Antisemitism definition bill signed into law

Caption

Rep. Esther Panitch, a Sandy Springs Democrat, argues in favor of a bill that would add antisemitism to the state’s hate crimes law. Panitch is the only Jewish state lawmaker in Georgia.

Credit: Jill Nolin / Georgia Recorder

Gov. Brian Kemp signed into law Wednesday a bill that would add a definition of antisemitism to state law. It's been a long time coming for advocates who hoped to toughen penalties for those who commit a crime with antisemitic intent. Rep. Esther Panitch, a Democrat and Georgia's lone Jewish lawmaker, spoke with GPB's Peter Biello. 

Peter Biello: How does it feel to finally get this bill passed?

Rep: Esther Panitch: I feel a great sense of relief. It's been a long time coming, and even before I got here. So it's been longer for my co-sponsor, John Carson. But the Jewish community has waited three years for this. And so it's a relief for them as well.

Peter Biello: You were a victim of antisemitic flyering. Now that this bill is in effect, what impact might it have on incidents like that in the future?

Rep: Esther Panitch: This bill doesn't attack the flyers, and this bill wasn't brought forth because of the flyers. It came before the flyers. But if this person who does the flyering takes the next step and does something violent against somebody Jewish or defaces their property, then the flyers could be used as evidence of motive to show that this person was acting against Jews and that that was their intent. So the bill will help. It's just not — it wasn't intended for this particular type of event.

Peter Biello: My understanding is that this does not criminalize a sentiment about Jews or people simply speaking ill of Jewish people. It allows prosecutors to prove intent when something that is already a crime is committed. Is that correct?

Rep: Esther Panitch: That's exactly correct. You can say — or anybody can say the most awful things about Jews, about Israel. And it's not a crime. So if you take an action that's already unlawful, whether it's crime or some type of unlawful discrimination, then prosecutors or investigators can look at this as a motivation to see whether it was antisemitic or not.

Peter Biello: This legislation relies on a definition of antisemitism crafted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. Why is it important to use that definition?

Rep: Esther Panitch: This definition was comprised of scholars, people from all over the world. It was comprised in Europe and the United States participated in it to identify the different types of antisemitism. We all know what a swastika looks like, but we don't always know when anti-Zionism or anti-Israel sentiment crosses into antisemitism. Since Oct. 7, we've seen a lot of that. But in Europe in 2016, they were able to identify it back then. It's already been in Europe. So — and Europe's particularly sensitive given what happened in World War II. So this is the gold standard of definitions. It takes into account both the conventional types of antisemitism and the contemporary types of antisemitism.

Peter Biello: In a version of this bill last year, a lawmaker tried to incorporate the full definition of antisemitism, and he changed one word. He changed the word "certain perceptions" of Jews to "negative perceptions" of Jews. You objected to that. Why? What is the difference between "certain" perceptions and "negative" perceptions in the definition of antisemitism?

Rep: Esther Panitch: So if somebody harms a Jew because they think they have power, power's a positive perception, not a negative perception. So positive perceptions also get Jews killed or assaulted or harassed or threatened, just as negative perceptions do. And the reason that we refer to this definition and we did not want it word for word in the code, is for exactly what happened last year when one lawmaker decides he wants to change the entire definition and the meaning of antisemitism. Had we allowed that amendment to — to stand, it would be more dangerous than not having a definition at all. So that's why we rejected ... we tabled it, once that amendment was passed and brought it back this year.

Peter Biello: What impact do you think this legislation is going to have as far as deterrents of antisemitic acts?

Rep: Esther Panitch: So we have seen in Florida, they have established some statutes, about flyering specifically, that has resulted in a decrease of antisemitic incidents in Florida. So I believe that there is a deterrent effect when a state stands up and says, "not only are we going to talk about being against antisemitism, we're actually putting the weight of the state behind it." So it hopefully has a great deterrent effect. We'll have to see. But just like the hate crime statute didn't stop racism, we don't expect this definition to stop antisemitism.

Peter Biello: One critic during the Senate hearing on this bill said that the use of this particular definition conflates Judaism with pro-Israel sentiment. Do you agree with that?

Rep: Esther Panitch: So Israel is integral to Judaism. And so it's hard sometimes to separate the two in terms of meaning. But Jews here are not responsible for the government of Israel's actions and shouldn't be held collectively responsible for them. There are plenty of Israelis who disagree with their current administration. But after Oct. 7, we could see where anti-Israel sentiment crossed directly into anti-Jewish sentiment when you have rallies purporting to be for pro-Palestine turning into "gas the Jews" and airports in Russia where people, mobs, you know, came to "kill the Jews," not kill the Israelis — which would be bad enough — "Kill the Jews." So we definitely see that it certainly can cross into antisemitism. And we need a definition to tell when it's anti-Israel for legitimate reasons and when it's antisemitic.

Peter Biello: Do you think the events since Oct. 7 helped provide the motivation to pass this bill, or was the motivation already there, but the language simply needed to be right?

Rep: Esther Panitch: The motive, the motivation was there for some. Oct. 7, I think, showed the rest what Jews have been dealing with for centuries, and specifically the last few years when we've been saying antisemitism is on the rise. Now they can see it with their own eyes, and if they choose not to see it, it's because they don't want to see it.