Speech that is critical of Israel alone does not constitute unlawful discrimination.

Jerry Nadler, who has represented a big piece of Manhattan since 1992, is one of the longest serving Jewish members of the house.

He's also a Columbia University alum. He was on campus in 1968 when police cleared Hamilton Hall of anti-Vietnam war protesters.

He is a close observer of the Middle East and the politics of Israel in the U.S.

And he's the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, where he's long seen himself as a champion of civil liberties.

All of this background helped put Nadler at the center of a swirl of events this week. As pro-Palestinian protesters at Columbia were

ejected from Hamilton Hall, as President Biden made his first public remarks

about campus protests, as a ceasefire deal between Hamas and Israel seemed

tantalizingly close, and as the House passed by an overwhelming majority of 320 to 91, the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act, a bill against which Nadler led the

opposition.

By encompassing purely political speech about Israel into Title VI is ambit, the bill sweeps too broadly.

We're going to talk to the Congressman about all this and about Trump's interview in Time magazine, the potential for disruption at the Democratic

Convention in Chicago, the vote Nadler most regrets in his long career, and the nature of truth.

I'm Ryan Liza and this is Playbook Deep Dive. Oh, Let's start with what happened yesterday with the vote on the Anti-Semitism

Awareness Act of 2023. You voted against it and you made it. I led the opposition. You made a

very strong statement on on the floor.

Act adopts the definition of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition

of anti-Semitism.

Tell us about that definition,

what the intention of this legislation was,

and why you think it's such a bad idea.

Well, there are three extant definitions. One is by

...