SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
December, 06 2017, 12:30pm EDT
Contact:
Email:,info@jewishvoiceforpeace.org
JVP Responds to Trump's Announcement of Jerusalem As Israel's Capital and Plan To Move U.S. Embassy
Jewish Voice for Peace unequivocally condemns President Trump's announcement that he will begin the process of moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem as part of recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital, a move that would make the U.S. the only country in the world to do so. This move is counter to international law and is a clear attempt by Israel and the U.S. to consolidate Israeli annexation of land. This move is reckless, endangering the lives of Palestinians and Israelis on the ground.
WASHINGTON
Jewish Voice for Peace unequivocally condemns President Trump's announcement that he will begin the process of moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem as part of recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital, a move that would make the U.S. the only country in the world to do so. This move is counter to international law and is a clear attempt by Israel and the U.S. to consolidate Israeli annexation of land. This move is reckless, endangering the lives of Palestinians and Israelis on the ground.
Since Israel unilaterally annexed the eastern half of Jerusalem in 1967, the international community has considered it to be occupied territory. By recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital, Trump is endorsing Israeli policies of dispossession and forcible transfer, further harming the rights and lives of Palestinians and crushing any hope for a peace based on equality and freedom for everyone in the region.
Jerusalem is home to people of multiple faiths and religions, including almost 40 percent of whom are Palestinian. This move irrevocably demonstrates that the U.S. and Israel are colluding to violate the rights of Palestinians and sabotage any real possibility for an equitable agreement.
Rebecca Vilkomerson, JVP Executive Director:
For seventy years, the US has given Israel tacit approval to steal Palestinian land, build illegal Jewish settlements, and deny Palestinians in East Jerusalem and elsewhere their rights. The Trump-Netanyahu alliance takes these ongoing policies to the next level and is reckless, irresponsible and endangers the lives of Palestinians and Israelis.
Rabbi Alissa Wise, JVP Deputy Director:
Jerusalem is a symbol of holiness and hope for many people of many religions the world over. Beginning the process of moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem not only flies in the face of the international legal consensus, but also furthers the agenda of those who seek to re-cast a struggle for land, rights and sovereignty into a religious conflict.
Jewish Voice for Peace is a national, grassroots organization inspired by Jewish tradition to work for a just and lasting peace according to principles of human rights, equality, and international law for all the people of Israel and Palestine. JVP has over 200,000 online supporters, over 70 chapters, a youth wing, a Rabbinic Council, an Artist Council, an Academic Advisory Council, and an Advisory Board made up of leading U.S. intellectuals and artists.
(510) 465-1777LATEST NEWS
Jewish Voices for Palestine and Free Speech Slam House GOP 'Kangaroo Hearing' on Antisemitism
"What we are seeing has nothing to do with keeping Jews safe and everything to do with crushing dissent," said one Barnard College student.
May 07, 2025
Jewish students and academics for Palestinian rights and free speech on Wednesday condemned a congressional hearing in which House Republicans repeatedly conflated opposition to Zionism and Israeli crimes against Palestine with antisemitism, while Democratic lawmakers warned against the weaponization of civil rights to suppress dissent.
The House Education and Workforce Committee held the hearing—titled "Beyond the Ivy League: Stopping the Spread of Antisemitism on American Campuses"—which followed last year's panel on antisemitism, both real and contrived, at Columbia University.
This time, the presidents of Haverford College, DePaul University, and California Polytechnic State University were grilled by lawmakers including committee Chair Tim Walberg (R-Mich.), who said that Israel should deal with Gaza "m like Nagasaki and Hiroshima" and was a manager at the Moody Bible Institute, which according to a memo from a group of mostly Jewish Haverford professors, "trains students to convert Jewish people to Christianity."
The memo notes that committee member Rep. Mark Harris (R-N.C.) once said Jews and Muslims will never know "peace in their soul" until they renounce their religions and accept Jesus Christ as their lord and savior. Another committee member, Rep. Mary Miller (R-Ill.), said that Nazi leader Adolf oHitler was "right" about political movements' need to capture youth support, before later apologizing.
