In the federal FACE Act case born from the mob that blocked access in November 2024 to a synagogue in West Orange, N.J., the defendants are asking the courts to abandon the constitutional protections of religious freedom that make America great, while disregarding Jewish law, prayer and lived experience. One could hardly seek better proof that the defendants in this instance discarded both the law and America’s founding principles in their pursuit of antisemitic bigotry.

The legislation was initially designed to protect people entering abortion clinics from being harassed; eventually, it was expanded to apply to the entrances to houses of worship.

The Party for Socialism and Liberation New Jersey, American Muslims for Palestine New Jersey and numerous individual defendants all outrageously insist that the synagogue event they disrupted—one that memorialized a murdered Israeli rabbi and encouraged Jewish life in Israel—was not religious at all. They arrogate for themselves the right to decide what Judaism is, what Jews believe and which parts of Jewish life count as religious. That is not a legal defense, but an act of erasure, as antisemitic as it is unconstitutional.

The court filings could hardly make their intent and animus more blatant. One defendant asserts therein that encouraging Jews to live in the Holy Land “could not plausibly be interpreted” as a religious activity. Another compares such a real estate fair to “bingo night in a church basement.” A third faults the government for failing to prove, from Jewish law, that it’s a mitzvah (“commandment”) for Jews to live in the land of Israel, as if U.S. attorneys should be expected to research Jewish sources to establish basic Jewish tenets.

All of these attempt to force the courts into unconstitutional entanglement with religious doctrine, while denying and distorting obvious Jewish beliefs.

The First Amendment, to be certain, forbids the courts from wading into this argument; they cannot be called upon to determine what is or is not a Jewish religious activity. American courts cannot claim expertise in the Jewish attachment to the Land of Israel, the relevant mitzvot (“biblical commandments”) or how they apply today.

At the same time, the defendants’ attitude is so obviously at odds with Jewish belief and so dismissive of the Jewish experience as to prove antisemitic bias. The desire to live on holy ground is a theme that saturates Jewish prayer, holy texts and halachah (“Jewish law”). Antisemitism does not only target Jews as individuals, but Judaism as a religion, and the defense filings openly express that the defendants share this familiar and repugnant hostility.

To claim that a synagogue event about land in Israel is “not religious” requires, first of all, that one deny the mitzvah of yishuv ha’aretz, “settling the land,” affirmed by the Ramban and rooted in Torah. It demands nullification of the pleas for rebuilding of Jerusalem and the Holy Temple, restoration of the Davidic Kingdom and return of the Divine Presence that are at the core of every Jewish prayer service, every day of the year.

And, of course, it erases religious expression by Jews. Whether those making aliyah come from the United States, France, Ethiopia, Ukraine, Argentina or anywhere else, political Zionism is rarely even a secondary concern. The overwhelming majority move either to escape Jew-hatred or to fulfill numerous religious commandments, including living in the Land of Israel and participating in its rebuilding. Maimonides, Rav Ovadiah of Bartenura, Rav Yosef Karo, in addition to the hundreds of students of the Vilna Gaon and Ba’al Shem Tov who moved to the Land of Israel, all did so exclusively as an expression of their Jewish religious beliefs.

Most fundamentally, to insist that their motivations are “not religious” is to tell the Jews targeted at Congregation Ohr Torah that their own lives, fears, hopes, beliefs and commitments do not matter. That is not a defense. It is an expression of transparent—and transparently hateful—disregard for Jewish humanity.

The FACE Act protects all forms of religious exercise, not only ritual. Congress enacted it to protect houses of worship and religious communities from intimidation and obstruction. This protection is not limited to prayer services, but encompasses the full spectrum of religious life, including gatherings that express, celebrate or advance a community’s religious identity. A synagogue event discussing Jewish life in Israel is unquestionably part of that spectrum.

If a court accepted the defendants’ framing, that would set a chilling precedent. Jewish prayer would be protected, but attempts to realize the commitments expressed in those prayers would not. That would hamper Jewish religious liberty no less than attacks on circumcision or kosher meat. It would have the courts annul the parts of Judaism that anti‑Israel activists find inconvenient.

The defendants’ argument is unconstitutional because it asks the court to define Judaism, and antisemitic because it expressly denies both Judaism’s own self‑definition and the religious beliefs of the targeted Jews. In other words, the defendants want the courts to declare their activities not to be hateful or bigoted, precisely because they are.

This is dangerous not only for Jews who seek to fulfill mitzvot, but for all Americans who share the reverence of the country’s Founding Fathers for religious freedom and tolerance.

Consider that without those principles, Pilgrims in Massachusetts, Mennonites in Pennsylvania and Anglicans in Virginia could not have united to build the world’s dominant superpower. The defendants have thus proven both their guilt and their hostility towards Judaism, Jewish life and the values that make America great.

If you think about it, it is shocking that Korach joined forces with Datan and Aviram in his campaign to usurp leadership. Korach had a distinguished reputation, as Chazal (the Sages) explain, and he presented his case by way of (very flawed) doctrinal arguments, trying to persuade the masses that his theological position was correct. In stark contrast, Datan and Aviram had a very checkered and disreputable past of nasty confrontation and shameful instigation.

As Rashi explains, based on midrashim, it was Datan and Aviram who were violently fighting with each other in Egypt when Moshe tried to stop them (Shemot [Exodus] 2:3); it was Datan and Aviram who badmouthed Moshe to Pharoah, thereby almost causing Moshe’s execution (ibid. 2:15); it was Datan and Aviram who violated the command not to leave over any manna until the next day (ibid. 16:19-20); and as Midrash Ha-Gadol (Bamidbar [Numbers]16:1) states, it was Datan and Aviram who complained at the shore of Yam Suf (the Sea of Reeds) about having left Egypt and who sought to return there (Shemot 14:11-12 – v. Rashi on v. 12).

