Summary
The Jewish relationship with the United States reflects a voluntary civic covenant grounded in religious freedom, equal citizenship, and pluralism. This arrangement allowed Jews to integrate fully into American public life while maintaining distinct religious and communal identities. Over time, Jewish political activism expanded from seeking basic protections to shaping national debates and foreign policy, particularly regarding Israel. This enduring partnership has profoundly influenced both American democracy and modern Jewish identity.
Key Takeaways
- A voluntary civic covenant between Jews and the United States is rooted in religious liberty, civil equality, and pluralism, enabling full participation without forced assimilation.
- Jewish political engagement evolved from petitioning for protection to becoming influential partners within American democracy, with strong involvement in civil rights, social justice, and foreign policy advocacy.
- Support for Israel and the development of organized pro Israel advocacy have become central expressions of Jewish political identity, operating through strategic alliances, elite engagement, and alignment with broader American interests.
The phrase “Jewish contract with America” isn’t a single formal document but a theological, historical, and cultural set of ideas. Rather than an implicit document, this “covenant” is linked to the Jewish concept of “brit.” But unlike biblical covenants, this civic connection is voluntary and revocable. The European Jewish model required Jews to acknowledge loyalty to rulers, absent any guarantees of rights. Such an arrangement was based on the toleration of rulers toward their Jewish subjects.
On several earlier occasions I have written about the Jewish contract with America. Initially, I published a piece in 2009 for the Jerusalem Center, entitled “Jews in the Psyche of America.” In 2013, writing for the Casden Institute Annual, I produced an article framing the core elements of this “contract.”
Following the attack on the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh in October of 2018, I issued a commentary reflecting on how that event had sparked the need to rethink this contractual arrangement. Finally, more recently, in 2024, I prepared an essay for eJewishphilanthropy, “Revisiting the Jewish Contract with America.”
Some Reflections:
The American political tradition specifically identifies a number of core elements that have been incorporated into this covenantal relationship. Among these themes are religious freedom, civil equality, and pluralism. Just as this nation has constructed a set of revolutionary principles of governance, Jews, in turn, responded to this experiment in democracy by demonstrating their loyalty as citizens and through their civic participation.
Religious liberty (as guaranteed in the First Amendment to the Constitution, ensuring the free exercise of faith, along with the affirmation of no established state religion) represents for many Jews the single most revolutionary feature of the American political construct. The opportunity for Jews to practice Judaism without constraints regarding state interference was seen as singularly significant. Further, there would be no requirements within the American context to convert, assimilate or hide one’s Jewish identity.
Citizenship in the United States is based on the rights of the individual to fully participate as voters and office holders with full and equal access before the courts. Such guarantees differed widely from the European experience that Jews had previously encountered, where often they were treated and seen as a protected minority with separate “legal status.” Jews would embrace their American citizenship and in doing so, expressed their loyalty to this nation.
How the Jewish community is organized with its schools, synagogues, charities, etc.… exists by choice, just as how Jews elect to define their affiliation and express their beliefs. This pluralistic model led in the 19th Century to the formation of Jewish denominations.
Other Writers and their Contributions:
Numerous scholars, among them Jonathan Sarna, Michael Walzer, Dan Elazar, Will Herberg, and Leon Wieseltier have written about aspects of this covenantal model.
Viewing American democracy as a “Jewish good,” Sarna views this experience as providing a new covenantal model. Walzer views America as a secular covenantal republic, informed and shaped by the political ideas of the Torah. Dan Elazar’s covenantal political theory on federalism aligns with how the American Jewish communal world would be organized.
Will Herberg’s tripartite religious model places Judaism on equal standing with Protestantism and Catholicism. Under this notion, Jews can claim an equal place among America’s mainstream religious constituencies, giving them greater credibility and access. Similarly, the doctrine of ethnic pluralism allowed Jews to redefine themselves as an ethnic community, giving them standing with other similar communities within the American polity.
A somewhat contrasting voice regarding this unique connection has been offered by Leon Wieseltier who expressed concern that American freedoms can weaken one’s Jewish rootedness, creating a type of covenantal thinning.
Israel as a Partner to the Contract:
Among the core features of American democracy involves the right of citizens to petition their government, to freely assemble, and to enjoy the benefits of freedom of speech. These distinguishing features have permitted Jews to petition the government on behalf of domestic and foreign concerns.