Yet these and other Republican lawmakers on the panel pressured the three university presidents to crack down on constitutionally protected speech, while conflating support for Palestine and criticism of Israel with antisemitism.
"Haverford employs faculty members who engage in blatant antisemitism with no apparent consequences," said Walberg. "For example, one professor declared online that Zionism is Nazism."
Asked by Walberg if the phrase "long live the intifada"—an affirmation of Palestinians' legal right to armed resistance against Israeli oppression—is "protected speech at Haverford's campus," college president Wendy Raymond incorrectly said, "That is an antisemitic form of speech."
Walberg also falsely called the Hamas-led October 7, 2023 attack on Israel "unprovoked" and singled out students and faculty who praised Palestinians who resist Israel—which is facing a genocide case at the International Court of Justice and whose prime minister and former defense minister are fugitives from the International Criminal Court, where they are wanted for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity, including extermination and forced starvation, in Gaza.
DePaul University president Robert Manuel said he was "deeply sorry" for "mistakes" made at the Chicago school, where two Jewish students were brutally attacked last November in what prosecutors have charged as a hate crime, while touting the banning of pro-Palestine groups including Students for Justice in Palestine from campus.
While noting that the Constitution "doesn't protect antisemitic violence, true threats of violence, or certain kinds of speech that may properly be labeled 'harassment,'" Georgetown University Law Center professor and former ACLU national legal director David Cole told the committee that the First Amendment "protects speech many of us find wrongheaded or deeply offensive, including anti-Israel advocacy and even antisemitic advocacy."
Cole accused the committee of making "broad-based charges of antisemitism without any factual predicate."
"To be honest, and with all due respect, the hearings this committee held on this same subject last year are reminiscent not of a fair trial of any sort, but of the kind of hearings the House Committee on Un-American Activities used to hold," Cole contended. "And I think we can all agree that the HUAC hearings were both a big mistake and a major intrusion on the First Amendment rights of Americans."
Cole also took aim at U.S. President Donald Trump's weaponization of antisemitism to threaten and defund colleges and universities that don't crack down on Palestine defenders, stressing that "the government may not threaten funding cuts as a tool to pressure recipients into suppressing such viewpoints."
Dozens of Jewish Haverford students signed an open letter to members of the House Education Committee ahead of Wednesday's hearing stating that "we are all deeply concerned by how you are weaponizing our pain and anguish for your own purposes."
Letter to the Editor: Jewish Haverford Students Reject Congress’ Weaponization of Antisemitism haverfordclerk.com/letter-to-th...
[image or embed]
— Karen Masters ( @karenlmasters.bsky.social) May 7, 2025 at 12:15 PM
"It is clear to us that these hearings will not, and have no desire to, protect us or combat antisemitism," the letter says. "Instead, this congressional hearing weaponizes antisemitism to target freedom of speech on college campuses, silences political dissidents, and attacks students who speak out in solidarity with Palestine. It is a blatant assault on our Black, brown, transgender, queer, noncitizen, and Palestinian peers."
A day before the hearing, the group Jewish Voice for Peace Action (JVPA)—which called the panel a "kangaroo hearing"— brought nine Columbia University and affiliated students to Capitol Hill to meet with members of Congress and "speak about their experiences as Jewish students who have been steadfastly committed to advocating for the safety and freedom of the Palestinian people."
Columbia junior Shay Orentlicher said that "I'm here asking my representatives to call for the release of my friend Mahmoud Khalil and to put real pressure on the Trump regime," referring to the permanent U.S. resident facing deportation after helping to lead pro-Palestine protests at the New York City university.
"I cannot stand to see the Trump administration smear Mahmoud as an antisemite when it could not be further than the truth," Orentlicher added.
Tali Beckwith-Cohen, a Jewish senior at Columbia-affiliated Barnard College, argued: "The Trump regime is using false allegations of antisemitism to disappear our friends, punish student protestors, and dismantle higher education. What we are seeing has nothing to do with keeping Jews safe, and everything to do with crushing dissent."
