Georgia Bill Would Define Antisemitism

A bill to define antisemitism in the state’s legal code has been introduced in the Georgia House of Representatives.

If approved by the House and Senate and signed into law by Gov. Brian Kemp, the legislation filed Feb. 7 would make the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition the basis for legal actions regarding antisemitism.

That definition reads: “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

Rep. John Carson, a Republican from Marietta, is the chief sponsor of the bipartisan measure. Other co-sponsors are Republican Reps. Chuck Efstration, from Dacula, Sharon Cooper, from Marietta and Democratic Reps. Mike Wilensky, from Dunwoody, Angelika Kausche, from Johns Creek and Stacey Evans, from Atlanta.

Rep. Mike Wilensky believes the bill “should have no problems moving through both chambers.”

“I am proud to sponsor this update to Georgia’s definition of antisemitism, which will bring us in line with other states and help delineate what constitutes antisemitism. The persecution of the Jewish people simply must stop, and I look forward to the bill’s passage,” Carson told the AJT.

Wilensky said that Senate backers are being lined up. “It should have no problems moving through both chambers,” he said.

The bill’s language states: “Antisemitism, including harassment on the basis of actual or perceived Jewish origin, ancestry, ethnicity, identity, affiliation, or faith, remains a persistent, pervasive and disturbing problem in contemporary American society … [the IHRA definition] has been an essential definitional tool used to determine contemporary manifestations of antisemitism and includes useful examples of discriminatory anti-Israel acts that can cross the line into antisemitism.”

Wilensky said that sponsors consulted with the Atlanta regional office of the American Jewish Committee and the Israeli-American Coalition for Action, the advocacy arm of the Israeli-American Council.

Dov Wilker, the American Jewish Committee’s Atlanta regional director, said, “We are very pleased that the House and Senate have passed a law that is awaiting the governor’s signature.”

On Jan. 26, International Holocaust Remembrance Day, 10 states announced that they would adopt the IHRA definition. Proclamations were issued by Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Nevada, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming, while the Commonwealth of Virginia issued an executive order. In June 2021, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed legislation making his state the first to adopt the definition.

The IHRA adopted the “non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism” in 2016. The U.S. became a signatory in January 2019.

Critics contend that the IHRA definition could be used to stifle debate, particularly around the Israeli-Palestinian issue. Of 11 defining examples of antisemitism that accompany the 38-word definition, six reference Israel. Among them are accusing Jews outside of Israel of dual loyalty and “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination.”

The newly-introduced bill states: “Nothing in this Code section shall be construed to diminish or infringe upon any right protected under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution or the Georgia Constitution.”

Meanwhile, the House and Senate have sent Kemp legislation that amends the state’s anti-BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) law.

The 2016 law requires that any person or company contracting with the state for services valued at $1,000 or more agree not to boycott Israel. The BDS movement seeks to use economic pressure to force changes in Israeli policies regarding the Palestinians.

The law awaiting the governor’s signature would raise the threshold for triggering the anti-boycott pledge to $100,000 and apply it to businesses with five or more employees, in effect reducing the number of contracts that potentially may be affected.

Rep. John Carson, a Republican from Marietta, is the chief sponsor of the bipartisan measure. “The persecution of the Jewish people simply must stop, and I look forward to the bill’s passage,” Carson told the AJT.

A boycott is defined as “engaging in refusals to deal with, terminating business activities with, or other actions that are intended to limit commercial relations with Israel or individuals or companies doing business in Israel.”

House Bill 383, approved 146-9 on Jan. 27, matches a version approved by the Senate in the 2021 session. “Trade with Israel is a compelling state interest for the state of Georgia, I would argue, and this bill preserves free speech rights for individuals and sole proprietorships,” Carson, the lead sponsor, said on the House floor. “But it also says we as a state are not going to contract — we’re updating our statute to say we are not going to contract with groups that embrace boycott, divestment and sanctions against the state of Israel.”

Dov Wilker, the American Jewish Committee’s Atlanta regional director, said, “We are very pleased that the House and Senate have passed a law that is awaiting the governor’s signature,” thanking in particular Carson, Wilensky and Sen. Kay Kirkpatrick, a Republican from Marietta.

Even with the change in the threshold for triggering the anti-boycott pledge, the law’s viability remains in doubt. U.S. District Court Judge Mark Cohen last May declared the measure to be unconstitutional, as he rejected the state’s request to dismiss a lawsuit challenging Georgia’s law.

Cohen wrote: “The requirement contained in [the Georgia law] that parties seeking to contract with the state of Georgia sign a certification that they are not engaged in a boycott of Israel also is unconstitutional compelled speech … The certification that one is not engaged in a boycott of Israel is no different than requiring a person to espouse certain political beliefs or to engage in certain political associations. The Supreme Court has found similar requirements to be unconstitutional on their face.”

At least 35 states have some form of anti-BDS law, resolution or executive order, several of which have been challenged on First Amendment grounds. In January, a federal judge in Houston granted an injunction blocking a similar law from taking effect in Texas.

Video of Carson remarks Jan. 27 on House floor re: Georgia anti-BDS law: