South Dakota doctors who offer transgender kids hormone treatments and puberty blockers could face jail time if lawmakers pass a new bill

Canela López

ANGELA WEISS / Getty Images

South Dakota lawmakers voted Wednesday on a bill that would make it criminal for doctors to provide puberty-blockers, hormones, or any gender-affirmation surgeries to anyone under the age of 16. 

The bill is supported by social conservatives in the state's Republican-controlled legislature who say that transgender people under 16 are "too young" to make medical decisions about their gender identity. 

A recent study found that trans kids have a firm grasp of their gender identity. Another found gender-affirming care reduces rates of suicide among transgender youth.

On Wednesday, South Dakota's House passed a bill that would penalize doctors for providing gender affirmation treatments — like hormone treatments, puberty-blockers, and gender-affirming surgeries — to anyone under the age of 16.

If passed by the state Senate and ultimately signed by the governor, the bill would punish doctors with up to one year of jail time and a fine of up to $2,000.

Social conservatives in the state's Republican-dominated Congress who support HR 1057, like state representative Fred Deutsch, have said that transgender youth are "too young" to make life-altering medical decisions based on their gender identity.

Similar age-restricting bills have been proposed in seven other states: Missouri, Illinois, Kentucky, South Carolina, Colorado, Florida, and Oklahoma.

Experts say the bill could have grave consequences.

"This bill runs counter to a mountain of medical and social science literature that shows transgender youths' health significantly improve with access to supportive and gender affirming-health care, resulting in a reduction in suicide rates of transgender youth," Shawn Meerkamper and Dale Melchert, senior staff attorney and staff attorney for the Transgender Law Center, wrote in an email to Insider.
The law would ban young people from accessing puberty blockers, which delay body changes that can be traumatic and confusing

Klaus Vedfelt/Getty ImagesSupporters of the bill have likened HR 1057

 to pressing a "pause button" on transgender children receiving gender 

affirmation procedures until after they turn 16, rather than a ban.

Critics say it would do the opposite.

Parts of puberty, like growing breasts or body hair, can be traumatic for teens who do not identify with the gender they were assigned at birth. In many cases, it can trigger something called gender dysphoria, a condition in which a person feels like their body doesn't match their gender identity. Dysphoria has been linked to depression and anxiety and significantly increased risks of substance abuse and suicide.

To prevent or minimize dysphoria, doctors can prescribe puberty blockers, which halt puberty, allowing trans teens to make decisions about whether they want to take hormones to transition later in life, or not.

These procedures are not necessary for all transgender or non-binary people — many opt to not take hormones or have surgery at all. But for many, puberty blockers are extremely important for the mental health and safety of many other transgender and non-binary people. 

Gender-affirming care has been found to reduce rates of depression and suicide among transgender youth

Mark Makela/Getty Images

A study by doctors at Massachusetts General Hospital, published 

January 1 in the medical journal Pediatrics, found that

transgender youth who are able to take hormone blockers when they

 wanted to, rather than going through puberty, had significantly less

 suicidal ideations throughout their lifetimes than those who did not.

"Gender-affirming health care saves lives," Melchert and Meerkamper, who were not involved in the study, told Insider.

"Transgender youth are already up against astronomical rates of bullying, violence, and suicide, and they already face tremendous barriers to accessing health care. They don't need their state legislators piling on."

Keisling said that this kind of ban would prevent families, and their medical practitioners, from making life-saving, private medical decisions.

"These are parents who are just trying to do the best they can," Mara Keisling, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, told Insider. "And this makes that harder. It makes it harder to live in South Dakota. It makes it harder to be a kid."
A recent study debunked the idea that under-16s are 'too young' to make medical decisions about their gender

Klaus Vedfelt/Getty Images

The bill says that transgender children are "too young" to know what their gender identity is for certain.

A recent study by Princeton University researchers, published in PNAS, found that transgender children who are able to "socially transition" — or live as the gender they identify with — develop a firm grasp of their gender identity at the same age their cisgender peers do.

