In America: NAE cuts ties with ADL

During their 2025 Representative Assembly, the National Education Association (NEA), the Largest Union in the United States, voted to sever ties with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). Though primarily a domestic issue, it significantly influences how U.S. labor movements perceive global human rights and defense matters.. With over 3 million members, the NAE accused the ADL of politicizing the term “antisemitism” to punish all criticisms (whether legitimate or otherwise) of the Israeli government, especially as it relates to their policy in Gaza and the West Bank. This stifling of open dialogue, according to the NEA, displays unacceptable bias that implicates educational materials and programs related to antisemitism and the Holocaust. This move by the NEA highlights a growing tension within the US labor movement regarding the intersection of domestic social justice and international human rights.

The NEA has enormous influence in the United States as they represent 2.8 million education professionals, retirees, and educators-in-training, and had a combined budget of $827 million as of 2024. It has historically been at the forefront of advocacy and lobbying efforts for progressive education policies in America and helped establish the US Department of Education. They are also a major supporter of the Democratic Party and help individual democratic candidates during their campaigns. Besides its substantial social capital and its political partisanship, it has cultivated educational partnerships with multiple advocacy groups, such as the Anti-Defamation League. The ADL has been providing educational materials and helping roll out programs on the holocaust and anti-semitism as part of its core mission. Still, its pro-Israel stance has been the subject of strong controversy globally. 

For decades, the ADL has been a strong proponent of “new antisemitism,” which advances the view that all anti-zionists are antisemitic, including specific criticisms of the State of Israel. It has also sought to push for some anti-BDS laws to prohibit US state governments from having commercial relationships with firms or people that are part of the BDS movement (this was later challenged as a violation of First Amendment rights). The NAE alleges that the ADL has distorted antisemitism statistics by including criticism of Israel and Palestinian solidarity actions. However, it should be noted that, just like in the NEA, there have been stark divisions within the ADL regarding their policy stance.

It has been alleged that the ADL continuously conflates prominent criticism vis-à-vis the state of Israel with antisemitism. This, coupled with the NAE’s stated general discomfort with the ADL’s influence on professional and educational curricula, has raised the issue of their association. NEA delegate Stephen Siegel was quoted as saying, “Allowing the ADL to determine what constitutes antisemitism would be like allowing the fossil fuel industry to determine what constitutes climate change”. Yet opponents, including some Jewish educators, expressed concern that the vote isolates Jewish students as well as teachers, and sends a message that they are not safe in education spaces.

Nonetheless, this has led the NEA to vote on a resolution to terminate their relationship with the ADL on the grounds of partiality. The voting document, known as “New Business Item 39”, calls for the NEA to stop using, endorsing, or publicizing ADL materials, including those on antisemitism and Holocaust education. While technically non-binding, the implication this vote has on the #DroptheADLFromSchools movement and the internal impact studies that will follow remains significant: The bill reflects a broader shift in progressive spaces, where support for Palestinian rights is increasingly framed as part of anti-racist and social justice work. It also sets a contemporary precedent for how labor unions should engage with global human rights issues, which converges domestic activities and education within the United States with international politics.

The ADL has strongly disavowed this decision, and is pushing back, stating, per their letter, that this vote sends a chilling message: that the marginalization of Jews is acceptable. By severing this partnership, the NAE is ostensibly taking away reputable resources from schools that educate people about the Holocaust, address antisemitism, and combat all forms of hate. At a time of heightened hate-based violence, when students are increasingly exposed to extremist content online and in their communities, educators need more tools, not fewer. The Holocaust and antisemitism education provided by the ADL has been helping students understand history, recognize warning signs, and build empathy that protects all vulnerable communities. With these aspects in mind, the NEA’s decision may influence how antisemitism and human rights are taught in classrooms, especially amid rising tensions over the war in Gaza. Moreover, it raises questions about who defines hate and whether organizations like the ADL should have gatekeeping power over educational content.

There is substantial historical precedent of direct activist involvement of academia in international human rights-related issues. For example, numerous universities and public institutions in the US boycotted South African companies during Apartheid, with student protests pressuring the federal government to follow suit. Similar academia-related protests regarding the US involvement in Vietnam, protesting the Mobutu regime in the DRC, the distancing from academia by the Chinese Communist Party due to censorship and human rights violations, and the ongoing BDS movement all displayed controversial but significant actions that shaped how different international stakeholders have engaged with these global issues. They also prove that public institutions often act on moral imperatives even for international issues. 

While labor union membership in general has been steadily declining, the power of the NEA to reshape educational values should not be understated. Moreover, while the reverberations of this decision have yet to fully materialize, it still marks a significant moment for international political advocacy as critics argue that it undermines the ADL’s informational objectives and sets a clear moral stance on institutional partnerships from the largest labor union in the United States. It also asserts the increasing willingness for labor unions to assert their autonomy in shaping educational values, in this case, aligning more with Palestinian rights as understood as part of a broader anti-discriminatory social struggle. 

Civil rights education could evolve to include more contested perspectives, challenging dominant narratives, and encouraging deeper critical inquiry. And institutional partnerships will likely face heightened scrutiny, with educators demanding transparency and ideological neutrality. The NEA’s decision to break its storied relationship with an NGO as prolific as the ADL signals a recurring trend of justice, pedagogy, and solidarity converging in American educational institutions during a time of moral panic.