Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
After multiple iterations and weeks of debate, a bill to define and ban antisemitism at Indiana’s public education institutions cleared the General Assembly on Friday and now awaits a signature from the governor.
“This is a very strong statement that the state of Indiana finds it abhorrent that anybody would ever engage in any type of antisemitic behavior,” said bill sponsor Sen. Aaron Freeman, R-Indianapolis, adding that the definition “will hopefully be a guide to live by in the future for our state.”
In contention has been a definition of antisemitism adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), part of which references 11 “contemporary examples” of antisemitism that members of the Hoosier Jewish community said are necessary to codify in state law. Critics maintained those examples are overly broad and limit free speech, however.
In the final hours of the legislative session, a compromise on the final version of House Bill 1002 found a middle ground: include the IHRA’s core definition of antisemitism, but not specifically reference the accompanying examples.
The House priority bill, authored by Rep. Chris Jeter, R-Fishers, ultimately passed unanimously from the House, and with just one opposing vote in the Senate from Fort Wayne Republican Liz Brown.
“House Bill 1002 … has been on quite a journey,” Jeter said. “One of the big discussion points really revolved around how to reference the definition. … There were some real, more technical negotiations back and forth about whether we should reference an outside group, or whether we should put the definition right into the code, and so that it’s really clear that it doesn’t change unless we change it. We sort of came to an agreement on that by doing both — we tightened the language down, referenced IHRA, and then put the actual words, the definition, and pegged it to a certain date. I think that got everybody good with that.”
Jeter said the examples created “issues” for lawmakers, though: “We removed a reference to those because some were problematic.”
The Indianapolis Jewish Community Relations Council (JCRC) — which previously reversed its support when senators removed all reference to IHRA in an earlier draft — said it approved of the final bill and was “grateful” to the General Assembly for “standing with us in the fight against antisemitism.”
The group additionally applauded the bill for “formally recognizing that antisemitism, whether expressed by an individual or through an institutional policy, is a prohibited form of discrimination in educational institutions in this state.”
Policymakers define antisemitism
The final bill language approved by legislators is part — but not all — of IHRA’s overall definition of antisemitism.
The intergovernmental organization, comprised of dozens of countries including the United States and Israel, adopted the “working definition” of antisemitism in 2016. Since then, the definition has been widely accepted by Jewish groups and is used by the U.S. State Department, the European Union and the United Nations.
That “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.”
The original legislation specifically included IHRA’s “contemporary examples of antisemitism included in the May 26, 2016, working definition of antisemitism.”
But Friday’s bill instead defines antisemitism as “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews.” It continues, saying “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.”
Although included in earlier versions of the bill, lawmakers removed another provision that said “criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country” is not antisemitism.
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.
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.
Caryl Auslander, speaking on behalf of the JCRC on Friday, said antisemitism “is not just criticism against the State of Israel.”
“Our feeling is that there’s a fine line between hate speech and free speech,” Auslander said. “But there are limitations on free speech, as we know. It’s not universal, and so we feel very strongly that this will make a very strong statement against hate in the State of Indiana against Jews.”
Critics of the IHRA definition have argued that it’s overly broad and limits free speech. They worried, too, that criticism of a foreign government would still count as anti-Jewish rhetoric.
Many of those issues appeared to be resolved after the IHRA reference was struck out earlier in the session.
Auslander maintained that using IHRA’s definition in the bill — even without explicit mention of the examples — are still incorporated.
“That’s just all part of the interpretation,” she said. “We feel very strongly that since the 11 examples are included within IHRA, that those are being incorporated by reference.”
Auslander added, too, that the JCRC will work with Indiana’s governmental agencies and educational institutions “to ensure the proper interpretation and implementation of the IHRA definition, including the context and referenced examples widely recognized as a critical component of its use.”
The Indiana Muslim Advocacy Network said in its own statement Friday that the group was “pleased to see” House Bill 1002 passed.
“We are thankful to members of the Indiana General Assembly who spent time listening and working with multiple communities to make sure the contemporary examples accompanied by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance working definition of antisemitism, were stricken from the bill,” said Maliha Zafar executive director of the Indiana Muslim Advocacy Network. “The reservations surrounding these examples stemmed from majority of the examples defining certain criticisms of Israel as antisemitic, which could have been used to stifle free speech in schools and on college campuses.”
The Indiana Capital Chronicle is an independent, not-for-profit news organization that covers state government, policy and elections.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.