Regardless of how long it had been since a transgender child had socially transitioned, they identified as strongly with the gender they are rather than the one they were assigned at birth as their cisgender peers did.

"We trust kids to tell us what their gender is unless they're trans kids," Keisling told Insider.

Read more:

Beauty YouTuber NikkieTutorials came out as a transgender woman in an emotional video. Here are 4 other trans YouTubers.

15 iconic moments in the LGBTQ rights movement from the last decade

A trans dad underwent $30,000 worth of fertility treatments to have a baby. He says his insurance company refused to pay.

Lil Nas X had the best response to a homophobic rant from rapper Pastor Troy

(GROWING HIS FUNDAMENTALIST BEARD)

Jacob Sarkisian

Lil Nas X has won two Grammys. Pastor Troy has won zero.

 Kevin Mazur/Getty Images/Prince Williams/WireImage

he rapper Pastor Troy went on a long homophobic rant against Lil Nas X on Instagram in a post that has since been deleted.

Lil Nas X, who came out as gay last year, shut the rapper down with a reply on Twitter: "damn I look good in that pic on god."

The Grammy winner also defended his choice of outfits: "some people like it, some people don't."
Visit Insider's homepage for more stories.

Lil Nas X responded in perhaps the best way possible to a lengthy homophobic rant from the rapper Pastor Troy.

In a tirade of abuse posted on Instagram on Wednesday, Pastor Troy wrote: "Welp, Guess I won't be winning a GRAMMY…If this what I gotta wear," a reference to Lil Nas X's all-pink ensemble at Sunday's Grammy Awards.

Lil Nas X, who came out as gay last year, captured a screenshot of the Instagram post, which has since been deleted, and tweeted it alongside a photo of himself at the Grammys. He shut down the rapper with a simple caption: "damn i look good in that pic on god."
—nope (@LilNasX) January 29, 2020

In the post, which was put up three hours before Lil Nas X responded, Pastor Troy said: "They love to push this s--- on Our Kids!! The other day @applebees had some punks kissing and laughing eating mozzarella sticks. First Thing My 14 yr old Son said was, 'F---- Applebee's' And It Brought Joy to My Heart!! He sees it…their agenda to take the masculinity from Men, Black Men Especially."

He added: "Y'all Better open that 3rd Eye and let your Sons Know What Is Real…Or They Ass Gone Be Headed Down That Old Town Road Foreal!!~P.T." He ended with the hashtags "#BlackOwnedandIndependent," "#NotMySons," "#ItAintWorthIt," "#Taketheroadlesstraveled," "#Youwillstillgetthere," "#DSGB," and "#Wontbeonmypagelong."

Lil Nas X posted another tweet a few hours later mocking Pastor Troy, joking about the "mozzarella sticks" line in the rapper's original post.
—nope (@LilNasX) January 29, 2020

While Lil Nas X drew mostly support from his Twitter followers, some did choose to criticize his all-pink outfit.

One Twitter user with the handle @MrKlassic76 replied to the Grammy winner: "There is nothing wrong with you being gay it's cool, just chill with these crazy ass outfits, your hurting yourself not helping yourself. Respect yourself bro."

Lil Nas X responded to the tweet writing: "I have the upmost respect for myself. I wouldn't do anything i wasn't comfortable with."

—nope (@LilNasX) January 29, 2020

Read more:
Billy Ray Cyrus dedicates 2 of his and Lil Nas X's Grammy wins to Kobe Bryant and his daughter

The end of American exceptionalism? Study indicates failure of US democracy creating wave of self doubt


January 30, 2020 By Common Dreams


A new study shows that less than half of all Americans are satisfied with the nation’s democratic system.

More Americans are dissatisfied with democracy than at any point since records began in 1995, according to a new study published Wednesday, and the number of citizens with a positive view of the U.S. system of government dipped for the first time below 50%.

To observers like journalist Rania Khalek, the reason for such a shift in global attitudes was clear.

