The Bill Has Entered Committee
The Pennsylvania General Assembly’s official record identifies the proposal as Senate Bill 1489 in the 2025 to 2026 session. Its latest listed action is referral to the Senate State Government Committee on October 13. The record describes legislation concerning the definition of antisemitism within the state’s general provisions.
That status is the immediate procedural fact. Introduction and committee referral open a legislative process; they do not establish that Pennsylvania has already enacted the proposed definition. The official record checked on October 17 did not list a vote passing the measure.
The sponsor list includes lawmakers from both parties. Their names indicate support for introducing the proposal, rather than a completed vote by either legislative chamber. Further committee and chamber action would be needed to advance it.
Schwank Wants a Lasting Legislative Commitment
Schwank, a Democratic lawmaker and cochair of the Pennsylvania Jewish Legislative Caucus, told JNS that she expected to keep pursuing the proposal. She said there was insufficient time to secure passage in the current session and that she planned to introduce it again.
Her stated preference is legislation rather than relying solely on an executive order. In her view, a law would demonstrate legislators’ commitment to confronting antisemitism and provide a durable expression of that commitment.
Her comments about Shapiro should be read with the same attribution. They express her confidence in what the governor would do if a bill reaches his desk. They are not a separately announced signing pledge from the governor’s office, and the condition of legislative passage remains central.
A Reference for Recognizing Antisemitism
IHRA adopted its working definition in 2016. The organization describes it as nonbinding and accompanies it with examples intended to be understood in context. It addresses hostility toward Jews, including manifestations directed at people, property and community or religious institutions.
The accompanying guidance also distinguishes antisemitism from criticism of Israel comparable to criticism directed at other countries. That qualification is part of the framework, alongside the examples describing antisemitic conduct.
Adopting a reference in state legislation is a separate step from IHRA’s publication of the definition. Any legal effect would depend on the enacted text and applicable law. The proposal’s existence should not be presented as a newly created criminal offense or an already operative prohibition.
Small Communities Are Central to Her Case
Schwank told JNS that identifying antisemitism matters particularly in places outside Pennsylvania’s largest Jewish population centers. She pointed to her experience in Berks County and argued that a shared reference could help officials understand incidents reported by smaller Jewish communities.
Her case connects recognition with public responsibility: a community’s size should not determine whether its concerns are understood. That is the purpose she assigns to the measure, rather than evidence that a particular legal outcome has already been achieved.
For now, the next step remains legislative consideration, followed by reintroduction if the current session ends without passage. The October interview clarifies the sponsor’s strategy while the official bill record fixes its present status: introduced and referred to committee, with enactment still ahead.
