In June 2022, North Carolina Democrats gathered for their state convention in Durham and adopted a series of resolutions focused on Israel. One called for screening American aid and other economic and security ties with the country and imposing “targeted sanctions” on individuals and entities accused of human-rights violations.
There was no Oct. 7 massacre and no war in Gaza.
The resolution called for travel bans and asset freezes and urged the United States to condition future arms sales and security assistance on steps toward ending what it described as apartheid and persecution.
The North Carolina Jewish Clergy Association objected, calling the measures neither thoughtful nor balanced and warning that the language was “potentially dangerous” at a time of rising antisemitism.
Oct. 7 was still 16 months away.
Four years later, North Carolina Democrats have an arms embargo against Israel in their party platform. Washington Democrats have adopted an embargo of their own. Their platform also attributes rising antisemitism partly to the Israeli government and rejects certain “forms of Zionism.” In Minnesota, Democratic convention delegates removed language identifying denial of Israel’s right to exist as a form of antisemitism.
Oct. 7 changed the politics around Israel dramatically, but the organizing inside these state parties was already underway.
North Carolina kept coming back to the issue. In June 2025, the State Executive Committee narrowly approved a resolution calling for an immediate embargo on military aid, weapons shipments and military logistical support to Israel. The resolution said the restrictions should remain until Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and B’Tselem certified that Israel was no longer engaged in apartheid rule. It also alleged that U.S.-supplied military resources had been used to commit genocide and other war crimes in Gaza.
Jewish Democrats objected, as did Gov. Josh Stein, North Carolina’s first Jewish governor. Stein later said that he disagreed with his party’s “anti-Israel resolutions” and wanted Democrats focused on issues closer to home, including the cost of living and health care. He also pointed to rising antisemitism and Islamophobia.
The tension soon reached another corner of the state party. In February, Stein publicly denounced Elyas Mohammed, chairman of the NCDP Muslim Caucus, after Mohammed called Zionists “modern-day Nazis” and a “threat to humanity.”
“Antisemitic comments and conspiracy theories have no place anywhere, including in the North Carolina Democratic Party,” Stein said.
This year, the embargo made it into the NCDP platform. A position that had begun before October 7 in convention resolutions seeking sanctions and restrictions on Israel had stuck around long enough to become the party’s written policy.
North Carolina is hardly the only state where this is happening.
At its convention this summer, the Washington State Democratic Party adopted a resolution accusing Israel of genocide, ethnic cleansing and apartheid and demanding a “full arms embargo.” It also sought to suspend other forms of military assistance and intelligence support. Afterward, the party announced that delegates were calling on every Democratic congressional candidate in Washington to publicly support ending U.S. military aid to Israel.
The next stop could be the national Democratic Party platform.
The party platform goes further.
In its section on antisemitism, Washington Democrats say there has been a “dramatic resurgence” of antisemitism “due in part to actions taken by the Israeli government.” Elsewhere, the platform rejects “racist political ideologies rooted in supremacy, including forms of Zionism.” It links those forms of Zionism to Israeli occupation and unequal treatment, among other policies.
Jewish Democrats complained that they had been brought into the process too late. Democratic state Sen. Jesse Salomon, co-chairman of Washington’s legislative Jewish Caucus, said Jewish lawmakers learned about some of the language too late to change it. At the same time, the state party’s own Jewish caucus had largely fallen dormant.
Minnesota went another way. At the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party convention in 2024, delegates considered an antisemitism resolution whose original language condemned targeting Jews as individuals or as a people. It also included “denial of the right of the State of Israel to exist.”
Delegates took the Israel language out.
The final version still condemned antisemitism and targeting Jews, but the explicit connection between antisemitism and denying Israel’s existence was gone. The party chairman stressed afterward that Minnesota Democrats’ underlying platform had not changed. It continued to support Israel’s right to exist while also supporting “Palestinian self-determination.”
The map goes beyond those three states. Wisconsin Democrats have backed restrictions on weapons transfers to Israel, while other state parties have passed ceasefire and Gaza-related resolutions of varying scope. They are not all the same. Some also called for the release of Israeli hostages. Others reaffirm support for a two-state solution.
Still, the discussion inside several state parties is no longer just about whether the United States should send Israel a particular weapon. Party delegates are now weighing language about Zionism and Israel’s legitimacy. They are also deciding what their own parties are willing to call antisemitism.
Jewish Democrats have had to learn how those internal processes work.
North Carolina’s Jewish Democrats learned the lesson early. In November 2023, barely a month after Oct. 7, the NCDP Executive Committee initially rejected recognition of the newly organized Jewish Caucus. Three weeks later, after an outcry, the committee reversed itself and recognized it.
Less than three years later, having a recognized caucus mattered. A “Genocide Accountability Resolution” moved from the precinct level through county and district party bodies before reaching the State Executive Committee. The measure would have added language supporting the prosecution and vetting of people and entities in the United States that “may have participated in or enabled genocide.”
Jewish Caucus leaders spent weeks organizing against it. Other caucus members organized in support.
The resolution failed 163-130. Jewish Caucus first vice chair Amy DeLoach said afterward, “Now we feel like we have a home again.”
There is a familiar political method here. Democratic Socialists of America chapters have spent years paying attention to the parts of party politics most voters rarely think about. That means showing up at precinct meetings and conventions, but also learning which committees matter and how party rules work.
The similarity is not that DSA necessarily wrote those Israel resolutions. It is that activists can gain influence inside a party without first winning its highest-profile elections. A resolution can start in a room most voters never see and eventually end up in a platform read by candidates across the state.
North Carolina makes the point fairly neatly. Stein opposed his party’s anti-Israel resolutions, but the embargo made it into the platform anyway. Washington Democrats have gone further by asking congressional candidates to publicly embrace the policy.
The outcomes elsewhere have not been uniform. Minnesota delegates removed language. North Carolina’s Jewish Caucus successfully stopped another resolution. Washington Democrats put their position into the platform.
National parties rarely move all at once. The change usually starts in the states, where activists organize and new positions become official party language. If that continues, these resolutions may not stay local for long. The next stop could be the national Democratic Party platform.