“Our systems aren’t actually democratic,” said Khalek. “We live in a miserable oligarchy, no wonder people are unhappy.”

“Dissatisfaction with democracy within developed countries is at its highest level in almost 25 years”

That’s bc our systems aren’t actually democratic. We live in a miserable oligarchy, no wonder people are unhappy https://t.co/gb06pA1qen

— Rania Khalek (@RaniaKhalek) January 29, 2020

A majority of people around the world—57.5%—are dissatisfied with democracy, the University of Cambridge’s Centre for the Future of Democracy study (pdf) found.

“If confidence in democracy has been slipping, it is because democratic institutions have been seen failing to address some of the major crises of our era, from economic crashes to the threat of global warming,” said study lead author Dr Roberto Foa.

According to the study, Americans’ dissatisfaction with democracy has been on the rise since the financial crisis of 2008:

The U.S. has seen a “dramatic and unexpected” decline in satisfaction, according to researchers. In 1995, more than three-quarters of US citizens were satisfied with American democracy, a figure that plateaued for the next decade. The first big knock came with the 2008 financial crisis, and deterioration has continued year-on-year ever since. Now, less than half of US citizens are content with their democracy.

“Such levels of democratic dissatisfaction would not be unusual elsewhere,” said Foa. “But for the United States it may mark an end of exceptionalism, and a profound shift in America’s view of itself.”

More broadly, Foa said, the dissatisfaction should be seen in the context of rational actors replying in a logical fashion to the questions posed by researchers. If the systems fail, they don’t deserve the people’s faith.

“Our findings suggest that citizens are rational in their view of political institutions,” said Foa, “and update their assessment in response to what they observe.”

by Eoin Higgins, staff writer

Wilbur Ross sees China’s coronavirus outbreak as good news for US economy

WELL OF COURSE HE DOES, HE IS A 1% BOTTOM FEEDER

January 30, 2020 By Travis Gettys


President Donald Trump’s commerce secretary saw the coronavirus in China as a boon to American business.

Wilbur Ross, who heads the Commerce Department, told Fox Business Network’s Maria Bartiromo that business leaders should consider China’s recent history with viral outbreaks before deciding to buy goods and materials there.

“Every American’s heart goes out to the victims of the coronavirus, so I don’t want to talk about a victory lap over a very unfortunate and very malignant disease, but the fact is it does give businesses,” Ross said, before pausing to cough, “yet another thing to consider when they go through their review of their supply chain on top of all the other things. Because you had SARS, you had the African swine virus there, now you have this. It’s another risk factor that people need to take into account.

“I think it will help to accelerate the return of jobs to North America, some to U.S., probably some to Mexico, as well,” he added.

Secretary Wilbur Ross says coronavirus will be good for [checks notes] American jobs: “I think it will help to accelerate the return of jobs to North America.” pic.twitter.com/Y4SbDIcTi4

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 30, 2020

Duterte’s Graveyard A DOCUMENTARY

https://www.theatlantic.com/video/index/605737/duterte-war-on-drugs/



THE ATLANTIC SELECTS
Duterte’s Graveyard
Jan 29, 2020
Video by Anders Palm Olesen and Simone Gottschau

Editor’s Note: This film contains some graphic imagery.
During his campaign for the Philippine presidency in 2016, Rodrigo Duterte ran on a platform of a “relentless” war on drugs that promised to purge the country of narcotics-related violence. Once in office, Duterte encouraged vigilante death squads and police task forces to commit extrajudicial murders of suspected drug users and dealers. In his first month, nearly 600 people were killed with impunity.


Now Duterte has passed the halfway point of his six-year presidency, and his crackdown is far from over. The death toll has risen to 12,000, although unofficial estimates are higher. The urban poor are the main targets of these killings; any young person in a shantytown can be seen as a suspected drug addict. Police routinely execute unarmed suspects and often plant evidence. Citizens randomly assassinate neighbors. Many victims’ bodies are found on the sidewalk, bathed in blood.


Where these bodies are taken is the subject of Anders Palm Olesen and Simone Gottschau’s short documentary, Manila High. Set in the Pasay City Cemetery, a new public grave complex that’s being built to meet the needs of the rising body count, the film focuses on young caretakers who live and work on the premises. This is ground zero of the drug war; the resident gravediggers are poor, and they live in fear of ending up the next victim of a random killing.


“At the cemetery, we found a micro-universe from where another layer of the war on drugs could be told,” Olesen told me. “We found absurdity in the construction of a government-funded burial complex [where] caretakers themselves are afraid of ending up in the very graves they were building.”


While filming, the omnipresence of death was jarring to the directors. “The opening scene at the morgue was something you can’t really prepare yourself for beforehand,” Gottschau told me.


In Manila, one of the places hit hardest by the crackdown, Olesen and Gottschau spoke with citizens who publicly supported it. A 2019 survey found that 82 percent of adult Filipinos were satisfied with the administration’s campaign against illegal drugs.


“From the very beginning, it was clear to us that this was more a war on the poor than anything else,” said Olesen. “The scaremongering has the political effect of tightening Duterte’s grip on power.”


“What we witnessed,” he continued, “seemed no different from the alienating tactics of the 20th century’s totalitarian dictators remodeled on a 21st-century blueprint. The politics of dividing the people between a ‘them’ versus ‘us’ is on the rise all over the world.”

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.
Author: Emily Buder

About This Series

A showcase of cinematic short documentary films, curated by The Atlantic.

WHY HAVE WITNESSES 
WHEN YOU CAN ORDER THEIR MEMOIR FROM AMAZON

The Room Where It Happened: A White House Memoir 

by John Bolton  (Author)

John Bolton served as National Security Advisor to President Donald Trump for 519 days. A seasoned public servant who had previously worked for Presidents Reagan, Bush #41, and Bush #43, Bolton brought to the administration thirty years of experience in international issues and a reputation for tough, blunt talk. In his memoir, he offers a substantive and factual account of his time in the room where it happened.

Just as the Senate was poised to reconvene for the impeachment trial, CNN reported that the White House issued a formal threat to John Bolton over the pending publication of his book.

The news comes as Republican senators are mulling whether to call for witnesses, possibly including Bolton, in a vote that could come on Friday.

The book, The Room Where It Happened: A White House Memoir, is scheduled to be published on March 17. Late last month, Bolton submitted his book for vetting to the National Security Council. The New York Times reported on Sunday that in the manuscript, Bolton recounts a conversation with Trump in which the president tied aid to Ukraine to whether that country launched investigations into Joe Biden and his son Hunter.

On Wednesday, the Senate started what is likely to be two days of Q&A sessions, in which senators pose written questions to impeachment managers and Trump’s legal team.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) started off the proceedings with a question she submitted on behalf of her and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT). The question was on how the Senate should consider whether Trump abused his power if he had more than one motive for his actions. Patrick Philbin, one of the president’s attorneys, said that if there was any national interest motive, acquittal is warranted.

The next question, from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), noted the allegations made in Bolton’s book and asked how the Senate could render a verdict without hearing from him and other witnesses.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the lead impeachment manager, said that reports of Bolton’s book showed how there was a corrupt motive.

“Don’t wait for the book, don’t wait until March 17, when it is in black and white, the answer to your question,” Schiff told the Senate.

Later in the day, Trump’s legal team read the letter that was sent to Bolton’s attorney about the book, revealing that the National Security Council had concerns that it contained classified information. Bolton’s attorney Charles Cooper released his response to the White House letter in which he said they “do not believe that any information could reasonably be considered classified, but given that Ambassador Bolton could be called to testify as early as next week, it is imperative that we have the results of your review of that chapter as soon as possible.”

Iranian factory makes U.S. and Israeli flags to burn
WONDER IF THEY TAKE FOREIGN ORDERS 
Reuters•January 29, 2020



1 / 32
Iranian factory makes U.S. and Israeli flags to burn
Large flag factory creates U.S. and Israeli flags for Iranian protesters to burn in Khomein City

KHOMEIN, Iran (Reuters) - Business is booming at Iran's largest flag factory which makes U.S., British and Israeli flags for Iranian protesters to burn.

At the factory in the town of Khomein, southwest of the capital Tehran, young men and women print the flags by hand then hang them up to dry. The factory produces about 2,000 U.S. and Israeli flags a month in its busiest periods, and more than 1.5 million square feet of flags a year.

Tensions between the United States and Iran have reached the highest level in decades after top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani was killed in a U.S. drone strike in Baghdad on Jan. 3, prompting Iran to retaliate with a missile attack against a U.S. base in Iraq days later.

In state-sponsored rallies and protests in Iran, demonstrators regularly burn the flags of Israel, U.S. and Britain.

Ghasem Ghanjani, who owns the Diba Parcham flag factory, said: "We have no problem with the American and British people. We have (a) problem with their governors. We have (a) problem with their presidents, with the wrong policy they have."

"The people of America and Israel know that we have no problem with them. If people burn the flags of these countries at different rallies, it is only to show their protest."

Rezaei, a quality control manager, who declined to give her first name, said, "compared to the cowardly actions of the United States, such as General Soleimani's assassination, this (burning an American flag) is a minimal thing against them. This is the least that can be done."

For hardliners, anti-American sentiment has always been central to Iran's Islamic revolution, and Iran's clerical rulers continue to denounce the United States as the Great Satan.

Last November, however, many Iranians took to the streets to protest against the country's top authorities, chanting "our enemy is not the U.S., our enemy is here."

During protests this month that erupted after Tehran belatedly admitted shooting down a passenger plane by mistake, young demonstrators in Tehran refused to step on the American flag painted on the street.

PHOTOS

Worst Locust Swarms in Decades Hit East Africa

• ALAN TAYLOR
 
• JANUARY 28, 2020
 
• 15 PHOTOS
 
• IN FOCUS

Hundreds of millions of desert locusts are swarming in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Somalia—some of the biggest numbers seen in more than 25 years. Unusually wet weather in the area toward the end of 2019 has contributed to the massive outbreak, driving an explosion of locusts that are destroying crops and threatening food security across the region. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization is requesting international assistance to combat the swarms, and warning of the potential for massive growth if they are left unchecked.

SEE  https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=BIBLICAL
SEE  https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=PLAGUE
SEE  https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=LOCUSTS
SEE  https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=AFRICA
SEE  https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=KENYA
SEE  https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=SOMALIA

Joe Biden Said No Scientist Supports Bernie Sanders’ Climate Plan. Dozens Just Did.

Chris D'Angelo,HuffPost•January 29, 2020


Dozens of scientists have endorsed Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-Vt.) sweeping plan to combat global climate change after fellow Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden declared that “not a single solitary scientist thinks it can work.”

The former vice president derided Sanders’ proposed $16.3 trillion Green New Deal during a campaign stop last week in New Hampshire, adding that “you can not get to zero emissions by 2030. It’s impossible.”

Sanders swung back over the weekend, telling a crowd in Iowa that he would soon unveil “a long list of scientists” who back his plan. The Sanders campaign delivered on Tuesday, releasing a letter of support signed by 57 science professors and researchers from around the country.

“The Green New Deal you are proposing is not only possible, but it must be done if we want to save the planet for ourselves, our children, grandchildren, and future generations,” the letter signed by the scientists said. “Not only does your Green New Deal follow the [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s] timeline for action, but the solutions you are proposing to solve our climate crisis are realistic, necessary, and backed by science. We must protect the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the planet we call home.”

The Sunrise Movement, the youth-led grassroots group that’s campaigned for a Green New Deal and endorsed Sanders for president earlier this month, is helping lead the signature campaign.

NEW: More than 55 scientists sign letter supporting @BernieSanders' climate plan #GreenNewDeal pic.twitter.com/xfRvjei7st

— People for Bernie (@People4Bernie) January 28, 2020

Sanders’ plan is ambitious and popular among climate activists. It calls for slashing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions 71% below 2017 levels by 2030 and zeroing them out altogether by 2050; bans on fracking, oil and gas drilling on federal lands and fossil fuel subsidies; and promises to create 20 million jobs. It proposes spending $16.3 trillion over the next decade, including $1.52 trillion on renewable energy and $852 billion on energy storage.

Biden’s climate plan calls for spending $1.7 trillion over a decade, creating 10 million new jobs and reaching net-zero emissions no later than 2050.

The Sunrise Movement gave Sanders’ Green New Deal a score of 91.5% ― the highest among the top Democratic candidates. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Biden scored 85.5% and 37.5%, respectively. Greenpeace gives Sanders’ plan an A+, Warren’s an A and Biden’s a B+.

Several signatories of Tuesday’s letter also voiced support for Sanders’ push for climate action on Twitter.

“I believe that radical decarbonization is possible *if* supported by a deep commitment to and centering of people,” wrote Emily Grubert, a professor of environmental engineering at the Georgia Institute of Technology. “It’s going to be hard — so hard. But we must try.”

“I’m a climate scientist and I’m freaking out about what’s happening to our planet right now,” wrote Peter Kalmus, a climate scientist at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Lab. “Is Bernie’s climate plan ambitious? Yes. Is it expensive? Yes. But the alternative is losing... well, everything. From where I sit, the thing that’s not feasible is doing nothing.”

Sanders defines a Jewish identity his way on the 2020 trail

ELANA SCHOR, Associated Press•January 29, 2020

NEW YORK (AP) — Bernie Sanders is approaching next week’s Iowa caucuses in a position to become the first major-party Jewish presidential nominee in the nation’s history. And at a time of resurgent anti-Semitism, he’s talking in more depth about how his faith shapes his broader worldview.

Soon after the one-year anniversary of the massacre at Pittsburgh’s Tree of Life synagogue, Sanders penned a column on combating anti-Semitism that outlined how his family’s history underpins his commitment to fight bigotry. After five New York Jews were stabbed while celebrating Hanukkah last month, Sanders used an Iowa menorah-lighting stop to connect his immigrant father’s journey to America, “fleeing anti-Semitism and fleeing violence,” to ideals he described as imperiled by attacks on Jews -- and other minority groups.

Just last week, Sanders tweeted a video featuring his campaign’s Jewish outreach director, Joel Rubin, discussing the Vermont senator’s “intrinsically Jewish values.”

Sanders has described his pride in being Jewish since his first Democratic presidential run in 2016. But he’s known more for detaching from organized religion than embracing faith, and his model of Jewish American candidacy -- aligning with “the tradition of Jewish social justice” while criticizing Israeli government policy toward Palestinians -- breaks the mold cast by observant Jew Joseph Lieberman, the Democrats’ vice-presidential nominee 20 years ago.

Sanders’ increased engagement with his Jewishness comes as a Democratic super PAC unveils a six-figure ad campaign in Iowa challenging his candidacy and raising questions about his health.

Sanders “doesn’t buy into that concept of anti-Semitism and Jewish identity as defined by Israel,” said Rubin, who joined the campaign earlier this month, in an interview.

The 78-year-old democratic socialist connected his Jewishness to his liberal policies during remarks last fall to J Street, a progressive Jewish American group whose conference drew five Democratic presidential candidates.

“If there’s any group on earth that should be trying to bring people together around a common and progressive agenda, it is the Jewish people,” Sanders said, adding that he believes in Israel’s “right to exist in peace and security” and would extend the same right to Palestinians.

Sanders later raised a topic that promises to complicate his unifying vision of Jewish American values. Blasting conservative Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, he told the audience: “It is not anti-Semitism to say that the Netanyahu government has been racist.”