"Thousands of Jews on campuses across the country have spoken out in solidarity with the people of Gaza and we will not be silent," Beckwith-Cohen vowed.
JVPA political director Beth Miller contended that "the far-right does not care about Jewish safety."
"Trump and his allies in Congress are platforming neo-Nazis and Christian nationalists, all while pretending to care about antisemitism in order to take a hatchet to our communities and most basic freedoms," Miller added. "This is intended to silence the Palestinian rights movement, sow chaos, and sharpen authoritarian tools that will then be used to dismantle civil liberties and democracy itself."
Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.), the ranking member of the House Education Committee, pushed back on Republicans' assertions during Wednesday's hearing, noting that "my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have not held any hearings on other forms of discrimination and hate, such as racism, Title IX gender violations, Islamophobia, homophobia, or the challenges of meeting the needs of students with disabilities."
Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) noted that Trump praised attendees of the deadly 2017 "United the Right" white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia as "very fine people," and that Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. "spread an antisemitic conspiracy theory that Covid was engineered to target white and Black people but spare Jewish people."
Casar asked committee Republicans to condemn these and other antisemitic incidents by raising their hands. None did.
Antisemitism is an assault on all of our values. So why would Republicans cut funding to address hate crimes or protect synagogues? Republicans are not trying to keep Jewish students safe. They're trying to keep the Israeli government safe from any form of criticism.
[image or embed]
— Congressman Greg Casar ( @repcasar.bsky.social) May 7, 2025 at 10:24 AM
"Not a single Republican today has been willing to condemn any of this antisemitism," Casar lamented. "Unfortunately, the party of 'very fine people on both sides' or ' Jewish space lasers' does not give a damn about stopping antisemitism. If my Republican colleagues want to stop the spread of antisemitism, maybe they should stop apologizing for and promoting antisemites."
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) argued that "it is abundantly clear that the cynical work of the majority party on this committee is now being expanded and weaponized by the [Trump] administration seeking to squash dissent."
"Political protest, anti-war protest, pro-Palestinian protest—this is all protected speech under the First Amendment, regardless of citizenship status," Omar said after listing a number of Palestine defenders, including green-card holders, targeted for deportation by the Trump administration.
"Using immigration authorities to target, abduct, and detain noncitizens for their activism is a clear violation of their rights and a hallmark of an authoritarian government," she added.
Asserting that "throughout history, college campuses have been the places where worldviews, politics, cultures meet," Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.) said thato "some of the most transformative movements for justice in this country were ignited by students on college campuses."
"We cannot allow them to use efforts to divide our marginalized communities against each other."
"Now, that tradition of protest, academic freedom, and the core principle of free speech is under attack," Lee noted. "Not genuinely in the name of safety and student well-being, but under the guise of control used to suppress the voices of marginalized groups."
Lee said that it's clear that committee Republicans don't care about tackling antisemitism and other forms of bigotry "because they've dismantled and closed regional offices for civil rights... tasked with investigating antisemitism, that they have not spoken out against the Nazi salutes of Elon Musk or the Great Replacement Theory that led to the largest antisemitic massacre in my district."
"They have done nothing about anti-Blackness—I won't hold my breath for a hearing on that," she continued.
"We haven't acknowledged that our safety and our liberation are tied together," Lee added. "We cannot allow them to use efforts to divide our marginalized communities against each other... We are the closest we have ever been—ever been—to losing our civil liberties. We have to fight against it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
In Latest Legal Loss for Trump, Federal Court Orders Rümeysa Öztürk's Return to Vermont
The ruling in Rümeysa Öztürk's case came less than 24 hours after courts ruled that Badar Khan Suri's case must be heard in Virginia and that Mahmoud Khalil's case must remain in New Jersey.
May 07, 2025
On Wednesday, Tufts University student Rümeysa Öztürk was the third detained international scholar in 24 hours to secure a victory in a case against the Trump administration when a federal appeals panel ordered the government to return Öztürk to Vermont from the crowded Louisiana detention center to which she was sent hours after plainclothes immigration agents arrested her in March.
The Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals handed down its ruling weeks after U.S. District Judge William K. Sessions III in Vermont ordered the administration to return Öztürk to the New England state, where she had been located when her attorneys filed a habeas corpus petition on her behalf.
Sessions' ruling had demanded that Öztürk be returned to Vermont for a hearing by May 1, but she remained in Louisiana—where the Trump administration has sent numerous foreign students marked for deportation to ensure their cases would be handled by conservative judges—as the White House appealed the case to the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
That court said Wednesday that Öztürk must be sent back to Vermont by May 14, where a federal judge will hold a hearing on her habeas corpus petition on May 22. A bail hearing for Öztürk's release will also be held on May 9.
Öztürk's lawyers argue that the government is unconstitutionally retaliating against her for co-writing an op-ed in her school newspaper last year in which she called on Tufts to divest from companies tied to Israel and its bombardment of Gaza. She was detained in March by plainclothes immigration agents—some of whom wore masks—near her apartment in Somerville, Massachusetts.
"No one should be arrested and locked up for their political views," said Esha Bhandari, deputy director of the ACLU's Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, which is helping to represent Öztürk. "Every day that Rümeysa Öztürk remains in detention is a day too long. We're grateful the court refused the government’s attempt to keep her isolated from her community and her legal counsel as she pursues her case for release."
Lawyers recently submitted new filings in Öztürk's case in Vermont, describing her living conditions for nearly two months in Louisiana.
In a cramped room with 23 other women, Öztürk has suffered progressively more severe asthma attacks and has been exposed to triggers for her asthma, including insect and rodent droppings and a lack of fresh air.
"Rümeysa has suffered six weeks in crowded confinement without adequate access to medical care and in conditions that doctors say risk exacerbating her asthma attacks. Her detention—over an op-ed she co-authored in her student newspaper—is as cruel as it is unconstitutional," said Jessie Rossman, legal director for the ACLU of Massachusetts. "Today, we moved one step closer to returning Rümeysa to her community and studies in Massachusetts."
With Öztürk expected to return to Vermont within days, the ACLU this week was also celebrating another "huge blow for the Trump administration" in the case of Georgetown University postdoctoral fellow Badar Khan Suri, who was also arrested in March by masked immigration agents before being secretly transported first to Louisiana and then to Texas.
A federal court ruled Suri's habeas corpus case should be heard in a court in Virginia, where he was living with his wife and young children when he was detained.
The Department of Homeland Security said Suri was "rendered deportable" under the Immigration and Nationality Act because he was found "spreading Hamas propaganda and promoting antisemitism on social media"—claims for which DHS offered no evidence.
His lawyers have argued he was being detained for constitutionally protected speech in support of Palestinian rights.
A federal court in Virginia is now set to hear Suri's case regarding his demand to be returned to Virginia and released on bond on May 14.
Eden Heilman, legal director for the ACLU of Virginia, said the court rejected the Trump administration's effort to "find a court it believed would be friendlier to its unlawful detention of people advocating for Palestinian rights."
"We are pleased the court saw through the Trump administration's attempts to manipulate the law, and we won't stop fighting until Dr. Khan Suri is reunited with his family," said Heilman.
Meanwhile, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia on Tuesday rejected the Trump administration's effort to appeal the issue of where former Columbia University student organizer Mahmoud Khalil's habeas corpus case should be heard, ensuring that a federal court in New Jersey—where Khalil was detained when the petition was filed—will remain the venue for the case.
The administration has been pushing for Khalil's case to be heard in Louisiana, where he has also been in Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention since March, when ICE agents accosted him and his pregnant wife and took him away in an unmarked vehicle—eventually sending him 1,400 miles away from his wife and his legal counsel, where he remained last month during the birth of his first child.
Brett Max Kaufman, senior counsel with the ACLU's Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, expressed hope that Tuesday's ruling "sends a strong message to other courts around the country facing government attempts to shop for favorable jurisdictions by moving people detained on unconstitutional immigration charges around."
"It is the fundamental job of the judiciary," said Kaufman, "to stand up to this kind of government manipulation of our basic rights."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'The Fix Is In': GOP Wants Poor People to Pay More for Medicaid to Fund Tax Cuts for Wealthy
"Poor people will pay more for healthcare so rich people can get tax cuts. Sometimes the stakes are pretty simple."
