ADC Sounds the Alarm: Last-Minute “Safeguard” Confirms Wisconsin IHRA Bills are Unconstitutional

Washington, D.C. | The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) is sounding the alarm on Wisconsin bills SB 445 and AB 446 as lawmakers rush to insert a last-minute amendment claiming the bills are not intended to create new crimes for students at public colleges. This amendment is not a fix. It is an admission. 

When legislation requires an emergency disclaimer clarifying that it is not meant to criminalize students, that alone reveals the inherent danger embedded in the bill’s structure. You do not need a “safeguard” against consequences that were never possible. The need for this language underscores what critics have warned all along: the bills were designed to invite punitive enforcement and chill protected speech. SB 445 and AB 446 are fundamentally broken. No amendment can repair a framework that embeds a politicized definition of antisemitism into Wisconsin law in a manner that risks viewpoint discrimination.

Wisconsin already has strong, constitutional protections against antisemitism and religious discrimination: Wis. Stat. § 939.645 (Hate Crimes Law) enhances penalties for crimes motivated by religion and other protected characteristics and has been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. Wis. Stat. § 943.012 makes vandalism of religious institutions a felony.

There is no enforcement gap. There is no absence of legal tools. What these bills attempt to regulate is political speech. Federal courts have already warned against codifying the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition into law. In Justice in Palestine v. Abbott, a federal court held that such codification constitutes viewpoint discrimination. The Supreme Court’s ruling in Matal v. Tam reaffirmed that the government may not suppress speech simply because it is controversial or offensive.

A line stating “this is not intended to create new crimes” does not change the operational reality. Embedding IHRA into statute would still pressure universities and public institutions to treat criticism of the State of Israel as suspect. Administrators, facing political risk, would be incentivized to overcorrect. The result is predictable: chilled speech, selective enforcement, and erosion of First Amendment protections.

At the October 22, 2025, hearing, 89% of testimonies opposed these bills. Opposition included Orthodox Jewish leaders, rabbis, former Jewish elected officials, interfaith coalitions, and civil liberties organizations. Kenneth Stern, the lead drafter of IHRA, has repeatedly warned against turning it into binding law. Adding a cosmetic safeguard does not neutralize constitutional defects. It highlights them. ADC urges the Governor and lawmakers to reject SB 445 and AB 446 in their entirety. Civil rights law must protect people from discrimination — not shield governments from criticism.