are steadily rising and the fight against anti-Semitism and calls on govern-
agree that IHRA’s Member Countries and indeed ments to implement the International Working Defi-
IHRA’s experts need political tools with which to fight nition. It specifically calls on education authorities
this scourge . . . . By adopting this working definition, to “ensure that freedom of speech is upheld within
the IHRA is setting an example of responsible con- the law and to protect students and staff from … a
duct for other international fora and hopes to inspire hostile environment in whatever form it takes…”
them also to take action on a legally binding working
definition.” Ottawa Protocol on Combating Antisemitism
Moreover, in 2010, the Inter-parliamentary Coali-
Since the IHRA’s adoption, several countries and tion for Combating Antisemitism (ICCA) issued an
government agencies have followed suit. In Decem- international declaration, the ”Ottawa Protocol on
ber 2016, due to an increase in the number of anti- Combating Antisemitism,” which was unanimously
Semitic incidents in the country, British Prime Minis- adopted by representatives of over fifty countries’
ter Theresa May announced that Britain would adopt parliaments, including the U.S. Congress, expressed
the working definition. In April 2017, the Austrian alarm that “since the London Conference in February
Government adopted the IHRA working definition 2009, there continues to be a dramatic increase in
after a prominent NGO reported a record number of recorded antisemitic hate crimes and attacks target-
anti-Semitic incidents in Austria during 2016, noting ing Jewish persons and property, and Jewish reli-
that the adoption should send a national and inter- gious, educational and communal institutions.”

The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law 4

 The Louis D. Brandeis Center
FAQs About Defining Anti-Semitism
The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law

As such, the Protocol reaffirmed the EUMC Working discrimination against Arab Muslim, Sikh, and
Definition and called on “our governments to inter- Jewish students,” and directs the Department of
national commitments on combating antisemitism.” Education to use the State Department’s defini-
tion of anti-Semitism as part of the Department’s
OSCE Recognition of Working Definition assessment of whether the alleged practice was
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in motivated by anti-Semitic intent. The bill states that
Europe (OSCE) Parliamentary Assembly formally “awareness of this definition of anti-Semitism will
recognized the International Working Definition in increase understanding of the parameters of con-
its educational and police training materials and temporary anti-Jewish conduct and will assist the
programs. Additionally, OSCE’s Office for Demo- Department of Education in determining whether
cratic Institutions and Human Rights recommends an investigation of anti-Semitism under Title VI is
the Working Definition as a valuable hate crime
data warranted.”
collection tool for law enforcement agencies and
educators. The U.S. Commission on Security
& Similar bills have also been introduced by state leg-
Cooperation in Europe (Helsinki Commission) which islatures in Tennessee, Virginia and South Carolina.
ensures compliance with OSCE commitments, The South Carolina Subcommittee on General Laws
reported to Congress: “We should widely promote, voted unanimously in support of the measure.
within the OSCE, the [International] comprehensive
working definition of anti-Semitism. This document is Does this have implications for freedom of
tremendously useful in identifying current manifesta- speech?
tions of anti-Semitism to those who might not oth- This definition raises no issues for freedom of
erwise recognize them. It should be disseminated as speech if used in the manner recommended by
widely as possible among public officials, educators, the Ottawa Protocol. That is to say, its employment
and journalists, among others.” Further progress for education, training and orientation purposes
was made this past Spring 2017, when the Office for creates no legal problem, and there are no implica-
Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), tions under the First Amendment. Governmental
a division of OSCE, included the IHRA definition into officials or university administrators who propose to
its important new guide, “Understanding Anti-Semit- apply the definition in an enforcement or regulatory
ic Hate Crimes and Addressing the Security Needs context should consult with counsel on constitu-
of Jewish Communities.” tional limitations as they would for any such stan-
dards the First Amendment. Governmental officials
U.S. Anti-Semitism Awareness Legislation or university administrators who propose to apply
Federal and State efforts have been made to define the definition in an enforcement or regulatory con-
anti-Semitism through Anti-Semitism Awareness text should consult with counsel on constitutional
Legislation. In December 2016, the bipartisan Anti- limitations as they would for any such standards.
Semitism Awareness Act unanimously passed the
Senate, but the legislative period ended before the What further steps are needed in the United
House could act on companion legislation. This bill States?
acknowledged the “Dear Colleague Letter” that To build on recent progress, domestic federal agen-
LDB’s President Kenneth L. Marcus issued in 2004, cies, universities, and other agencies and institu-
which extended the protections of Title VI to include tions should adopt a version of the Interna tional
incidents involving “race or national origin harass- Working Definition of Anti-Semitism, such as the
ment commingled with aspects of religious State Department’s definition, through “Anti-

The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law 5

 The Louis D. Brandeis Center
FAQs About Defining Anti-Semitism
The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law

Semitism Awareness Legislation” or the like. Such

adoption would enable the government to speak About the Brandeis Center
The Louis D. Brandeis Center, Inc., (LDB) is an in-
in one voice whether it is addressing foreign or do-
dependent, nonprofit organization established to
mestic matters. This would advance governmental advance the civil and human rights of the Jewish
efforts to combat anti-Semitism. And because anti- people and promote justice for all. The Brandeis
Semitism is a problem particularly evident in higher Center conducts research, education, and advocacy
education, universities and student governments to combat the resurgence of anti-Semitism on college
should utilize the definition as well. and university campuses. It is not affiliated with the
Massachusetts University, the Kentucky law school, or
any of the other institutions that share the name and
honor the memory of the late U.S. Supreme Court
Contact Us
justice.
Web: www.brandeiscenter.com
Phone: 202-559-9296
E-mail: [email protected]
Address: 1717 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Suite 1025
Washington, D.C. 20005
Facebook: Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human
Rights Under Law
Twitter: @brandeiscenter; @klmarcus

Bibliography

1. Barry A. Kosmin & Ariella Keysar, National Demographic Survey of American Jewish College Students 2014:
Anti-Semitism Report, The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law & Trinity College (2015).
2. Dina Porat and Esther Webman, Compilation booklet of the proceedings of “The Working Definition of Anti-
semitism - Six Years After,” The Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism and Racism
(2010).
3. Dina Porat and Kenneth Stern, Defining Antisemitism (2005).
4. Dina Porat, “The International Working Definition of Antisemitism and Its Detractors,” Israel Journal of Foreign
Affairs 3, 1 (2011).
5. Gavin I. Langmuir, Towards a Definition of Anti-Semitism, University of California Press (1996).
6. Kenneth L. Marcus, The Definition of Anti-Semitism (New York: Oxford University Press: 2015).
7. Kenneth L. Marcus, “The Definition of Antisemitism” in Charles Asher Small, Global Antisemitism: A Crisis of
Modernity (Brill: 2013).
8. Leonard Saxe, Theodore Sasson, Graham Wright & Shahar Hecht, Antisemitism and the College Campus:
Perceptions and Realities, Brandeis University’s Maurice and Marilyn Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies
(2015).

The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law 6