Maureen Galindo, a Democratic candidate for Texas's 35th Congressional District, is defending herself against accusations of antisemitism after she wrote on Instagram earlier this month that if elected to Congress, she would "turn Karnes ICE Detention Center into a prison for American Zionists and former ICE officers for human trafficking."
Galindo placed first in the state's March Democratic primary ahead of Johnny Garcia, a public information officer for the Bexar County Sheriff's Office who is preferred by national Democrats. The two are competing in an upcoming runoff to determine which candidate will represent the heavily Democratic San Antonio-based district in November.
What the Right Is Saying
Republicans have largely remained silent on Galindo's specific comments but have taken note of the Democratic infighting. The controversy comes as a GOP-aligned super PAC spent nearly $1 million to boost Galindo in the primary race, according to The New York Times.
Conservative commentators have highlighted the internal divisions within the Democratic Party over Israel policy and criticism of Zionism. Some Republicans argue that Democrats are facing consequences for their party's increasingly aggressive rhetoric against Israel's government.
Galindo's supporters on the right have pointed to her progressive platform on housing and immigration as reasons to back her candidacy, arguing that her primary opponent represents establishment Democratic interests rather than grassroots change in the district.
What the Left Is Saying
Progressive and mainstream Democrats have widely condemned Galindo's remarks. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries issued a statement calling on Republicans to stop supporting her campaign. "House Republican leadership must immediately cease propping up this antisemitic candidacy, pull spending in the race and forcefully condemn these comments," Jeffries said. "To embrace and uplift a fringe candidate with antisemitic—and extremely dangerous—rhetoric and views in order to win an election is beyond the pale."
Two Jewish members of Congress also responded to the controversy. Rep. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., and Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., said they would "force a vote to expel her" should Galindo be elected. Senate Democratic candidate James Talarico refused to campaign alongside Galindo in the days following her post.
Galindo has sought to clarify that she was targeting "billionaire Zionists who have profited off genocidal prison state materials and trafficking," not Jews based on religion. She wrote on her website that prosecution under her proposal "has nothing to do with religion—they could be Evangelical, Catholic, Mormon, Jewish, etc."
What the Numbers Show
Texas's 35th Congressional District has voted Democratic in recent elections. Galindo received the most votes in the March primary with a plurality, while Garcia came in second and is endorsed by national party leadership and pro-Israel groups.
The $1 million spent by the Republican-aligned super PAC to boost Galindo represents a significant investment for a House primary race. Democrats have pointed to this spending as evidence of GOP efforts to influence the Democratic nomination process.
Early voting data from Bexar County, where most of the district's voters reside, shows turnout patterns typical for midterm primaries in urban Texas counties, according to local election records.
The Bottom Line
The controversy highlights ongoing tensions within the Democratic Party over Israel and Zionism. National Democrats are working to prevent Galindo from becoming their nominee in a seat they expect to win in November, while Republicans appear to be investing in an effort that could either produce a vulnerable general-election candidate or deepen Democratic divisions.
Galindo's claim that her comments were mischaracterized by local media has not quieted the criticism. The runoff election will determine whether voters in the district accept her explanation or opt for Garcia as their nominee. Either way, the episode underscores how primary elections can expose fault lines within parties on foreign policy issues typically associated with federal debates.