Missouri lawmakers are locked in an increasingly heated fight over how to define antisemitism in classrooms and on campuses, after the state House signed off this spring on a bill that would write a widely used international definition into state law.
The legislation would adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism and require public K-12 schools and state colleges to fold that definition into their student, faculty and employee codes of conduct to prohibit antisemitic harassment. Sponsored by Rep. George Hruza (R-Huntleigh), the bill also tasks Title VI coordinators with tracking, investigating and reporting antisemitism complaints. The move has sharpened long-simmering tensions between lawmakers and free speech advocates across the state.
Coverage from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch described the measure as headed to Gov. Mike Kehoe’s desk after the House vote. Official roll call records show the House passed HB 2061 on Feb. 16, 2026, by a 109-21 margin, according to LegiScan. A companion bill in the Senate has cleared a key committee but has not yet logged a full-floor roll call.
What the bill would do
The bill copies the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism in full, including its contemporary examples, and instructs educational institutions to “integrate the definition” into their conduct codes for students, faculty and staff. At the same time, the text specifies that criticism of Israel “similar to criticism toward any other country shall not be construed to be antisemitic.”
Under the measure, Title VI coordinators at state education agencies would have to set up formal reporting channels, investigate complaints and file an annual report to the legislature. Those requirements appear in the official bill materials and engrossed text, available through the Missouri House of Representatives.
Supporters and critics
Backers of the plan, including Rep. Hruza and Sen. Curtis Trent, say schools and law enforcement need clearer tools to protect Jewish students and respond to threats, particularly as campus tensions rise. They lay out that case in a joint op-ed published by The Missouri Times, arguing the IHRA definition is the best available standard for spotting antisemitic conduct before it escalates.
Opponents, including academics and civil liberties advocates, counter that the IHRA examples are too easily stretched in ways that could chill criticism of Israel or shut down legitimate academic debate. They warn that universities in particular could feel pressure to police political speech, a concern explored in commentary published by The St. Louis Jewish Light. For critics, the question is not whether to fight antisemitism, but how to do it without putting campus discourse on a short leash.
What’s next
The bill’s fate now hinges on the Senate calendar. The companion measure, SB 1051, cleared the Senate Education Committee on March 10 but, as of April 9, still had no recorded full-floor roll call, according to documents from the Missouri Senate. Those materials and accompanying fiscal notes outline the companion bill’s provisions and committee action.
Gov. Kehoe has already signed other legislation this April, but IHRA-related bills did not appear on the list of measures he approved on April 7, according to the Office of the Governor.
If the antisemitism bill ultimately makes it across the finish line, it is slated to take effect on Aug. 28, 2026. That timeline would give school districts and higher education systems several months to rewrite conduct codes and build out the reporting and investigation procedures spelled out in the text. Between now and then, expect the debate over where hate speech ends and protected speech begins to keep drawing a crowd at the Capitol.