Adam Dicktor identified various political idioms that gave particular definition to the American Jewish scene:
Nationalist Orientation vs. Accommodational Behavior: Jews operated in one of two political spheres, either understanding their political destiny as distinctively national/tribal in orientation or as accommodating to the larger, more universal focus with its emphasis on “repairing the world.” The essential characteristic of the Jewish political condition has been this dynamic tension between proponents of political nationalism and those embracing Jewish universalism.
Judaism as Americanism: Jews would be seen as full partners in the American story, where “Judeo-Christian values” would frame the social fabric of this nation. This imbedded sense of being a part of the American story was understood as core to the Jewish experience in this nation.
“Be a Jew on the Street and an American at Home:” In the American context one can reject the melting pot perspective in favor of asserting a Jewish political and public identity.
Four-time frames summarize the scope and breath of American Jewish activism:
- Petitioners(1654-1870): Jews requesting actions to be taken on their behalf.
- Personalities(1870-1930): Individual Jews who created personal relationships as a means of advancing Jewish interests.
- Participants(1930-1960): Jewish organizations joining with others to achieve specific outcomes.
- Partners(1960-2026): Jews and Jewish institutions as power players operating within the political system.
Jews have been primary players and partners on behalf of a wide array of American-based priorities, among them civil rights concerns, economic and social justice issues, educational and immigration policies. Correspondingly, Jews have been active in defending and protecting other Jewish Diaspora communities as well as speaking out on behalf of other minority constituencies across the globe.
With the emergence of Zionism, there has been a growing sense of the essential connection of the United States with the idea of a Jewish national homeland, emanating both from within the Jewish community and beyond.
Advocacy for Israel has represented a key element in shaping American Jewish identity. The seeds of Jewish advocacy and political engagement with Israel most certainly date back, even prior to the formation of the State of Israel. Yet, the first twenty-five years of the State’s existence would frame the Israel advocacy model that America’s Jews and the organizations that represent them have employed throughout the history of the State’s evolution and development.
In 2016, I wrote about the core features and practices associated with this central element to this contract with America, suggesting that Jews have successfully embraced the tools of political activism to promote the U.S.-Israel relationship. Over the decades, the pro-Israel advocacy network has developed a set of principles and practices, allowing it to advance this special connection between Washington and Jerusalem.
More recently, I had the opportunity to examine the key organizing features adopted by AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee). Even as the Gaza Conflict has created certain divisions, 85% of American Jews, according to an American Jewish Committee study believe it is important to the United States to support Israel. That same report noted that 57% felt more connected to Israel following October 7.
Advocacy Principles:
Over these past eight decades, the pro-Israel community was able to develop a set of advocacy principles. The Jewish community would seek to engage key non-Jewish elites, representing one such organizing strategy. In contemporary times, these leaders would be selected from five spheres of influence: the world of business/labor, civic culture, education, religion, and government. These “influence makers” have played critical roles in defending Jews and advancing the case for Israel.
Over time, a set of core political principles have come to define and shape the pro-Israel agenda:
Rule of Marginal Effect: If there is no direct challenge to their credibility or political interests, minority communities can advance their agenda. Since the inception of the State of Israel, there has been a growing congruence between the pro-Israel positions of the organized Jewish community and its allies and that of the broader American foreign policy establishment.
When Jewish interests or Israeli policies, for example, are not aligned with core American values and foreign policy priorities, there is a greater potential for increased tension and policy disagreement among the principal actors, leading at times to tensions between the United States and Israel.
Jewish communal politics serves as a barometer of the general political climate. Jewish political behavior and rhetoric models the larger political culture. Jews have a unique and on-going engagement with American democracy, creating broad political participation on behalf of both specific Jewish concerns and a wide set of general interests. This political investment by Jews is far out of proportion to the community’s percentage of the population as evidenced its voter participation, financial engagement, and involvement with political parties and candidates.
Interest group politics requires that a community have access to national political elites and decision-making institutions. For constituencies with a small population base, it is essential that these groups maximize their resources, develop, and sustain a focused agenda, and demonstrate to decision-makers a successful track record. Minority groups establish their political credibility by focusing on the political outcomes that are core to their self-interests and are seen as benefitting the U.S. The success of the Israel agenda in Washington is directly tied to this formula.
While only a symbolic notion, this “Jewish contract with America” has come to symbolize the deep and abiding connectedness of Jews with the American experience. In all aspects of one’s life as a Jew and as an American, one encounters this melding together of state and faith. The fluidity of being Jewish and American has helped to define and certainly shape this unique bond. The character of Jewish patriotism and loyalty as a result has been singularly profound.
