This docum ent does not reflect the intent or official position of the bill sponsor or House of Representatives.
STORAGE NAME: h0187.CRJ
DATE: 11/29/2023
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES STAFF ANALYSIS
BILL #: HB 187 Antisemitism
SPONSOR(S): Gottlieb
TIED BILLS: IDEN./SIM. BILLS: SB 148
REFERENCE ACTION ANALYST STAFF DIRECTOR or
BUDGET/POLICY CHIEF
1) Criminal Justice Subcommittee Leshko Hall
2) Judiciary Committee
SUMMARY ANALYSIS
Section 877.19, F.S., requires all law enforcement agencies in Florida to submit a monthly report to the Florida
Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) concerning any incidents of criminal acts that evidence prejudice
based on race, religion, ethnicity, color, ancestry, sexual orientation, or national origin. FDLE is required to
compile and disseminate such information upon request to any local law enforcement agency, unit of local
government, or state agency. Additionally, the Florida Attorney General (AGO) must publish an annual
summary of the compiled data.
The AGO’s 2021 summary on hate crimes detailed a 16.5 percent overall increase in hate crimes in Florida
between 2020 and 2021 and noted that in 2021, 13.5 percent of all reported hate crimes were motivated by
religion. Moreover, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) reports that since 2020, antisemitic incidents in Florida
increased over 100 percent, rising from 127 incidents in 2020 to 269 incidents in 2022. On a national level,
Federal Bureau of Investigation data shows the number of reported hate crimes in the United States are the
highest since collection of such data began in 1991, and more than doubled between 2014 and 2022.
According to the ADL, in 2022, Florida was in the top five states where the highest number of antisemitic
incidents occurred.
The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), formerly known as the Task Force for International
Cooperation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance, and Research, was formed in 1998, and its current
membership consists of 35 countries. IHRA’s Committee on Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial crafted a non-
legally binding working definition of “antisemitism,” which was fully adopted by the IRHA in 2016. The working
definition was constructed by building an international consensus on the meaning of “antisemitism” in order to
assist nations in addressing the rise in hate and discrimination. Subsequently, 43 United Nations member
states, including the United States, a wide range of other political entities, including a large number of regional,
state, and local governments, and various international organizations have adopted or endorsed IHRA’s
working definition.
Florida law currently codifies a definition of “anti-Semitism” in s. 1000.05(8), F.S., relating to the identification of
discrimination in K-20 public education, which closely mirrors the IHRA working definition of antisemitism.
However, the definition does not apply generally to all sections of Florida law and thus is not applicable in
identifying and reporting other instances of discrimination or incidents of hate crimes.
HB 187 creates s. 1.015, F.S., to define “antisemitism” based on the working definition developed and adopted
by the IHRA as – a certain perception of Jewish individuals which may be expressed as hatred toward such
individuals. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish and non-Jewish
individuals and their property and toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities – and to provide
contemporary examples of antisemitism. The bill codifies the definition and examples in Chapter 1 of the
Florida Statutes, relating to Definitions, making them applicable to all sections of Florida Law.
The bill provides an effective date of July 1, 2024. STORAGE NAME: h0187.CRJ PAGE: 2
DATE: 11/29/2023
FULL ANALYSIS
I. SUBSTANTIVE ANALYSIS
A. EFFECT OF PROPOSED CHANGES:
Background
Evidencing Prejudice While Committing an Offense
Section 775.085, F.S., reclassifies the penalty for any felony or misdemeanor to the next highest
degree if the commission of the offense evidences prejudice based on the race, color, ancestry,
ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, homeless status, or advanced age of the victim, as
follows:
A misdemeanor of the second-degree is reclassified to a misdemeanor of the first-degree.
A misdemeanor of the first-degree is reclassified to a felony of the third-degree.
A felony of the third-degree is reclassified to a felony of the second-degree.
A felony of the second-degree is reclassified to a felony of the first-degree.
A felony of the first-degree is reclassified to a life felony.
The offender must have perceived, known, or have had reasonable grounds to perceive or know that
the victim was within one of the classes delineated above for the penalty reclassification to apply.
1
Reporting of Hate Crimes
Section 877.19, F.S., requires all law enforcement agencies in Florida to submit a monthly report to the
Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) concerning any incidents of criminal acts that evidence
prejudice based on race, religion, ethnicity, color, ancestry, sexual orientation, or national origin. FDLE
is required to compile and disseminate such information upon request to any local law enforcement
agency, unit of local government, or state agency. Additionally, the Florida Attorney General (AGO)
must publish an annual summary of the compiled data.
2
The AGO’s 2021 summary on hate crimes detailed a 16.5 percent overall increase in hate crimes in
Florida between 2020 and 2021 and noted that in 2021, 13.5 percent of all reported hate crimes were
motivated by religion.
3
Moreover, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) reports that since 2020,
antisemitic incidents in Florida increased over 100 percent, rising from 127 incidents in 2020 to 269
incidents in 2022.
