Democratic CD1 candidate Dr. Amish Shah celebrates the early voting returns with supporters during a watch party at a private home in Phoenix on July 21, 2026.

A series of Democratic primary victories in Arizona has offered fresh evidence that candidates supportive of Israel remain competitive in one of the country’s most closely divided battleground states, even as the party’s progressive wing pushes for a more confrontational approach toward the Jewish state.

State Rep. Alma Hernandez, US Rep. Greg Stanton, and former state lawmaker Amish Shah prevailed in closely watched contests Tuesday. Hernandez and Stanton defeated progressive challengers who made opposition to Israel central to their campaigns, while Shah—who has defended Israel’s war against Hamas—won the Democratic nomination in a competitive congressional district.

Hernandez, a Jewish and Mexican American lawmaker who describes herself as an unapologetic Zionist, defeated Rocque Perez in the Democratic primary for an Arizona Senate seat, winning approximately 54 percent of the vote.

The race had increasingly become a proxy battle over Israel and the Democratic Party’s ideological direction. Hernandez argued that attacks on her support for Israel had crossed from legitimate political criticism into antisemitism targeting her Jewish identity.

Perez denied that his campaign was motivated by antisemitism, saying his criticism focused on Hernandez’s political positions. But he repeatedly accused her of enabling “genocide,” representing “foreign interests,” and relying on support from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. A fundraising message asking supporters to help “unseat a Zionist!” drew condemnation from Jewish community leaders.

Following her victory, Hernandez said voters had rejected both antisemitism and the agenda of the Democratic Socialists of America.

“We proved that elections are won by knocking on doors and talking to voters, not by social media or online outrage and your friends’ endorsements,” she said.

Hernandez also urged other Democrats not to capitulate to anti-Israel activists or assume that condemning Israel is necessary to prevail in a party primary.

“You don’t have to cave into the pressure, or blame everything on AIPAC or Democratic Majority for Israel, and say that it’s a genocide to win Democratic voters over,” she wrote on social media. “They don’t need to hate Israel to win. Period.”

In Arizona’s 4th Congressional District, Stanton easily defeated progressive organizer Kai Newkirk, winning roughly two-thirds of the vote. Local media called the race shortly after results began arriving.

Newkirk made Stanton’s support for Israel and relationship with pro-Israel organizations major campaign issues. He called for an end to all US military assistance to Israel, a comprehensive arms embargo, and a broader shift in American policy toward the Palestinians. He also accused Israel of committing “genocide” in Gaza.

The challenger attracted support from progressive and anti-Israel organizations, including Our Revolution and Track AIPAC. He also promoted an endorsement from left-wing commentator Cenk Uygur, who praised him as “Israel free.”

Stanton, a former Phoenix mayor first elected to Congress in 2018, argued that Democrats should prioritize governing and delivering tangible results over ideological purity. His decisive victory suggested that Newkirk’s attacks on Israel and AIPAC gained limited traction among voters in the suburban district.

Shah’s victory in Arizona’s competitive 1st Congressional District was more complicated politically. The emergency physician defeated former television journalist Marlene Galán-Woods, who had received support from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, by approximately 39 percent to 34 percent.

The race centered largely on grassroots organizing and the national party’s decision to intervene in the primary, rather than on Israel. Nevertheless, Shah has articulated a broadly supportive position toward the Jewish state.

In a Middle East policy paper, Shah described his personal connection to Israel and defended its right to protect itself from Hamas and other regional threats. Although he lamented civilian casualties in Gaza and cited the pacifist principles of his Jain faith, he argued that war can be necessary under narrowly defined circumstances.

“Hamas is a militant terrorist organization that has committed unspeakable atrocities to achieve its ends,” Shah wrote. “Israel has responded to the attacks of October 7 by engaging in a war to destroy Hamas. I support Israel in this endeavor.”

He also criticized what he described as insufficient international pressure to dismantle Hamas, saying Israel had been left “nearly alone in its effort,” apart from the United States.

Taken together, the results demonstrate the limits of treating Democratic attitudes toward Israel as uniform. Hernandez and Stanton won clear victories over challengers who sought to mobilize voters around opposition to Israel, while Shah prevailed despite offering a defense of Israel’s campaign against Hamas.

The contests do not erase the gains made by anti-Israel candidates elsewhere, particularly in heavily Democratic urban districts. But they suggest that such campaigns may face greater difficulty in swing states and suburban districts, where Democratic candidates must assemble broader coalitions and remain competitive with independents.

As Democrats prepare for the November midterms, Arizona will remain an important test of whether the party’s traditional coalition can withstand pressure from its activist left. For now, the results indicate that support for Israel remains compatible with success in Democratic primaries—even amid growing divisions within the party over the war in Gaza.