Legislative efforts to combat pro-Palestinian demonstrations at home and abroad, compared

Photo via Lily Franks/The New Political

In July, the House of Commons passed an order to amend the Terrorism Act of 2000 to designate British pro-Palestinian direct action group Palestine Action a terrorist organization. Since then, the London Metropolitan Police have made hundreds of arrests at demonstrations against the law in July and August, and, most recently, last weekend, when police arrested 857 at a demonstration at Parliament Square. 

In the United States, targeted opposition to pro-Palestinian demonstrations has looked a bit different. 

The Trump administration followed through with the president’s promise to designate cartels and other transnational organizations as foreign terrorist organizations within hours of his inauguration in January. But despite his harsh criticisms of pro-Palestinian campus demonstrations, the president took no steps to extend this designation to pro-Palestine groups. 

In June, a bill introduced in the House of Representatives made a case for the designation of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Muslim civil rights group, as a foreign terrorist organization, alleging a relationship between CAIR and Hamas. In May, a provision that would have revoked tax-exempt status from non-profits deemed to be “supporting terrorism” was removed from the GOP budget bill commonly known as the “Big, Beautiful Bill.” The Anti-Defamation League, a New York-based non-governmental organization founded to combat antisemitism and other forms of hate speech, has accused Students for Justice in Palestine of supporting terrorism. However, there has been no recent and unified effort to follow in the UK’s footsteps. 

Instead, U.S. states, including Ohio, have taken a different approach. In March, lawmakers reintroduced S.B. 87, a bill originally introduced in the Senate in June of 2024, which would expand the definition of ethnic intimidation and codify the International Holocaust Remembrance Association’s definition of antisemitism. 

The IHRA’s working definition of antisemitism, which includes “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,” among its examples of antisemitism, has long been the subject of controversy in relation to its adoption by governments and legislatures. In 2024, the United States Senate received a statement from around 1,200 Jewish university professors criticizing the Antisemitism Awareness Act, which sought to codify a 2019 Trump administration executive order adopting the definition. Kenneth Stern, a lead drafter of the IHRA, criticized the executive order in 2019. “I’m a Zionist. But on a college campus, where the purpose is to explore ideas, anti-Zionists have a right to free expression,” Stern wrote in an opinion piece for the Guardian.

State Senator Terry Johnson, R-McDermott, said the bill would address a “concerning wave of extremist demonstrations” on Ohio college campuses. By amending the definition of ethnic intimidation to include rioting and aggravated rioting, the bill would make it possible to bring certain rioting charges to a fifth-degree felony. Rioting itself is a first-degree misdemeanor under Ohio law and is defined as disorderly conduct by five or more persons, including that “​​with purpose to hinder, impede, or obstruct the orderly process of administration or instruction at an educational institution, or to interfere with or disrupt lawful activities carried on at such institution.” 

Speaking on behalf of the Ohio Divest Coalition in August at a Columbus Press Conference organized by a coalition of Ohio pro-Palestinian advocacy groups, Ann Ghazy spoke of Senate Bill 87 and warned the audience: “Today, our activism faces other threats.” Ghazy also testified in opposition to the bill at Senate hearings in December.

Other states have moved to codify the IRHA definition through legislation this year, though specifics vary. In July, North Carolina formally codified the working definition. In April, Kansas Governor Laura Kelley signed a bill declaring antisemitism, in accordance with the IRHA definition, to be against the public policy of the state of Kansas. The bill specifically mentions institutions of public education, the ACLU noted.