Ill Defined

"There's a false narrative that the [Working] definition [of antisemitism] censors criticism of the Israeli government. I consider it complete nonsense," [Representative Ritchie] Torres [D-NY] said in an interview with NPR.

"If you can figure out how to critique the policies and practices of the Israeli government without calling for the destruction of Israel itself, then no reasonable person would ever accuse you of antisemitism," he added.
House passes bill aimed to combat antisemitism amid college unrest

Okay. Fair enough. But...

Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:

[...]

Applying double standards by requiring of [the State of Israel] a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
Working definition of antisemitism

Has Representative Torres actually read the Working definition of antisemitism? Leaving aside the appropriateness of applying a double standard to Israel, and the more vexing question of who would determine that a double standard, was, in fact, being applied, if H. R. 6090 adopts the "definition of antisemitism set forth by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance for the enforcement of Federal antidiscrimination laws concerning education programs or activities, and for other purposes" and that definition explicitly allows for criticism of the States of Israel that falls well short of "calling for the destruction of Israel itself" to be defined as antisemitic, it stands to reason that one could, in fact make a "critique the policies and practices of the Israeli government without calling for the destruction of Israel itself" and yet be accused by a reasonable person of antisemitism, because that person is thinking in accordance with the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's Working definition of antisemitism. And from there institutions could be sanctioned under American civil rights legislation.

House Resolution 6090, the "Antisemitism Awareness Act," may be useful. I don't know. My initial impression is that it's political posturing. It dates back to the first weeks of the current conflict between Israel and Hamas, so it isn't, properly speaking, a reaction to the current wave of anti-Israel/pro-Palestinian protests on American university campuses. Be that as it may, it's being positioned as a means for college administrators to combat antisemitism on campus, seeking to expand the Trump Administration executive order 13899, which was intended to make antisemitism a civil rights violation. Senator Rick Scott (R-Florida) has already sent a letter to Attorney General Garland asking that the Justice Department investigate, and prosecute, organizations behind the current campus protest movement. And this is mainly political, accusing the Biden Administration of supporting the protest organizations, and effectively asking the Attorney General to be as zealous in prosecuting political allies as it supposedly is at targeting rivals. (Which seems strange, given that it casts those rivals as having done nothing wrong. Apparently, Senator Scott believes the answer to politically-motivated law enforcement are more political prosecutions.)

I understand the impulse to say: "antisemitism bad" and seek action based on that belief. I'm less certain that a simplistic understanding of the problem makes a good basis for legislation, especially when it's not clear that one is familiar with what's being put in place. According to the Working definition of antisemitism, "Antisemitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law." Which makes sense. But that speaks to a distinction between the working definition and laws, which is appropriate, given the the authors are not legislators. I'm unconvinced of the wisdom of eroding that distinction. Representative Torres may be working under the presumption that a "reasonableness" standard will simply trump any legislation if it comes up in the courts. I'm unconvinced of the wisdom of that, too.