Petition Against Adopting the IHRA Definition of Antisemitism in Wisconsin

Wisconsin State Legislators

To: Wisconsin State Senators and Representatives


Dear Distinguished Wisconsin Representatives,

We urge you to oppose the codification of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Working Definition of Antisemitism, including its contemporary examples, into Wisconsin state law. While we unequivocally condemn antisemitism in all its forms and recognize the urgent need to combat hatred and discrimination, we believe the IHRA definition is flawed and poses a significant risk to civil liberties, including free speech, academic freedom, and the broader fight for justice and equality.

Why the IHRA Definition is Problematic

The IHRA definition includes a core statement and eleven examples, seven of which relate to criticism of the State of Israel. This creates ambiguity that can conflate legitimate political critique with antisemitism. This risks stifling free expression and silencing advocacy for Palestinian human rights, which is critical to justice and equality for all.

  • The definition’s primary author, Ken Stern, has warned that it can be used a “blunt instrument” to label critics of Israel as antisemitic, even when their speech is protected under the First Amendment

  • The definition was not intended as a legal framework but as a non-binding tool for data collection

  • Academics and scholars globally, have opposed the definition, citing its potential to suppress academic freedom and activism

  • In Wisconsin, its adoption could exacerbate tensions on university campuses, creating a chilling effect on students and faculty who engage in legitimate critique of Israeli policies

A Better Way Forward

Wisconsin can lead in crafting a balanced approach that combats antisemitism while preserving free expression. We propose the following actions:

  • Strengthen Anti-Hate Education: Expand Wisconsin Act 30 to include robust curricula on antisemitism, racism, and other forms of discrimination, emphasizing historical context without conflating political critique with hate.

  • Enhance Law Enforcement Training: Develop clear, narrowly tailored guidelines for identifying and prosecuting hate crimes, ensuring antisemitic incidents are addressed without relying on vague definitions that could be misused.

  • Promote Community Dialogue: Support initiatives that foster mutual understanding and combat all forms of prejudice collaboratively.

  • Protect Free Speech: Ensure that Wisconsin's laws and policies uphold the First Amendment, safeguarding the right to criticize any government, including Israel's.

  • Utilize Current Hate Crime Laws: In Wisconsin, hate crime laws in Wisconsin is under utilized. In 2021, nearly half of Wisconsin's counties never used the hate penalty in the last five years.

Conclusion

Wisconsin’s motto, “Forward,” reflects a commitment to progress. We urge you to reject the IHRA definition and instead adopt a comprehensive, inclusive strategy that effectively combats antisemitism while safeguarding the fundamental rights of all Wisconsin residents. Let us build a state where all communities feel safe, respected, and free to express their views without fear of censorship.

Sincerely,

Wisconsin Muslim Civic Alliance



Petition by
Fauzia Qureshi
Wisconsin Muslim Civic Alliance

To: Wisconsin State Legislators
From: [Your Name]

To: Wisconsin State Senators and Representatives

Dear Distinguished Wisconsin Representatives,

We urge you to oppose the codification of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Working Definition of Antisemitism, including its contemporary examples, into Wisconsin state law. While we unequivocally condemn antisemitism in all its forms and recognize the urgent need to combat hatred and discrimination, we believe the IHRA definition is flawed and poses a significant risk to civil liberties, including free speech, academic freedom, and the broader fight for justice and equality.

Why the IHRA Definition is Problematic

The IHRA definition includes a core statement and eleven examples, seven of which relate to criticism of the State of Israel. This creates ambiguity that can conflate legitimate political critique with antisemitism. This risks stifling free expression and silencing advocacy for Palestinian human rights, which is critical to justice and equality for all.

The definition’s primary author, Ken Stern, has warned that it can be used a “blunt instrument” to label critics of Israel as antisemitic, even when their speech is protected under the First Amendment

The definition was not intended as a legal framework but as a non-binding tool for data collection

Academics and scholars globally, have opposed the definition, citing its potential to suppress academic freedom and activism

In Wisconsin, its adoption could exacerbate tensions on university campuses, creating a chilling effect on students and faculty who engage in legitimate critique of Israeli policies

A Better Way Forward

Wisconsin can lead in crafting a balanced approach that combats antisemitism while preserving free expression. We propose the following actions:

Strengthen Anti-Hate Education: Expand Wisconsin Act 30 to include robust curricula on antisemitism, racism, and other forms of discrimination, emphasizing historical context without conflating political critique with hate.

Enhance Law Enforcement Training: Develop clear, narrowly tailored guidelines for identifying and prosecuting hate crimes, ensuring antisemitic incidents are addressed without relying on vague definitions that could be misused.

Promote Community Dialogue: Support initiatives that foster mutual understanding and combat all forms of prejudice collaboratively.

Protect Free Speech: Ensure that Wisconsin's laws and policies uphold the First Amendment, safeguarding the right to criticize any government, including Israel's.

Utilize Current Hate Crime Laws: In Wisconsin, hate crime laws in Wisconsin is under utilized. In 2021, nearly half of Wisconsin's counties never used the hate penalty in the last five years.

Conclusion

Wisconsin’s motto, “Forward,” reflects a commitment to progress. We urge you to reject the IHRA definition and instead adopt a comprehensive, inclusive strategy that effectively combats antisemitism while safeguarding the fundamental rights of all Wisconsin residents. Let us build a state where all communities feel safe, respected, and free to express their views without fear of censorship.

Sincerely,