Who Is Igniting Antisemitism in America?

The ADL receipts are in. Right-wing extremists are responsible for effectively 100% of antisemitic attacks in America. So why are politicians pointing at Muslims and the Left?

I want to begin with a personal story.

In February 2017, antisemitic extremists demolished a Jewish cemetery near my home in Philadelphia. Headstones were toppled. A sacred space was desecrated. My response was not to write a think piece about it. I activated my local Muslim community to show up—immediately, physically, with our hands—to stand in solidarity with our Jewish neighbors. We helped clean up the destruction that hatred left behind.

I share this not for credit. I share it because the conversation I am about to have requires context. I have combated antisemitism my entire career as a human rights lawyer. I have written about it extensively. I have spoken at the funerals of Holocaust survivors—and I was honored to serve as a pallbearer for one. Many of my most steadfast allies in this work are Jewish leaders, Jewish activists, and Jewish readers who stand shoulder to shoulder with me against hate and oppression in all its forms.

I reject antisemitism unequivocally. I always have. I always will.

2018: Speaking at the funeral of a Holocaust survivor, where I was also honored to serve as a pallbearer.

And it is precisely because I reject antisemitism—because I take it seriously as a moral catastrophe and a human rights crisis—that I am deeply troubled by how the ADL’s new report on antisemitism is being used. Those citing it most loudly are refusing to acknowledge what the ADL’s own data actually tells us about who is driving the spike in antisemitism in America. We cannot cure a cancer unless we acknowledge what is causing that cancer. So, who is igniting antisemitism in America? Let’s Address This.

What the ADL’s Own Data Actually Shows

The Anti-Defamation League—the organization whose entire mission is documenting and combating antisemitism—has kept meticulous records of antisemitic incidents in the United States for decades. I have downloaded their full dataset of every single documented act of antisemitism and made it publicly available for anyone to examine. The link is here: ADL Full Dataset — 40,180 Cases

Since 2002, the ADL has documented 40,180 cases of antisemitism in the United States.

The ADL HEAT MAP also identifies those attacks by the motivating ideology behind each one and allows users to filter by category, as follows:

This is significant because the ADL and similarly situated orgs have repeatedly claimed that antisemitism is rapidly growing among the Left, among universities, and among Muslims. Now we have the ADLs data to document what that looks like. And the data is stunning. Of those 40,180 documented antisemitic incidents, how many were motivated by “Islamist” ideology or Leftist ideology?

The answer is three.

Not three percent. Three incidents.

Those two green dots represent the totality of 25 years of ADL-documented antisemitic attacks attributable to anyone claiming Muslim motivation. And lest anyone pivot to blaming the political left: the ADL documents only one antisemitic attack attributable to leftist ideology.

All the rest—effectively 100% of 40,180 documented antisemitic incidents—come from right-wing extremists, white supremacists, and Christian nationalists.

This is not my data. This is ADL data. You can visit the ADL HEAT MAP right now and conduct the exact same search. The very organization that exists to fight antisemitism has documented, in its own records and on its own website, that the existential, catastrophic, overwhelming threat to Jewish Americans in this country comes not from Muslim communities, not from the Left, and not from college students—but from the same right-wing extremist movement that is simultaneously undermining our democracy, our institutions, and the rule of law.

Read that again: 3 Versus 40,180

Ask yourself, how many media outlets have reported this disparity in any meaningful sort of way? And if we refuse to identify the source of antisemitism, how can we hope to effectively deploy resources to stop that antisemitism?

But this is only the first of multiple questions on who is igniting antisemitism in America.

The ADL’s Credibility Problem

I must address something that further complicates this. It will make some readers uncomfortable. But honest conversations sometimes cause the most discomfort.

The ADL’s new report says antisemitism is at a 40-year high. And antisemitism being at a 40-year high is a genuine crisis that demands a genuine response. But experts and institutions are now on record questioning whether the ADL’s methodology is reliable enough to make that determination—and the concerns are serious.

First, while the ADL’s own stated methodology claims it does not count criticism of Israel as antisemitic—the ADL report repeatedly states that criticism of Israel is antisemitic. For example, the report states:

Israel and Zionism: ADL is careful to not conflate general criticism of Israel or anti-Israel activism with antisemitism. Legitimate political protest, support for Palestinian rights or expressions of opposition to Israeli policies are not included in the Audit.

I agree with this. The only problem is the ADL itself does not agree with this, as the following sentence which adds:

ADL’s approach to Israel-related expressions comports with the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism.

The IHRA working definition of antisemitism literally conflates criticism of Israel with antisemitism. As the National Institute of Health concludes in its comprehensive analysis and rejection of the IHRA definition of antisemitism:

We conclude that the [IHRA] definition and its list of examples ought to be rejected. The urgency to do so stems from the fact that pro-Israel activists can and have mobilised the IHRA document for political goals unrelated to tackling antisemitism, notably to stigmatise and silence critics of the Israeli government. This causes widespread self-censorship, has an adverse impact on freedom of speech, and impedes action against the unjust treatment of Palestinians. We also identify intrinsic problems in the way the definition refers to criticism of Israel similar ‘to that leveled against any other country’, ambiguous wording about ‘the power of Jews as a collective’, lack of clarity as to the Jewish people’s ‘right to self-determination’, and its denial of obvious racism. We consider alternative definitions and prefer one like the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) definition, ‘hostility to or prejudice against Jews’, with the addition of the words ‘as Jews’.

Thus, even in back to back statements the ADL contradicts itself, and reputable organizations like the NIH has written extensively on the dangers of the IHRA definition of antisemitism.

