Define to Defeat Act of 2025
HB4087, titled the “Define to Defeat Act of 2025,” would require the federal government to use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism, along with its examples, when addressing antisemitism in certain civil rights contexts. The bill’s findings state that Congress views the IHRA definition as a clear, objective tool for identifying contemporary antisemitism and for improving monitoring, investigation, and policymaking related to anti-Jewish discrimination.
The bill directs the head of each federal department or agency to include the IHRA definition in anti-discrimination training and education materials. It also requires federal courts, in any criminal or civil jury trial involving antisemitism, to include the definition in jury instructions. In addition, when federal agencies review, investigate, or decide whether conduct violates specified civil rights laws on the basis of race, religion, color, ethnicity, or national origin, they must consider whether the conduct was motivated in whole or in part by antisemitism.
The bill would affect the administration and interpretation of several federal civil rights laws by making the IHRA definition of antisemitism a reference point for federal agencies and courts. It applies to Title I of the Voting Rights Act, Titles II, III, IV, VI, and VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 1981, the Equal Educational Opportunities Act, and the federal hate-crime statute at 18 U.S.C. 249. The bill states that it does not expand enforcement authority, change substantive legal standards, or diminish First Amendment protections, but it would likely influence how agencies train staff, evaluate complaints, and frame antisemitism-related cases.
The bill’s stated purpose and findings reflect strong support for using a uniform federal definition to combat antisemitism, and the text emphasizes the persistence and seriousness of antisemitic harassment and hate incidents. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no direct legislative debate record in the materials. Based on the bill text alone, the measure is framed as a civil rights and anti-hate enforcement tool rather than a broader policy change.
The main point of contention is the choice to codify the IHRA definition and its examples as the governing federal reference for antisemitism. Supporters argue that a single, widely used definition improves consistency and enforcement, while critics of similar proposals often worry that the IHRA examples could be applied too broadly in ways that affect protected speech or criticism of Israel. The bill attempts to address those concerns by stating that it does not alter enforcement standards or infringe First Amendment rights, but the balance between anti-discrimination enforcement and free-speech protections remains the central issue.