Source: NeedToKnow.news

Sources Cited: IHRA, AntiWar, and InformationLiberation

.

South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem signed HB 1076, which requires the consideration of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism when investigating unfair or discriminatory practices. The IHRA definition violates the First Amendment to the US Constitution that establishes free speech.

Kristi Noem, during her bill signing ceremony, acknowledged Dan Rosen advises her; Rosen is the president of the American Jewish Congress and is tied to the AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee that has a big influence on politics. AIPAC’s website states that it “is the largest pro-Israel PAC in America and contributed more resources directly to candidates than any other PAC. 98% of AIPAC-backed candidates won their general election races in 2022”

Scroll to 17:40 to see Gov. Noem acknowledge Dan Rosen, who is tied to AIPAC) as her advisor:

.

The IHRA definition of antisemitism violates the First Amendment by forbidding speech that includes criticizing Jewish power in the media, economy and banking. Disagreement of facts about the Holocaust is banned. Accusing Jews of being more loyal to Israel rather than the country where they live is condemned. Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis is prohibited, and more.

Noem said that her law is the “strongest” in the country and will serve as a model for other states.

The IHRA working definition of antisemitism is:

“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.”

Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion. 

• Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions. 

• Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.

• Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust). 

• Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust. 

• Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations. 

• Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor. 

• Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation. 

• Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis. 

• Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis. 

• Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel. 

Antisemitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law (for example, denial of the Holocaust or distribution of antisemitic materials in some countries).  Criminal acts are antisemitic when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property – such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries – are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Jewish or linked to Jews.  

Antisemitic discrimination is the denial to Jews of opportunities or services available to others and is illegal in many countries.

A critic noted that no other ethnic or religious group in America is afforded any such privileges.

Other States that have adopted this policy:

According to The Jerusalem Post, South Dakota has become the 12th US state to codify the IHRA’s definition of anti-Semitism into law.

At least 23 other states have supported the IHRA definition through legislative action but have not officially made it into law.

The US State Department has also adopted the definition, as the US is a member country of the IHRA.

Over 30 states have adopted anti-BDS laws and many punish individuals or companies who boycott Israel.

Sources…

IHRA definition:      https://holocaustremembrance.com/resources/working-definition-antisemitism

AntiWar:    https://news.antiwar.com/2024/03/11/south-dakota-governor-signs-law-that-conflates-criticism-of-israel-with-anti-semitism/

Information Liberation:    https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=64329