NC House easily passes “Shalom Act” to enshrine antisemitism definition in state law

By a vote of 105-4, the North Carolina House on Wednesday passed a bill, dubbed the “Shalom Act,” that would establish a definition of antisemitism in state law.

If the bill becomes law, North Carolina would, by reference, make the “Working Definition of Antisemitism Adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance on May 26, 2016” the state’s official definition of antisemitism.

Under the definition, several types of criticism directed against Israel, such as “claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor,” would be deemed antisemitism.

House Speaker Tim Moore, who is serving as one of the bill’s chief sponsors, said the measure is a response to a rise in hate speech and attacks on Jewish people.

“North Carolina already has hate crime statutes in place, but there really is not a working definition of what truly constitutes antisemitism,” Moore said Wednesday at a press conference before the House vote. “This is very timely because of what we have seen across this country, and even right here in North Carolina.”

Though the bill passed by an overwhelming margin, it drew spirited opposition from members of a coalition of civil liberties and faith groups who convened a press conference on the Legislative Building’s front lawn and addressed the House Judiciary I Committee prior to the House floor vote.

Some of what the definition targets isn’t antisemitism, said Reighlah Collins, Policy Counsel for the ACLU of North Carolina. Rather, she said, it’s “political speech.”

“Any definition of antisemitism that conflates criticism of Israel chills constitutionally protected political speech. This bill would sweep up not just hate speech, but also for political speech, criticism of another government,” Collins said during the Judiciary committee hearing.

Democratic Rep. Marcia Morey voted against the bill, citing constitutional issues. Morey’s fellow Democrats, Representatives Pricey Harrison, Nasif Majeed and Renée Price also voted against it. Majeed (D-Mecklenburg) said he’s been working on an anti-hate crime bill for six years, yet House leadership has failed to act on more comprehensive protections for other faiths and other groups that experience hate.

While the bill provides for no particular enforcement mechanism, it specifies that the definition will be used as “a guide for training, education, recognizing, and combating antisemitic hate crimes or discrimination and for tracking and reporting antisemitic incidents.”

Moore said the bill does not create any new criminal penalties related to antisemitism, as state laws against “ethnic intimidation” already exist. But it provides a clear definition of antisemitism for prosecutors and law enforcement

“A prosecutor would look at that and look at the statutes that are already in place and make a determination if that conduct rose to that level.”

At the morning press conference, critics said the bill is an attack on free speech and conflates criticism of Israel and the actions of its government with antisemitism.

Abby Lublin, executive director of Carolina Jews for Justice, said that while her organization and others like it are alarmed by recent spikes in antisemitism and support ways to confront it productively, Moore’s bill “is not it.” She derided the legislation as “not a serious bill” and a measure that “exploits Jews for political gain,” threatens civil liberties, and distracts from serious efforts to confront antisemitism. Rather than making a real and productive impact, she said the measure was “a messaging bill” and a “gag bill” that’s part of a “broader anti-democratic agenda.”

She noted that by including criticism of the Israeli government in its definition, the bill would wrongfully and absurdly label many Jews – herself included – as antisemitic.

If Moore and other lawmakers were serious about attacking antisemitism, she said, they would promote better funding for federal Office of Civil Rights’ Title VI investigations, which Republicans in the U.S House have failed to adequately support.

Lela Ali of the group Muslim Women For, a grassroots organization, said that her group strongly endorses better protections for the Jewish community, but that HB 942 constitutes “a threat to democracy and free speech” and “a green light to censorship.”

Liz Stern of the group Jewish Voice for Peace also derided the bill as an effort to provide political cover for Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, the Republican nominees for governor, who she said has made repeated genuinely antisemitic statements, including denying the reality of the Nazi-perpetrated Holocaust.

The bill now goes to the Senate.

Rob Schofield contributed to this report.