Second, the ADL’s own audit of its own data contradicts itself. While earlier it claims to not conflate criticism of Israel with antisemitism, it now openly declares that criticism of Israel is the same as supporting terrorism against Jews:

We saw an explosion of anti-Israel activism that incorporated expressions of opposition to Zionism, as well as support for resistance against Israel or Zionists that could be perceived as supporting terrorism or attacks on Jews, Israelis or Zionists.

If expressions of opposition to Israel’s actions in Palestine is defined as “supporting terrorism,” then free speech is dead. This is an excellent example of why the NIH, and other reputable organizations, reject the IHRA and ADL definition of antisemitism. Because it has little to do with protecting Jews as a people, and much to do with censoring criticism of Israel as a government.

The ADL report thus extensively cites university protests—many of them led by Jewish students calling on universities to divest from Israel in protest of its genocide of Palestinians—as examples of antisemitic rhetoric. The report never explains why peaceful free speech and boycott constitute antisemitism. It never explains how Jewish students exercising their First Amendment rights to protest Israel’s government policies are engaged in anti-Jewish hatred.

Third, the ADL’s methodological failure is so significant that Wikipedia editors—in near consensus—voted to declare the ADL “generally unreliable” on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. As the Jewish Telegraph Agency reported, dozens of Wikipedia editors concluded that the ADL “acts primarily as a pro-Israel organization and tends to label legitimate criticism of Israel as antisemitism.” One editor wrote:

ADL no longer appears to adhere to a serious, mainstream and intellectually cogent definition of antisemitism, but has instead given into the shameless politicization of the very subject that it was originally esteemed for being reliable on.

The concerns extended to ADL leadership specifically. According to the JTA, editors cited a pattern of troubling statements by ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt—including claiming that student protests were Iranian proxies, comparing the keffiyeh to the swastika, praising Elon Musk after he promoted an antisemitic post on X, and comparing anti-Zionism to white supremacy. Those statements prompted a staff revolt within the ADL itself.

And fourth, there is the definitional question. The U.S. Department of Justice defines a hate crime as acts of violence or threats of violence motivated by bias based on protected characteristics. A reasonable person would expect the ADL—the nation’s leading antisemitism watchdog—to apply that same standard. Whether and how consistently it does so matters enormously to the integrity of its 40-year high claim. But instead, we see the ADL define peaceful speech as a hate crime. This is an indefensible position.

I raise these concerns not to dismiss antisemitism, but because I take antisemitism seriously. If we are serious about fighting antisemitism, we need reliable data, honest methodology, and an organization whose credibility is beyond reproach. An organization that responded to Elon Musk’s repeated Nazi salutes as an “awkward gesture in a moment of enthusiasm” has forfeited the moral authority to be taken at face value when it claims to be the definitive voice on what antisemitism is and who is committing it.

What Real Opposition to Antisemitism Looks Like

Let me be as direct as I know how to be.

Antisemitism is bad. There is no “but” after that sentence. Hatred of Jewish people is indefensible, inexcusable, and a moral scourge that every person of conscience must actively oppose—not rhetorically, but materially, with their time, their voice, and their presence. That is why I have worked throughout my career alongside Jewish leaders and activists who understand, as I do, that “never again” must mean never again for anyone—Palestinian, Jewish, Muslim, or otherwise.

What I will not do—what genuine opposition to antisemitism requires that we never do—is allow the word “antisemitism” to be weaponized as a tool to silence criticism of a government’s war crimes, to smear Muslim Americans with baseless accusations contradicted by 25 years of data, or to whitewash a genocide by declaring that those who oppose it are anti-Jewish (even when those opposed are Jewish themselves).

That is not fighting antisemitism. That is exploiting the memory of Jewish suffering to shield Israeli government policy from accountability. And it dishonors every Holocaust survivor whose funeral I have attended, every Jewish ally who has stood beside me in this fight, and every Jewish student who has had the courage to stand up for Palestinian lives at the risk of being falsely called antisemitic for doing so.

None of this is to say antisemitism doesn’t exist among some Muslims, or among some on the Left. It is to say that the data the ADL itself presents shows a massive disparity on where antisemitism in America is originating from, and that is where we must place our resources to combat. Anyone looking to combat antisemitism in America will find me as a steadfast ally in my capacity as a human being, as a human rights lawyer, as an American, and as an observant Muslim—because it is the right thing to do.

Photo Credit: CBS

Conclusion

The ADL report presents a strange dichotomy. The methodology demonstrates that the data is likely flawed, yet simultaneously, even within that flawed data, it remains clear who is behind virtually all antisemitic attacks in the United States: from the right-wing extremist movement that marched in Charlottesville chanting “Jews will not replace us.” From the white supremacist who murdered 11 Jewish worshippers at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh. From the Christian nationalist movement that has systematically targeted Jewish institutions, Jewish communities, and Jewish identity for generations. From the taxpayer funded organizations in Tennessee who deny a Jewish couple the right to adopt a child, because they are Jewish.

That is the antisemitism crisis in America. It is real. It is documented. It demands our full attention and our full resistance.

What it does not demand—what it cannot afford—is being hijacked by bad-faith actors who use it to demonize Muslims, silence Palestinian solidarity, and protect the architects of a genocide from the accountability that human rights demand.

I will continue to stand against antisemitism because hatred of Jewish people is indefensible and we cannot allow that any Jewish person is wrong for being Jewish. And I will continue to name who is actually committing antisemitism and hold them accountable—because truth demands nothing less.

---

Qasim Rashid is a human rights attorney, author, and host of Let’s Address This — a platform dedicated to human rights, accountability, and the facts that corporate media refuses to deliver. Subscribe, share, and let’s remain relentless in our mission for a more perfect Union

.