The United States Congress is investigating the American Psychological Association (APA) for alleged incidents of antisemitism within the organization. The House Committee on Education and Workforce, led by Chairman Tim Walberg, is examining reports that Jewish members of the APA have faced harassment and ostracism due to their identity and beliefs.
In a letter addressed to APA President Dr. Debra Kawahara, Walberg highlighted that the APA represents over 172,000 professionals across the nation, including researchers, clinical practitioners, and students. The committee’s concerns stem from complaints made by Jewish members who claim they have been marginalized for speaking out against antisemitism and supporting Zionism. Many of these complaints reportedly went unanswered by the APA.
The committee’s inquiry follows a February 2025 open letter from Psychologists Against Antisemitism, which raised serious concerns about the APA’s treatment of Jewish members. The letter detailed instances of insensitivity toward Jews, a lack of action regarding antisemitism, and hostility towards Jewish heritage. Reports have also indicated that some APA-affiliated newsletters contained defenses of Hamas and offered educational credits for conferences featuring speakers who endorsed violence against Jews and Israelis.
The investigation also points to allegations regarding a former APA division president who allegedly taught that Zionism is a mental illness and called for its destruction. This individual reportedly referred to Israelis using derogatory language.
Dr. Miri Bar-Halpern, a lecturer in psychology at Harvard Medical School and a member of the American Jewish Medical Association, expressed the need for the congressional investigation, stating, “Antisemitism has been rising within the mental health field for years.”
Dr. Julie Ancis, President of Psychologists Against Antisemitism, recalled events from 2016 when her division adopted a statement that characterized Israel as an “apartheid” and “genocidal state.” She mentioned that concerns raised by Jewish members were often dismissed, indicating a marginalization of Jewish perspectives within the APA leadership unless they aligned with an anti-Israel stance.
Ancis further noted that since the adoption of that statement, antisemitism has become increasingly embedded within the APA, manifesting in official statements, conference presentations, and continuing education credits. Following the events of October 7, 2023, there has reportedly been a rise in negative rhetoric regarding Israel, with little acknowledgment of the victims from that day.
Bar-Halpern emphasized the real clinical harms arising from this environment, indicating that many Jewish clinicians and clients experience what she termed “traumatic invalidation.” This includes the minimization or dismissal of their fears and concerns about antisemitism. She stated that Jewish therapists often face silence or even scorn from colleagues when discussing their trauma.
The situation has created a troubling intersection between activism and clinical practice. Bar-Halpern warned that if the mental health field cannot adequately address antisemitism, it risks losing its ethical integrity and compassion.
In light of these serious allegations, Ancis has outlined six key changes she hopes Congress will implement as a result of its investigation:
1. Enforce APA’s inclusive language standards for all minoritized groups.
2. Return to the science of psychology.
3. Address antisemitic and anti-Zionist rhetoric in APA-affiliated forums.
4. Monitor professional training to prevent harmful material from being used.
5. Investigate and implement consequences for violations of APA’s ethical principles regarding discrimination.
6. Provide leadership training focused on Jews, Jewish history, antisemitism, and culturally responsive approaches to working with Jewish clients.
The APA has been asked to submit relevant documentation to Congress by January 2, 2026, which will significantly inform the committee’s response to the allegations. As this investigation unfolds, the focus remains on ensuring a functional and non-discriminatory mental health care system in the United States—something that appears to be in question at present.