4,5
On a national level, Federal Bureau of Investigation data shows the number of
reported hate crimes in the United States are the highest since collection of such data began in 1991,
and more than doubled between 2014 and 2022.
6
According to the ADL, in 2022, Florida was in the top
five states where the highest number of antisemitic incidents occurred.
7
International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance
1
S. 775.085(1)(a) and (3), F.S.
2
S. 877.19(2) and (4), F.S.
3
Florida Attorney General, Hate Crimes in Florida January 1, 2021 – December 31, 2021,
https://www.myfloridalegal.com/files/pdf/page/BE0185D36969417B852589270066D783/Web+Link.pdf (last visited Nov. 29, 2023).
4
Center for Extremism, Audit of Antisemitic Incidents 2022, ADL (Mar. 23, 2023), https://www.adl.org/resources/report/audit-
antisemitic-incidents-2022 (last visited Nov. 29, 2023).
5
Center for Extremism, Hate in the Sunshine State: Extremism & Antisemitism in Florida, 2020-2022, ADL (Sept. 13, 2022),
https://www.adl.org/resources/report/hate-sunshine-state-extremism-antisemitism-florida-2020-2022 (last visited Nov. 29, 2023).
6
Tori Morales Pinales, How reports of hate crimes in the US were already at record highs, in 4 charts, CNN (Oct. 29, 2023),
https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/29/us/hate-crimes-antisemitism-anti-muslim-dg/index.html (last visited Nov. 29, 2023) (Hate crime
reporting to the FBI is voluntary and only about 80% of agencies submit data; compliance changes from year to year. Additionally,
according to the FBI’s National Crime Victimization Survey, fewer than half of hate crime victims report to police.)
7
Center for Extremism, supra, at 4. STORAGE NAME: h0187.CRJ PAGE: 3
DATE: 11/29/2023
The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), formerly known as the Task Force for
International Cooperation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance, and Research, was formed in 1998
by the former Swedish Prime Minister Göran Persson, and its current membership consists of 35
countries.
8
IHRA’s mission is to uphold the commitments contained in its founding document, the
Declaration of the Stockholm International Forum on the Holocaust (Stockholm Declaration).
The Stockholm Declaration is the product of the January 2000 International Forum convened in
Stockholm. The Forum was attended by representatives of 46 governments, including: 23 Heads of
State or Prime Ministers and 14 Deputy Prime Ministers or Ministers.
9
Some of the main tenants of the
Stockholm Declaration include promoting the education, remembrance, and research of the Holocaust,
commemorating victims of the Holocaust, and encouraging an annual day of remembrance in each
member country.
10
IHRA’s Committee on Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial crafted a non-legally binding working
definition of “antisemitism,” which was fully adopted by the IHRA in 2016.
11
The working definition was
constructed by building an international consensus on the meaning of “antisemitism” in order to assist
nations in addressing the rise in hate and discrimination. Subsequently, 43 United Nations member
states, including the United States, and a wide range of other political entities, including a large number
of regional, state, and local governments have adopted or endorsed IHRA’s working definition.
12
Moreover, the following international organizations have expressed support for the working definition of
antisemitism: the United Nations, the European Union, the Organization of American States, the
Council of Europe, and PARLASUR, the Parliament of MERCOSUR.
13,14
IHRA’s working definition of antisemitism provides:
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.
15
IHRA also provides the following contemporary examples of antisemitism:
Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical
ideology or an extremist view of religion.
Making mendacious, dehumanizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such
or the power of Jews as collective – such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth
about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy,
government or other societal institutions.
Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing
committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-
Jews.
Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the
genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its
supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
8
IHRA, Introduction, https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/about-us (last visited Nov. 29, 2023).
9
IHRA, Stockholm Declaration, https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/about-us/stockholm-declaration (last visited Nov. 29, 2023).
10
Id.
11
IHRA, What is antisemitism?, https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/resources/working-definitions-charters/working-definition-
antisemitism (last visited Nov. 29, 2023).
12
IHRA, Information on endorsement and adoption of the IHRA working definition of antisemitism,
https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/resources/working-definitions-charters/working-definition-antisemitism/adoption-endorsement
(last visited Nov. 29, 2023).
13
Id.
14
MERCOSUR is a regional trade bloc comprised of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay. Celeste Castillejo, Nicki Fleischner,
Chase Harrison, Luisa Horwitz, Mark Keller, and Jon Orbach, Explainer: What Is Mercosur?, American Society Council of the Americas
(Aug. 23, 2022), https://www.as-coa.org/articles/explainer-what-mercosur (last visited Nov. 29, 2023).
15
IHRA, supra, at 11. STORAGE NAME: h0187.CRJ PAGE: 4
DATE: 11/29/2023
Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the
Holocaust.
Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of
Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the
existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of
any other democratic nation.
Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g. claims of
Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel and Israelis.
Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
16
Current Definition in Florida Law
Florida law currently codifies a definition of “anti-Semitism” in s. 1000.05(8), F.S., relating to the
identification of discrimination in K-20 public education. The definition closely mirrors IHRA’s working
definition of antisemitism and specifies that the term “anti-Semitism” includes:
A certain perception of the Jewish people, which may be expressed as hatred toward
Jewish people, rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism directed toward a
person, his or her property, or toward Jewish community institutions or religious facilities.
17
Additionally, s. 1000.05(8), F.S., also includes the following examples of anti-Semitism, including
those related to Israel, which are almost identical to those provided by IHRA:
Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews, often in the name of a
radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about
Jews as such or the power of Jews as a collective, especially, but not exclusively, the
myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy,
government or other societal institutions.
Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing
committed by a single Jewish person or group, the State of Israel, or even for acts
committed by non-Jews.
Accusing Jews as a people or the State of Israel of inventing or exaggerating the
Holocaust.
Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or the alleged priorities of Jews
worldwide, than to the interest of their own nations.
18
Demonizing Israel by using the symbols and images associated with classic anti-
Semitism to characterize Israel or Israelis, drawing comparisons of contemporary
Israeli policy to that of the Nazis, or blaming Israel for all inter-religious or political
tensions.
Applying a double standard to Israel by requiring behavior of Israel that is not expected
or demanded of any other democratic nation or focusing peace or human rights
investigations only on Israel.
Delegitimizing Israel by denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination and
denying Israel the right to exist.
19
However, s. 1000.05(8), F.S., specifies that criticism of Israel that is similar to criticism toward any other
country may not be regarded as anti-Semitic.
16
Id.
17
S. 1000.05(8), F.S.
18
S. 1000.05(8)(a), F.S.
19
S. 1000.05(8)(b), F.S. STORAGE NAME: h0187.CRJ PAGE: 5
DATE: 11/29/2023
Although currently codified, the definition and examples of antisemitism do not apply generally to all
sections of Florida law and thus are not applicable in identifying and reporting other instances of
discrimination or incidents of hate crimes.
Effect of Proposed Changes
HB 187 creates s. 1.015, F.S., to define “antisemitism” based on the working definition developed and
adopted by the IHRA and to provide contemporary examples of antisemitism. The bill defines
“antisemitism” as:
A certain perception of Jewish individuals which may be expressed as hatred toward such
individuals. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward
Jewish and non-Jewish individuals and their property and toward Jewish community
institutions and religious facilities.
Additionally, the bill provides the following contemporary examples of antisemitism:
Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jewish individuals in the name
of a radical ideology or an extremist view of a religion.
Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about
Jewish individuals as such or the power of Jewish people as a collective, such as the
myth of a worldwide Jewish conspiracy or of Jewish individuals controlling the media,
economy, government, or other societal institutions.
Accusing Jewish people as a collective of being responsible for real or imagined
wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group or for acts committed by
non-Jewish individuals.
Denying the fact, scope, and mechanisms, such as gas chambers, or the intentionality
of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of Nazi Germany and its supporters
and accomplices during the Holocaust.
Accusing Jewish people as a collective, or Israel as a state, of inventing or
exaggerating the Holocaust.
Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of
Jewish individuals worldwide, than to the interests of their respective nations.
Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, such as claiming that the
existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
Applying double standards by requiring of the Jewish State of Israel a standard of
behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism, such as claims
of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel, to characterize Israel or Israelis.
Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
Holding Jewish individuals collectively responsible for actions of the State of Israel.
The bill codifies the definition and examples in Chapter 1 of the Florida Statutes, relating to Definitions,
making them applicable to all sections of Florida Law.
The bill provides an effective date of July 1, 2024.
B. SECTION DIRECTORY:
Section 1: Creates s. 1.015, F.S., relating to antisemitism.
Section 2: Provides an effective date of July 1, 2024.
II. FISCAL ANALYSIS & ECONOMIC IMPACT STATEMENT
A. FISCAL IMPACT ON STATE GOVERNMENT:
1. Revenues: STORAGE NAME: h0187.CRJ PAGE: 6
DATE: 11/29/2023
None.
2. Expenditures:
None.
B. FISCAL IMPACT ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:
1. Revenues:
None.
2. Expenditures:
None.
C. DIRECT ECONOMIC IMPACT ON PRIVATE SECTOR:
None.
D. FISCAL COMMENTS:
None.
III. COMMENTS
A. CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES:
1. Applicability of Municipality/County Mandates Provision:
Not Applicable. This bill does not appear to require counties or municipalities to spend funds or take
action requiring the expenditures of funds; reduce the authority that counties or municipalities have
to raise revenues in the aggregate; or reduce the percentage of state tax shared with counties or
municipalities.
2. Other:
None.
B. RULE-MAKING AUTHORITY:
None.
C. DRAFTING ISSUES OR OTHER COMMENTS:
None.
IV. AMENDMENTS/COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE CHANGES