Missouri governor signs bill targeting antisemitic acts in schools
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- Kehoe signed a bill mandating schools clearly define antisemitism.
- The law requires K-12 schools and public universities to report harassment.
- The law uses the IHRA definition while allowing schools flexibility to use it as a guide.
Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe signed a bill on Thursday mandating schools to clearly define antisemitism as Missouri steps into a national debate over antisemitism on college campuses.
The new law, which takes effect in August, requires all K-12 schools and public universities to report incidents and complaints of antisemitic discrimination or harassment to the state’s Title VI coordinator.
Dozens of states have codified the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism in some form since it was adopted in 2016. In 2023, then-Gov. Mike Parson signed a proclamation formally adopting the definition.
Kehoe, a Republican, said it is “a fundamental right for a student to be able to learn, free from hate,” at a bill signing last week.
After the start of the Israel-Gaza War, some states have adopted the definition in anti-discrimination law in light of skyrocketing reports of antisemitic incidents.
Last year, Kansas Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly signed a similar bill adopting the IHRA working definition of antisemitism as a legal tool for identifying discrimination.
The definition reads: “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”
The Anti-Defamation League, an advocacy group seeking to combat antisemitism, tracked 48 antisemitic incidents in Missouri in 2025, and eight in the Kansas City metro. In Kansas, the ADL reported eight antisemitic instances during the same time period.
Reports of antisemitic incidents peaked in 2023 in Missouri, where 374 incidents were recorded.
Supporters said college and university campuses have become increasingly hostile for Jewish students. The House Committee on Emerging Issues received several pieces of testimony from students that relayed instances of harassment or intimidation on campus.
“I have been harassed online by classmates who have created burner accounts and referenced Hamas acts of terrorism to intimidate me,” Tim Mellman, a senior at Washington University in St. Louis, wrote to the committee.
Title VI protection
The bill’s text states it shouldn’t be interpreted as conflicting with the First Amendment and existing antidiscrimination law at the federal level. It also requires the Missouri State Board of Education to monitor any federally recognized forms of discrimination that occur at a school, after a previous version only required reports on antisemitic acts.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination based on race, color or national origin for any federally funded program. Though it doesn’t include religion, Jewish students have petitioned the federal government when a school allowed or failed to protect them from harassment or intimidation.
With remedies already available, critics said the bill could chill speech.
“When folks see that there are essentially a prescribed list of things that if they say they could be investigated and punished under university policies, a reasonable person would steer well clear of those prohibitions for fear or risking suspension or expulsion from their institution,” said Tyler Coward, lead lead counsel for government affairs at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, an organization that promotes free speech.
Controversial definition
Hank Stern, who is responsible for drafting IHRA’s definition, has warned against adopting it in anti-discrimination laws.
“It was never intended to be used as a de facto hate speech code,” Stern wrote in an essay published by the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University. “Many pro-Israel Jewish groups eventually weaponized the definition to suppress student speech and to go after faculty for what they said, materials included in their courses, and speakers they invited to campus.”
Coward said he believes the language was not drafted to be enshrined in law and is unconstitutionally vague.
The state included a list of examples from IHRA of antisemitism that Coward said he believes could violate free speech rights. In particular, one of the examples of antisemitism is drawing a comparison between contemporary Israeli policy and that of the Nazis.
“However offensive one might find those comparisons. or engaging in so-called double standards to Israel, those are not forms of unprotected expression,” Coward said. “Under this law, individuals are free to criticize every country in the world, including making comparisons for every country in the world to that of Nazi Germany, except for Israel.”
The bill uses the IHRA’s definition, but the state will allow some flexibility to schools to create their own definitions with the IHRA as a “tool” or “guide.”
The bill was relatively uncontroversial in the Missouri Capitol, passing the Senate unanimously and by a vote of 100 to 17 in the House, with 19 members voting present.