May 07, 2025
Reporting out Wednesday indicates that congressional Republicans are considering a proposal that would force low-income Americans to pay more for Medicaid coverage, a highly regressive plan aimed at helping the GOP offset the massive projected cost of another round of tax breaks for the wealthy.
The proposal, first reported by The American Prospect's David Dayen, is part of a menu of options Republicans are weighing for inclusion in their forthcoming reconciliation package. A House Energy and Commerce Committee markup of the legislation is expected next week.
"Making poor people pay more for healthcare is exactly the kind of effective cut to Medicaid that moderate Republicans have sworn they would not abide," Dayen wrote. "While reducing the federal share of Obamacare's Medicaid expansion, which provides federal funding to extend Medicaid to adults under age 65 up to 138% of the poverty level in 40 states and D.C., is not part of the menu, this is a backdoor way of achieving something like that reduction, on the backs of individuals who get Medicaid."
The proposal is described in the emerging reconciliation proposal as "cost-sharing above 100% FPL," or federal poverty level.
Medicaid's website explains that out-of-pocket Medicaid costs currently apply to all "enrollees except those specifically exempted by law, and most are limited to nominal amounts."
Under the GOP proposal, according to Dayen, "Medicaid recipients making at or above the federal poverty level, which is $15,650 for a single individual and $21,150 for a two-person household, would have to pay some money for coverage—either in premiums, co-payments for hospital visits and other treatment, or other fees."
"Currently, Medicaid gives states the option to impose out-of-pocket spending on recipients, though some populations and services, like children under 18 or pregnancy care, are exempted," Dayen added. "Some premiums and enrollment fees are limited to beneficiaries above 150% of the poverty line; this policy would take that number lower."
Matt Bruenig, founder of the People's Policy Project, told the Prospect that "whether you call it a co-pay, a premium, a fee, or a tax, the net result is either a reduction in the disposable incomes of those subject to the cost-sharing or people forgoing healthcare."
"When I look out into the American income distribution for places where I'd like to cut things back," Bruenig added, "families with incomes between 100% and 138% of the poverty line is not where my eye tends to go."
In response to Dayen's reporting, Working Families Party national director Maurice Mitchell said in a statement that "Republicans want to hike Medicaid premiums and copays to pay for massive tax cuts for the rich."
"The fix is in," said Mitchell. "They care more about tax breaks for their billionaire donors than keeping costs low for families in their own districts. But we're not going to let them get away with it. We're ready to fight back."
"The bottom line is that the Republican bill is going to cut healthcare for kids, seniors, Americans with disabilities, and working families."
Another option on the GOP policy menu for Medicaid is work requirements, which have been tried to disastrous effect at the state level. Research has repeatedly shown that work requirements do little to boost employment while making it more difficult for eligible program recipients to continue receiving benefits. Most Medicaid recipients already work.
Dayen's reporting was published shortly before the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released an analysis examining the potential consequences of some of the Medicaid cuts floated by Republican lawmakers in recent days.
The CBO—which did not examine the GOP plan to impose more payments on poor Americans—found that the Republican proposals would "reduce the resources available to states to fund Medicaid programs."
"Overall, CBO expects that, on average, states would replace roughly half of the reduced funds with their own resources," the budget office said. "Additionally, in response to the loss of the other half of the resources, states would modify their Medicaid programs and reduce Medicaid spending using three levers: reduce provider payment rates, reduce the scope or amount of optional services, and reduce Medicaid enrollment."
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), who requested the CBO analysis last month, said Wednesday that "the Republican plan for healthcare means benefit cuts and terminated health insurance for millions of Americans who count on Medicaid."
"Republicans continue to use smoke and mirrors to try to trick Americans into thinking they aren't going to hurt anybody when they proceed with this reckless plan, but fighting reality is an uphill battle," said Wyden. "The bottom line is that the Republican bill is going to cut healthcare for kids, seniors, Americans with disabilities, and working families, and Democrats are going to fight to stop it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular