More than 100 House Democrats voted against a resolution condemning the Boulder terror attack, exposing deep political divisions on immigration enforcement even in the face of violent antisemitism.
Key Takeaways
- The House passed two resolutions addressing the Boulder attack, with Rep. Gabe Evans’ immigration-focused resolution passing 280-113, with 113 Democrats voting against it.
- A second resolution by Reps. Jeff Van Drew and Joe Neguse focusing solely on condemning antisemitism passed overwhelmingly 400-0, with only two present votes.
- The terror suspect, Mohammed Sabry Soliman, had overstayed his visa and now faces federal charges for allegedly attempting to set fire to pro-Israel demonstrators.
- Democrats claimed Evans’ resolution politicized antisemitism by including immigration enforcement provisions, while Republicans argued it addressed critical security concerns.
- President Trump’s administration has already taken steps to deport Soliman and his family, demonstrating a decisive response to the attack.
Divided Response to Boulder Attack Resolution
The House of Representatives showcased stark political divisions this week as lawmakers voted on two separate resolutions addressing the recent antisemitic terror attack in Boulder, Colorado. A resolution introduced by Rep. Gabe Evans (R-Colo.) that condemned the attack while also addressing immigration enforcement issues passed by a vote of 280-113, with 113 Democrats voting against the measure. The controversial resolution included language rebuking sanctuary jurisdictions, criticizing visa overstays, and commending Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), elements that Democrats claimed unnecessarily politicized the response to antisemitism.
“Who is this guy? He’s not seriously concerned with combating antisemitism in America. This is not a serious effort. Antisemitism is a scourge on America. It shouldn’t be weaponized politically,” said House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y.
In contrast, a second resolution introduced by Reps. Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.) and Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) that focused exclusively on condemning antisemitism passed with near-unanimous support, 400-0, with only Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) voting “present.” This stark difference in voting patterns highlights the increasing difficulty Congress faces in achieving bipartisan consensus even on matters involving terrorism and hate crimes when immigration policy becomes part of the conversation.
The Boulder Attack and Immigration Enforcement
The Boulder attack involved Mohammed Sabry Soliman, an Egyptian national who had overstayed his visa, who now faces federal charges for allegedly attempting to set fire to pro-Israel demonstrators. The Trump administration has taken swift action, with plans already in motion to deport Soliman and his family. Evans’ resolution emphasized the importance of communication between state, local, and federal law enforcement agencies while addressing what many conservatives view as the dangerous consequences of lax immigration enforcement policies across the country.
“Yes, it is different than mine. Mine focused purely on antisemitism here in the world. But he brings up a valid point not only for Jews, but for many innocent victims. Whether it was Laken Riley, whether it was the women that were raped, the women and men that were killed, those that were beaten, those that were hurt, who were in law enforcement. Illegal immigration is not a good thing,” said Rep. Jeff Van Drew, R-N.J.
Progressive Response to Antisemitism
Notably, several progressive Democrats known as “The Squad,” who have previously faced criticism for anti-Israel comments, did condemn the Boulder attack. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez expressed horror at the violence, while Rep. Ilhan Omar emphasized that violence against anyone is never acceptable. Even Rep. Rashida Tlaib, who has been one of Israel’s harshest critics in Congress and who voted “present” on Van Drew’s resolution, condemned the Boulder attack publicly while maintaining her political stance on related issues.
“I am horrified by last night’s horrific attack in Boulder. My heart is with the victims and our Jewish communities across the country. Antisemitism is on the rise here at home, and we have a moral responsibility to confront and stop it everywhere it exists,” said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.
Some Democrats claimed that Evans’ resolution was designed to force them into a politically difficult position. Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) accused Republicans of using antisemitism as a political weapon, stating, “You weren’t here, Mr. Evans, last term, but there were about 10 antisemitism resolutions that effectively said the same thing solely to score political points. We Jews are sick and tired of being used as pawns.” However, Republicans counter that addressing the immigration status of individuals who commit acts of terrorism is a legitimate policy concern, not a political maneuver.
The Broader Context of Immigration and Security
The divided response to the Boulder attack resolutions reflects the intensifying national debate over immigration enforcement and security. While Democrats accused Republicans of exploiting antisemitism for political gain, Republicans maintained that acknowledging the immigration status of the perpetrator was essential for effective policy responses. This tension comes as the Trump administration continues to implement stronger border security measures and more rigorous visa enforcement to prevent similar incidents from occurring in the future.
The Boulder attack has become a flashpoint that exemplifies how difficult it has become for Congress to address even violent acts of terrorism without becoming entangled in partisan disputes over immigration policy. As antisemitic incidents continue to rise across the United States, the challenge remains for lawmakers to balance legitimate security concerns with the political sensitivity surrounding immigration enforcement. The stark contrast between the two resolutions and their reception demonstrates just how polarized the House has become, even when responding to attacks on American soil.
