Kamala Harris vice president pick: Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro’s real risk to the Democratic ticket.

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro is reportedly under serious consideration to become vice president and presidential candidate Kamala Harris’ running mate. And, in a certain sense, there are good reasons for this: Democrats badly want (some would argue need) to win Pennsylvania. Shapiro is, by all accounts, quite popular in the state he runs. He won the governorship handily in 2022 against Pennsylvania state Sen. Doug Mastriano, proponent of Christian nationalist ideas—which Shapiro proved unafraid to tackle head-on.

Shapiro is Jewish and has spoken strongly about and against antisemitism, which will surely be a theme in the 2024 presidential election. Republican candidate Donald Trump wonders aloud how any Jew could vote for a Democrat even as his son hosts a fundraiser with pundit Tucker Carlson, promoter of antisemitic conspiracy theories. Republicans reportedly see Shapiro as a threat, while progressive Pennsylvania state Sen. Nikil Saval touted his “strong willingness to build coalitions with people that he also disagrees with, and to change his views and policies through that act of coalition-building.”

And yet, for all of this, there are demerits to Shapiro, too. In the New Republic, the leftist Jewish writer David Klion made the case that Shapiro could threaten Democratic unity. Some of this is for domestic reasons. (More than two dozen public education advocacy groups wrote a letter asking Harris not to select Shapiro over his support for private school vouchers.) And some of this is because of Shapiro’s stance on Israel: As Klion notes, Shapiro, when attorney general, backed the state’s anti–boycott, divestment, and sanctions law, describing BDS as “rooted in antisemitism.” The Forward described Shapiro as having been “been a fixture at local rallies supporting Israel during its repeated wars in Gaza.” And his support has remained constant in this war, too: During a radio show on Oct. 11, Shapiro said, “We need to gird ourselves for what appears to be, you know, going to be a long war and we need to remain on the side of Israel.” Since then, as the Philadelphia Inquirer put it, he has “resisted” calls for a cease-fire. This past spring, as pro-Palestinian protests took place on campuses across the United States, the governor called on the University of Pennsylvania to “disband the encampment and to restore order and safety on campus” and implied a parallel between white supremacists and students protesting their university’s policies vis-à-vis Israel and the war in Gaza.

All of this could very well hurt Democratic unity and suppress voter turnout on the political left. Nominating Shapiro would also signify an embrace of an understanding of antisemitism that some American Jews contest, issuing a ruling on American Jewish political identity that many would chafe against (though so too could the selection of another rumored veep contender, North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper, who signed into law a bill that includes in its definition of antisemitism “the denial of Jewish people’s right to self-determination and applying double standards to Israel’s actions”). But this policy or way of thinking, if embraced by the Harris campaign—regardless of who her running mate is—could do something else, too: It could undercut the core of Harris’ very compelling argument, which is that her campaign is standing up for American freedoms.

Harris is using Beyoncé’s song “Freedom” as her campaign anthem. In her first campaign ad, one can hear the song in the background as Harris speaks about the various freedoms she’s aiming to protect and expand on: “The freedom not just to get by, but to get ahead. The freedom to be safe from gun violence. The freedom to make decisions about your own body.”

If this list of freedoms is to mean anything, it has to include the freedom to speak out and protest against the United States and its foreign policy, including with respect to Israel. It’s fundamental to the very concept of American liberty.

I do not mean to pit Jewish candidates reportedly under consideration to be Harris’ running mate against each other, nor do I want to suggest that all Jews should take the same position. (As you may have heard, we’re not a monolith.) But this is a needle that Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker has managed to thread. Back in May, he said that he supported Jewish organizations, but he also said, with respect to calls to oust university administrators, “I’m not about calling for people to step down.” Some protesters were anti-war, he said, and some were anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian, and, yes, some were antisemitic. But, he stressed, “What I support is the fact that we need to protect not just Jewish students but all students on campuses where there are protests.” That’s how it should be in America: We all have a right to speak out, and we all have a right to be safe.

I can understand and even sympathize with Shapiro’s obvious desire to use his leadership role to combat antisemitism. However, this past April he said, “If the universities in accordance with their policies can’t guarantee the safety and security and well-being of the students, then I think it is incumbent upon a local mayor or local governor or local town councilor, whoever is the local leadership there, to step in and enforce the law.” This past spring, we saw how sending in law enforcement escalated the situation on campuses; at Columbia, we even saw an officer fire his gun inside a student-occupied building. But beyond that: What does the threat of law enforcement do to academic freedom, or freedom of assembly, or freedom of expression? Aren’t those freedoms also critical for the well-being of American Jews?

How the Harris campaign manages this isn’t all down to whether she chooses Shapiro. On Thursday, in response to protests against Israel on the occasion of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Washington, Harris put out a statement saying, “I condemn any individuals associating with the brutal terrorist organization Hamas, which has vowed to annihilate the State of Israel and kill Jews. Pro-Hamas graffiti and rhetoric is abhorrent and we must not tolerate it in our nation.” She added, “I condemn the burning of the American flag. That flag is a symbol of our highest ideals as a nation and represents the promise of America. It should never be desecrated in that way. I support the right to peacefully protest, but let’s be clear: Antisemitism, hate and violence of any kind have no place in our nation.”

I do not expect a person running for president of the United States to come out in support of flag burning or pro-Hamas graffiti. But the right to peaceful protest has to extend to the right to protest a head of state, even the head of Israel, even if what’s said at those protests makes some uncomfortable. Further, while I do not doubt that some people at some protests crossed over into antisemitism this year, the conflation of the protests with antisemitism remains problematic: Netanyahu may have tried to draw a straight line between conspiracies around the Jewish people and criticism of the Jewish state in his address to Congress, but Harris doesn’t have to follow his lead. (And, in fairness, she herself criticized the death toll and humanitarian conditions in Gaza on Thursday, vowing that she would not “be silent.”)

Kamala Harris will not make this country safer for American Jews by trying to shut down or stomp out criticism about Israel. What she can do to ensure our safety, though, with Shapiro or whoever else is on the ticket—including possible running mate Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, who clapped when Netanyahu, during his address, referred to protesters as “Iran’s useful idiots”—is protect pluralism in politics and in the public square.

Project 2025 has been described as a Christian nationalist mission. It is, I would argue, in the interest of American Jews that those attached to it lose. But the way to do that is to protect freedoms of assembly and expression, too. The freedom to worship how we choose, speak out against our government, and, yes, protest—these are freedoms that make life better and safer for American Jews. And for everyone else, too.