Assembly Bill 387 creates the “New Jersey Anti-Semitism Task Force” within the Department of State. The task force is intended to study anti-Semitism, compile evidence about its history and current manifestations, and develop recommendations to address harms caused by anti-Semitism in New Jersey. The bill’s findings section frames anti-Semitism as a form of racism and bigotry, cites national and state hate-crime data, and emphasizes the need to protect Jewish communities, institutions, and students.
The task force would be a permanent 18-member body made up of legislative leaders or designees, chairs of the Holocaust Education Commission and Israel Commission, representatives from organizations such as Hadassah, the Anti-Defamation League, and the Simon Wiesenthal Center, state law enforcement and bias-crimes officials, and several public members. It would organize after a majority of members are appointed, select leadership, meet at least four times per year with at least one in-person meeting, accept public testimony, and receive staff support from state agencies. Members would serve without compensation but could be reimbursed for expenses.
Substantively, the task force would research anti-Semitism on college campuses, state universities, and more broadly, with a New Jersey-specific focus. It would examine definitions and ideology, stereotypes and misconceptions about Jewish people, and discrimination or systemic failings affecting fair treatment of Jewish people. Based on that work, it would recommend remedies, public education strategies, and policy changes, including ways to eliminate state laws or policies that disproportionately and negatively affect Jewish people as a group.
The bill requires the task force to issue an annual report to the Governor and Legislature, with the first report due within 12 months of its initial meeting. Because the bill supplements Title 52 of the Revised Statutes, it would add a new state entity and reporting requirement rather than directly changing criminal, education, or civil-rights statutes. Its practical effect would be to create an ongoing advisory and research mechanism focused on anti-Semitism, hate incidents, and related policy responses.
No committee transcripts or votes are provided, so there is no recorded legislative debate or voting history to gauge support or opposition. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears framed as a public-safety, civil-rights, and education initiative, with an emphasis on protecting Jewish communities and improving state responses to hate incidents. Potential points of contention, if raised, could involve the scope and permanence of the task force, its membership composition, and whether its recommendations could affect broader policy debates on campus speech, discrimination, or state law reform.
The bill would add a new permanent task force to the Department of State under Title 52, creating a formal state advisory body on anti-Semitism. It would not itself create new criminal penalties or civil causes of action, but it would require annual reporting, public meetings, research, and policy recommendations that could influence future legislation, agency practices, and educational programming affecting Jewish communities, schools, universities, law enforcement, and civil-rights enforcement.
There is no committee testimony or vote record available, so the legislative sentiment cannot be measured directly from discussion or roll call data. The bill’s text strongly signals support for combating anti-Semitism and protecting Jewish residents, and the bipartisan-style sponsorship and co-sponsorship suggest at least some cross-party interest. Overall, the measure is presented in a positive, remedial frame centered on hate-crime prevention, education, and community safety.
Because no hearing transcript or vote history is available, no specific objections are documented. The most likely areas of contention are the breadth and permanence of the task force, the inclusion of advocacy organizations and political appointees on the membership roster, and the bill’s language about reviewing state laws and policies that may negatively affect Jewish people as a group. Some observers could also question whether the task force’s focus on campuses, public education, and policy remedies overlaps with existing commissions or agencies.