Anti-antisemitism Now

Abstract

As antisemitism continues to rise and antisemitic tropes become further normalized in public discourse, it has become clear that current approaches to counter the phenomenon are facing major setbacks. In response, the Biden White House recently released The U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism, America’s first national strategy of this kind. To my knowledge, this is the first law review article to address the National Strategy.

The National Strategy is a powerful recognition of rising antisemitism and prioritization of its risks both to Jews and to the nation as a whole. It is therefore very important as a political document. But it is likely to have more limited success as an operational strategy to advance the White House’s goal of reversing the normalization of antisemitism. This is the case for three reasons: misguided approaches to social media content moderation; an untested and highly optimistic slant on “speaking out” and public condemnation; and an unanalyzed reliance on voluntary corporate sanctions.

With respect to content moderation on social media, the National Strategy’s recommendation of Section 230 reform is problematic and could generate concern that antisemitism is being weaponized to accomplish other ends. The White House’s call for transparency and data sharing is commendable but could be strategically advanced by waiting to see how the platforms respond to the European Union’s new Digital Services Act before insisting on Congressional action. And the request that platforms voluntarily adopt “zero tolerance” terms of service for antisemitism is unrealistic and likely to backfire against Jews if—as is likely—it triggers over-enforcement. As for the National Strategy’s recommended tactics of public condemnation, counter-speech and voluntary corporate sanctions, the proposals have the best likelihood of success if they trigger rigorous empirical research into what kind of counter-speech and what kinds of sanctions are likely to work in context. Otherwise, the risk of failure, resource waste, and backlash from under-examined policies could undermine the National Strategy’s anti-antisemitism goals.

The National Strategy breaks important ground in centering anti-antisemitism in American policy. The normalization of antisemitism, with its centrality to white nationalism, must be resisted in order to protect both Jews and American democracy as a whole. The evaluation here is intended to increase the likelihood of success so that the White House’s efforts can avoid dismissal as mere political theater.

Keywords: antisemitism, U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism, content moderation, social media platforms, Section 230, EU Digital Services Act, GPT-4, First Amendment, disclosure, counter-speech, corporate sanctions, hate speech