The Democratic primary in New Jersey’s 11th Congressional District is still too close to call, but one outcome is clear: the substantial financial backing from a prominent pro-Israel PAC has proven counterproductive.
The United Democracy Project, a super PAC funded by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), poured over $2 million into efforts to undermine former Rep. Tom Malinowski. As the votes continue to be counted, Malinowski finds himself narrowly trailing progressive activist Analilia Mejia.
While the ads aimed at Malinowski may have backfired, they also splintered the establishment vote in a crowded field, allowing Mejia to capitalize on the disarray.
Regardless of whether Malinowski or Mejia emerges victorious—Mejia has openly criticized Israel’s actions during its conflict with Hamas—one of them will likely represent the district in Congress, marking a significant setback for pro-Israel advocates.
This special primary may not set a precedent for all Democratic primaries nationwide, yet it highlights the challenges faced by the United Democracy Project as it prepares for upcoming elections. The party has increasingly shown skepticism towards unconditional support for Israel.
Malinowski, who previously served two terms after winning a competitive race in 2018, entered this primary as a frontrunner. However, the party establishment was divided; while he had support from Sen. Andy Kim, other influential figures like former Gov. Phil Murphy backed Essex County Commissioner Brendan Gill, and some rallied behind former Lt. Gov. Tahesha Way.
Mejia, on the other hand, effectively claimed the progressive lane, garnering endorsements from national figures such as Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, alongside local leaders like Newark Mayor Ras Baraka and the Working Families Party. Throughout her campaign, she emphasized her outsider status, declaring in advertisements, “I don’t work for the political machine.”
“What helped me was that I spent all the time that I could actually talking to voters. I did not go negative. I focused on issues,” Mejia stated during a press conference, seamlessly switching between English and Spanish.
Although Malinowski was generally viewed as a supporter of Israel during his congressional tenure, the United Democracy Project targeted him due to his remarks about conditioning aid to Israel.
The PAC’s advertisements did not mention Israel; instead, they criticized Malinowski for supporting funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement as part of a bipartisan budget deal during President Trump’s administration. They also accused him of profiting from COVID-related stocks while serving in Congress.
“As good a race as Analilia ran, as good a candidate as Analilia is, let me be clear: AIPAC created this race for themselves,” remarked a seasoned New Jersey Democratic strategist who requested anonymity. “In a way only they can, they spent millions of dollars beating back a moderate Democrat to get themselves a progressive that is totally outside the frame that they would like.”
The strategist noted that attention on this race surged only in the final weeks, attributing this to Mejia’s ability to build momentum and capitalize on the situation.
“If it wasn’t for the AIPAC spending, this would have been a sleepy primary. When they came in and dropped millions of dollars on the race, it totally upended everything,” they added.
Julie Roginsky, who managed the super PAC supporting Malinowski, criticized AIPAC’s strategy in a post on social media, labeling it detrimental to its objectives.
“I ran the super PAC in support of Tom Malinowski’s campaign. I am also a pro-Israel Jew. What AIPAC did in this race is bad for Jews, bad for Israel, and bad for having bipartisan congressional support for the very issues AIPAC claims to care about,” she expressed.
The eventual winner will likely secure around 30% of the votes cast amid a complex interplay of factors—ranging from a fragmented establishment field to growing discontent among Democratic voters seeking representation that aligns with their views.
The pro-Israel group’s notable political defeat is resonating throughout Jewish-American political circles and within a Democratic Party increasingly divided over its stance on Israel, particularly regarding recent actions in Gaza.
Patrick Dorton, a spokesperson for UDP, dismissed the New Jersey loss as an expected outcome while hinting at further involvement in the upcoming regular primary scheduled for June.
“Our focus remains on who will serve the next full term in Congress. UDP will be closely monitoring dozens of primary races, including the June NJ-11 primary, to help ensure pro-Israel candidates are elected to Congress,” he stated.
With $96 million in its coffers after receiving a $30 million donation from AIPAC at the end of 2025, UDP is poised to exert its influence in Democratic primaries as it has done in previous election cycles.
In 2023 and 2024 alone, UDP spent $61 million, including over $22 million targeting two progressive representatives—Jamaal Bowman in New York and Cori Bush in Missouri—while also investing more than $4 million to assist Democrat Sarah Elfreth in Maryland.
In the last election cycle, UDP allocated $33 million primarily towards Democratic primaries. Although it has supported some Republican candidates, its focus has largely remained on Democratic races.
This extensive spending has fueled resentment among AIPAC critics who argue that Democrats must distance themselves from unconditional support for Israel. They feel empowered by shifting political sentiments and frustration with AIPAC’s aggressive spending against progressive candidates.
“AIPAC represents one of a larger constellation of right-wing interests and lobbies that are spending hundreds of millions of dollars in Democratic primaries, and that should be a five-alarm fire to every Democratic voter,” stated Usamah Andrabi, communications director at Justice Democrats.
The New Jersey contest marks just the beginning of what is anticipated to be an active primary season for AIPAC-aligned super PACs. While no other races have been publicly targeted yet, several candidates previously supported by UDP are facing challenging primaries.
Polling indicates that Democratic voters have become increasingly critical of Israel’s actions. An AP-NORC poll from September revealed that 71% of Democrats felt Israel’s response in Gaza following Hamas’ attacks on October 7 had gone “too far,” an increase from 63% the previous year. Only 15% deemed military aid to Israel an important U.S. foreign policy goal.
A Pew Research Center survey conducted around the same time found that just 18% of Democrats held a favorable view of the Israeli government—similar to the 14% who viewed Hamas positively and below the 37% who favored the Palestinian Authority.
Gallup data from March indicated that 59% of Democrats expressed more sympathy towards Palestinians than Israelis regarding “the Middle East situation,” marking a significant shift after two decades of tracking this sentiment.
Signs of change are also evident among Democratic lawmakers; more are now referring to Israel’s actions as “genocide,” despite ongoing criticism of Hamas’ attacks. Currently, 61 Democrats co-sponsor legislation aimed at prohibiting presidential approval for certain munitions to Israel—a bill informally dubbed “Block the Bombs.”
In a message posted on social media Friday morning, Ocasio-Cortez asserted that AIPAC’s spending in New Jersey illustrated its intolerance for diverse viewpoints and aimed to pressure elected officials into opposing their constituents’ views.
“I hope Dems begin to see that moderate or progressive, AIPAC is not our friend,” Ocasio-Cortez concluded.
