Embedded Files
State Senator John Velis co-chairs the Massachusetts Special Commission on Combating Antisemitism. And while combating antisemitism sounds like a good idea, Velis and his colleagues are trying to use the Commission to suppress free speech. In Aug. 2025, the Commission unanimously recommended that schools in Massachusetts utilize a definition of antisemitism (known as the IHRA definition) that is not widely supported by Jewish scholars. This definition of antisemitism incorrectly classifies criticism of Israel as antisemitic. In addition to advancing the disputed IHRA definition of antisemitism, the Commission recommended that incidents categorized as antisemitic be reported to the Massachusetts State Police for centralized collection of “hate crimes” data.
The Commission made these recommendations over the public objections of Jewish educators as well as the organization of Concerned Jewish Faculty, as reported in the Boston Herald.
During his first term, Trump signed an executive order applying the IHRA definition of antisemitism to federal agencies, setting in motion the censorship of free speech that is happening today. Velis and the Commission are importing Trump’s censorship tactics to Massachusetts.
Donald Trump wants to suppress free speech.
So does John Velis—because it serves his political ambitions.
Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs paid for Velis—who is not Jewish—to visit Israel in Jan. 2025 (in a trip worth $6,100), as reported by the Boston Globe. It is well known that Velis hopes to advance from state politics to Washington. He seems to think the best way to do so is with backing from the pro-Israel lobby.
Velis is willing to sacrifice free speech in Massachusetts to boost his career. Shame on you, Velis.
This website was created by a group of Jewish residents of western Massachusetts.
Contact us or request a yard sign at shameonvelis@gmail.com
Q: How does the IHRA definition of antisemitism suppress free speech?
A: The IHRA definition (which stands for International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance) might appear innocuous at first glance, but it contains a series of what it calls “contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life,” many of which pertain to Israel. The IHRA definition suppresses free speech by making people afraid that they will be accused of antisemitism if they criticize Israel. Although the IHRA definition and Velis himself have said that it is not inherently antisemitic to criticize Israel’s government, the definition with examples actually stifles such criticism—and the author of the IHRA definition, Kenneth Stern, has said so. See: “I drafted the definition of antisemitism. Rightwing Jews are weaponizing it.” (The Guardian). For additional detailed reading, see Professor Jeremy Menchik’s testimony before the Massachusetts Special Commission on Combating Antisemitism: “On Authoritarianism and Antisemitism.”
According to Human Rights Watch, “The IHRA definition has often been used to wrongly label criticism of Israel as antisemitic, and thus chill and sometimes suppress non-violent protest, activism, and speech critical of Israel.”
Shame on you, Velis. Support free speech. No IHRA definition.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse