That controversial phrasing has been interpreted by the Anti-Defamation League to convey an interest in eliminating the state of Israel.
"Rashida Tlaib RT's [retweets] out the same message that got Marc Lamont Hill canned from CNN," tweeted the account for StopAntiSemitism.org.
"From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be Free - code for eradicating the State of Israel and its millions of Jews. Reminder - this is a sitting U.S. Congresswoman."
The group was referring to a former CNN commentator who was fired from the network after a speech he gave at the United Nations in 2018. At the time, Hill denied calling for Israel's destruction.
"My reference to 'river to the sea' was not a call to destroy anything or anyone," he tweeted.
"It was a call for justice, both in Israel and in the West Bank/Gaza. The speech very clearly and specifically said those things. No amount of debate will change what I actually said or what I meant."
Tlaib has faced criticism over her support for Palestinians and the way she talked about Jews.
Tlaib was criticized by House Republicans last year after describing the "calm feeling" she experienced when thinking about the Holocaust. However, the congresswoman said her critics were policing and "twisting" her words and defended the comments she made.
The Michigan congresswoman also made headlines when she sought a humanitarian visit to her grandmother after the Israeli government rejected her and Rep. Ilhan Omar's, D-Minn., request to enter the Jewish state. Citing the two's itinerary, Israel claimed that their visit was intended to promote boycotts against the nation.
Tlaib later requested the humanitarian visit through a letter that contained a promise not to promote boycotts. But the Michigan Democrat reversed course after Israel accepted her request, claiming she would have to go under "oppressive conditions."
On Sunday, Tlaib referenced her grandmother, or "sity," in a tweet with the photo called out by StopAntiSemitism.org.
"Thinking of my sity Muftieh and family in Palestine today. From Detroit to Gaza, we will always fight against oppression and inequality," she said.
Tlaib's office did not immediately respond to Fox News' request for comment. Earlier this month, she came under fire for participating in a panel on "dismantling anti-Semitism."
"But Jack Saltzberg, the head of the Israel Group, a pro-Israel advocacy group that also focuses on Wikipedia, disagrees. “This is simply another example of an anti-Israel editor creating an article with the singular purpose of promulgating negative and inaccurate information about Israel. Yes, it is a big deal, but no, it is not new.”
[NOTE: THE FOLLOWING IS EXACTLY AS PUBLISHED BY HAARETZ; THE ISRAEL GROUP DOES NOT BACK MANY OF THE OPINIONS]
On Wikipedia, Israel Is Losing the Battle Against the Word 'Apartheid'
Trump’s peace plan and Israel’s creeping annexation of the West Bank are undermining one of Israel’s most important public diplomacy points in one of the most important arenas online
Omer Benjackob | Haaretz
The consensus that Israel’s occupation of the West Bank does not constitute a form of apartheid is shifting on Wikipedia. While the validity of drawing an analogy between Israel and the apartheid regime of South Africa has long been debated on Wikipedia, a new article titled “West Bank bantustans” shows cracks in the editorial agreements that have stood for almost a decade on the volunteer-edited online encylcopedia.
Wikipedia has had an article on “Israel and the apartheid analogy” for almost 15 years. However, editors active in this arena told Haaretz that the new entry directly comparing Israel’s control of the West Bank to the Black-only enclaves set up in South Africa indicates a possible shifting of balance in the encyclopedia, where facts are decided by consensus between different groups of volunteer editors.
As many know, The Israel Group has been the only pro-Israel organization at the forefront trying to stop Wikipedia's anti-Israel bias. Since most students begin their research on Wikipedia and since it is the largest online educational resource in the world, this battle must we waged.
Because of the sensitivity of the situation, most of The Israel Group's efforts against Wikipedia are under the radar and cannot be revealed publicly.
It is expensive to battle a behemoth like Wikipedia and it is a long-term effort that must be waged. But we can't do it alone.
As the year ends, please consider supporting our effort to stop Wikipedia's extreme anti-Israel bias!