The definition has been heavily criticised by academics, including legal scholars, who say that it stifles free speech relating to criticism of Israeli actions and policies. High-profile controversies took place in the United Kingdom in 2011 within the University and College Union,[note 1] and within the Labour Party in 2018. The definition has been contested for weaknesses that critics say lend themselves to abuse,[10][11][note 2] for obstructing campaigning for the rights of Palestinians, and for being too vague. Kenneth S. Stern, who contributed to the original draft, has opposed the weaponization of the definition on college campuses in ways that might suppress and limit free speech.[13][14] The controversy over the definition led to the creation of the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism and the Nexus Document, both of which expressly draw distinctions between antisemitism and criticism of Israel.[8]

Will you look at that, it’s criticized for not making a distinction between antisemitism and criticism of Israel, you know, because criticizing a country doesn’t mean hating its citizen or people ethnically related to them.

https://jerusalemdeclaration.org/