NBI 15D calls on APA’s Council of Representatives to replace APA’s 2007 Resolution on Anti-Semitic and Anti-Jewish Prejudice with a new resolution that:

Clearly identifies antisemitism as identity-based hostility, prejudice, hatred, or violence against Jews as Jews and condemns “all antisemitic attitudes and actions.” The 2007 Resolution does not clearly define antisemitism.

Emphasizes that evidence-based criticism of Israel’s government, practices, policies, and actions and/or advocacy for Palestinian human rights and equality is not intrinsically antisemitic. The 2007 Resolution links criticism of the State of Israel to antisemitism.

As an institution, APA needs to honor its commitment to anti-oppressive initiatives while simultaneously protecting free speech for all psychologists and communities. This means that APA needs to adopt antisemitism-related policies that:

Address the real and alarming rise in antisemitism in our society: NBI 15D reaffirms the 2007 Resolution by identifying antisemitism as a very serious threat and a source of significant physical and psychological harm to the Jewish community.

Protect free speech. Definitions that conflate antisemitism with criticism of Israel are being used throughout the country to crack down on anyone (including Jewish people) who criticizes the State of Israel or supports Palestinian human rights. Human rights groups and scholars have criticized this conflation and its use by governments and other institutions to suppress free speech, including non-violent protest. We have all seen first-hand the many attempts to erode free speech in our country over the last year.

NBI 15D also helps to address the rise of Islamophobia and the dehumanization of SWANA/MENA people and Palestinians by unlinking criticism of Israel from the definition of antisemitism. Currently, people engaged in activism related to Palestinian rights are accused of committing hate speech, leading to job loss, doxxing, and silencing.

By differentiating antisemitism from criticism of the State of Israel, NBI 15D will help to protect APA members — Jewish and non-Jewish alike — from professional sanctions for engaging in principled speech and non-violent protest. At the same time, it will serve as a model for other professional associations.

Some Jewish psychologists who insist that criticism of Israel is antisemitic have spoken out strongly against NBI 15D. They argue that Council members should not be the ones defining antisemitism. But the issue of protecting human rights and free speech for all affects everyone. As APA’s legislative body, it is Council’s responsibility to create the shared language and understanding that’s essential for APA’s important work to resist antisemitism and ensure that we protect free speech and our most vulnerable APA members from targeting based on their concerns for human rights.

These opponents of NBI 15D also often present a misleading, monolithic view of the Jewish community and its relationship to Israel. Indeed, a recent survey of American Jews from September 2025 reveals that:

1. Only about a quarter say that they are very emotionally attached to Israel;
2. Almost two-thirds say that Israel has committed war crimes against Palestinians; and
3. Over one-third say that Israel has committed genocide.

Indeed, Jewish psychologists helped create NBI 15D and the FAQ you are currently reading. The diversity of the American Jewish community needs to be respected— both generally and within APA. Claims that concern for Palestinians is antisemitic misrepresent and harm swaths of the Jewish community inside and outside of APA.