Sanders is hardly alone among Democrats in opposing Netanyahu's bid to annex West Bank settlements. But if Sanders prevails in the crowded Democratic presidential field -- which includes moderate Jewish rival Michael Bloomberg -- he’ll face a president in Donald Trump whose messages about anti-Semitism and Jewish identity are closely connected to the Israeli government.

Trump signed an executive order last month that stoked debate over when criticism of Israel crosses the line into anti-Semitism. The president also continues to embrace Netanyahu, releasing a Middle East peace plan alongside him on Tuesday, and last year said Jews who vote for Democrats are disloyal to their religion as well as Israel.

If Sanders is pitted against Trump, who would court Jewish votes as an ally of Netanyahu's government, the senator would have to carve out more nuanced terrain as a proud Jewish critic of that government. Bloomberg offers a contrasting approach, declaring that he “will always have Israel’s back" in a Sunday speech that poked at Sanders' 1960s volunteer stint on a leftist kibbutz in Israel.

Rubin acknowledged that Sanders is on the outside of legacy Jewish groups that view supporting Israel as sacrosanct.

“The Jewish establishment has a hard time looking at a Jewish politician who stands up for Jewish rights and makes it a Jewish American argument first,” said Rubin, who was J Street’s founding political director. But he asserted that “the predominant majority of American Jews” agree with Sanders.

A survey last year by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center found that 42% of Jewish Americans said Trump favors Israel too much. A similar share of Jewish Americans, 47%, said Trump strikes the right balance.

Even as Israel remains a polarizing topic, Sanders’ candidacy underlines a point that many Jews can agree on: Jewishness means different things to different people, presidential candidates included. While he eschews organized religion, Sanders was bar mitzvahed in his youth and has said he believes in God.

“The Jewish community is not a monolith,” Rabbi Hara Person, the Central Conference of American Rabbis' chief executive, said by email.

“It is certainly an important sign of progress in our country that Sanders is comfortable talking about and embracing his Jewish identity in the 2020 election and encompassing it as a value of who he is as a candidate,” added Person, who said she is not endorsing Sanders.

Halie Soifer, who heads the Jewish Democratic Council of America, said that Sanders “identified himself in a way most American Jews can relate to” by linking his faith to his progressive agenda.

“Where there's a robust debate in our community relates to his policies on Israel, and in that regard, I don’t know that his Judaism really comes into play,” added Soifer, whose group is not endorsing a Democratic primary candidate.

Jewish Americans tend to vote Democratic, even as Trump continues his outreach. According to AP VoteCast, 72% of Jewish voters backed Democratic House candidates in 2018 and 74% disapproved of Trump’s handling of his job.

Rubin described his job with the Sanders campaign as three-fold, energizing Sanders’ existing Jewish American supporters while also fielding challenges on high-priority Jewish issues and convincing new supporters that Sanders’ perspective is worth their time.

He may have a particularly tough road ahead with Jewish groups alienated by Sanders’ use of campaign surrogates who have made polarizing remarks about Israel-Palestinian relations.

Among those divisive figures is Muslim-American activist Linda Sarsour, who last month had to clarify her remarks after saying that Israel “is built on the idea that Jews are supreme to everyone else.” Among the prominent Jewish Americans who pushed back was the CEO of the Anti-Defamation League, who tweeted that her remarks were “anti-Semitism plain and simple.”

Mark Mellman, a longtime Democratic strategist who heads the group Democratic Majority for Israel, said that “it’s fair to say (Sanders) is greatly concerned by” rising anti-Semitism. But he warned that Sanders’ use of surrogates whose remarks on Israel have offended some Jewish Americans reflects a blind spot.

“There’s something wrong with somebody who professes to be concerned about anti-Semitism” but won’t disavow it when it comes from within his own camp, Mellman said.

His group's separate political action committee is running an ad against Sanders this week that does not mention Israel but raises doubts about the candidate's health after a heart attack last fall. The Sanders campaign raised more than $1.3 million in the day since it began using the ad to rally supporters, a figure first reported by The New York Times.

__

Associated Press religion coverage receives support from the Lilly Endowment through the Religion News Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for this content.