What does it mean to be Jewish in a time of rising antisemitism?

There is a quiet revolution happening in how America classifies identity, and California is once again at the leading edge. By moving to codify Jewishness as an ethnic and racial identity, the state is responding to a lived reality: antisemitism rarely confines itself to attacks on religious practice. Synagogue shootings, campus harassment, and online conspiracies often target Jews as a people, not as worshippers. The legal distinction matters because many anti-discrimination statutes—and the enforcement mechanisms behind them—are triggered by race or ethnicity, not religion alone. If the state is to protect Jewish Californians effectively, the argument goes, its laws must reflect the full nature of the threat. Yet this move is not without its own tensions. Some Jewish communities and legal scholars worry that redefining Jewishness in racial terms risks flattening a rich, multifaceted identity into a single legal box. Judaism is simultaneously a faith, a culture, a lineage, and a civilization—and for many, reducing it to race feels both inaccurate and reductive. There is also the uncomfortable historical echo: racial definitions of Jewishness were the foundation of Nazi-era persecution, and some argue that enshrining such categories in law, however well-intentioned, risks reinforcing the very frameworks that enabled dehumanization. The debate also opens a broader reflection on how modern democracies handle group protection. In an era of identity-based politics, the law is increasingly asked to name and classify the groups it shields. This can be a powerful tool—it gives prosecutors and civil rights agencies clear jurisdiction—but it also invites endless definitional disputes. If Jewishness is a race, what about converts? What about secular Jews? What about those who identify as Jewish ethnically but practice another faith? These aren't merely academic questions; they will shape real cases in real courtrooms. What makes this story significant beyond California is its symbolic weight. As the first state to take this step, California is setting a precedent that other states—and potentially federal agencies—may follow. It also places the state squarely in the middle of the ongoing national conversation about antisemitism, which has intensified since October 7, 2023. Proponents argue that recognizing the ethnic dimension of Jewish identity is a necessary, pragmatic response to a clear and present danger. Critics counter that legal categories are blunt instruments, and that the fight against hatred requires more than reclassification—it requires a cultural reckoning that no statute can deliver. Both sides, in their own way, are trying to answer the same question: how do we protect a people when the hatred against them refuses to fit neatly into our legal categories? The answer California offers is that we expand the categories. Whether that expansion brings clarity or chaos remains to be seen, but the debate itself is a necessary one. Source: https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/6044413-debate-jewish-religion-race/