Why in the world did Korach join forces with Datan and Aviram, whose very compromised past and quite negative reputation would surely not have served his professed ideological campaign well?

How could people who were known for their belligerent personalities and violations of Torah bring prestige to what Korach promoted as a grassroots religious drive founded on positive principles?

Why would Korach tarnish his movement by aligning with known troublemakers and negative forces?

The answer is that despite Korach presenting his agenda as an ideological crusade for the betterment of the masses, in truth it was a self-serving power grab motivated by jealousy and personal ambition; the ideology was a mere front and a ruse to draw pubic support for what was nothing more than an egocentric stunt. As such, Korach needed loud voices and strident personalities to amplify his message and force Moshe into a position of weakness and concession.

Datan and Aviram were the perfect characters for this. They were the ideal “hit men” and the best people to catalyze a mass movement against Moshe Rabbeinu, escalating matters to the point of surrender and collapse.

It is not surprising that throughout Jewish history, those who sought to challenge the Mesorah (Torah tradition) typically launched their campaigns by professing lofty ideologies that purported to enhance or ennoble Judaism, whereas the reality is that these deviant movements’ true aim to was to dilute and tear down Torah values and observance, usually with an underlying motivation of opportunism on the part of those involved.

By including Datan and Aviram in his uprising, Korach in effect exposed his campaign for what it really was – a self-serving power grab, in which Torah and Torah leadership were contested and defied by ostensibly lofty religious philosophies, all in a base effort by an illegitimate and greedy player to undermine the system and seize power.

May Hashem continue to illuminate our path, provide us with true Torah leaders, and enable us to realize when people are seeking to subvert Torah values while professing to enrich them.

Before issuing a kneejerk condemnation of Beckwith’s comments, the JCRC should thus first have addressed their merits. They are considerable.

In the immediate wake of the largest post-Holocaust mass murder of Jews, the Hamas massacre of October 7, 2023, chapters of Students for Justice in Palestine at Indiana, Purdue, and Butler Universities all held rallies in support of the kidnapping, rapes, and massacres of that day, branding these despicable crimes as “resistance.” Similarly, 57.5% of American Muslims surveyed in the wake of October 7th claimed the Hamas jihadi attack on Jewish civilians was at least somewhat justified.

The Executive Director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), billed as “the largest Muslim civil liberties and advocacy organization in the United States,” said that he was “happy” to see the atrocities of that day, which he called “self-defense.” In a 2024 survey, CAIR found overwhelming Muslim support for the notion that Israel’s efforts to free hostages from rape, starvation, and torture were actually a “genocide.”

Here in Indiana, Shaykh Mongy El-Quesny, Imam of the Northwest Indiana Islamic Center, called for “annihilation” of those who support Israel, while Sheikh Abdullah Alhajj, Imam of the Highland Masjid, denounced those who neutralized Jihadi terrorists as “enemies of Islam.” Masjid Al-Fajr of Indianapolis hosted a discussion claiming an “Islamic war” against “Zionists” and promoted antisemitic conspiracy theories. Is the JCRC claiming to know Islamic beliefs better than Indiana’s leading Imams?

While we may not agree with everything Lieutenant Governor Beckwith says or how he says it, JAACI believes that he has every right to call out hatred within the Muslim community, just as he does for any other group or community within Indiana. The JCRC and its allies cannot claim to represent the Jewish community while ignoring the existential threat to Jewish life in Indiana now festering under their noses.

JAACI touts its own strong record of supporting Jewish rights and opposing antisemitic boycotts, and calls upon all people of good will to condemn the threats to Jews and other Americans regardless of ideology, religion or political persuasion.

 Hundreds of protesters waving Israeli and American flags gathered Tuesday night, just steps from Gracie Mansion on Manhattan’s Upper East Side to rally against Democratic Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

Speakers at the rally accused the mayor of failing to protect the city’s Jewish population and ignoring antisemitism. The protest featured a long list of speakers, including former “Big Time Rush” star James Maslow, artist Scott LoBaido, Lawfare Project founder Brooke Goldstein and several pro-Israel activists.

The rally was organized by #EndJewHatred, a grassroots group focused on combating antisemitism.

In between the speeches, the crowd broke into chants of “Remove Mamdani” and “USA, USA,” and sang “The Star-Spangled Banner.”

“This is not the New York City I knew and loved,” Ari Ackerman, an entrepreneur and outspoken pro-Israel advocate, told Fox News Digital.

“There’s a different ideology that has taken over by the man who’s living in that house right over there,” he added, pointing at Gracie Mansion, “and it’s not good. It’s changed everything.”

Mamdani’s friction with the city’s Jewish community came into focus during his campaign as some questioned his stance on Israel, refusal to condemn the phrase “globalize the intifada” and his ties to activists like Hasan Piker and Mahmoud Khalil.

Antisemitic incidents have surged in New York City since Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks in Israel. Recently, there have been anti-Israel protests outside Jewish institutions and synagogues.

Since Mamdani took office in January, tensions have remained high, with many Jewish New Yorkers saying they do not feel safe in their own city. New York City is home to the largest Jewish population in the world outside Israel.

Just days after another wave of antisemitic threats and increasing security fears at Jewish places of worship across America, religious leaders descended on Capitol Hill this month with a blunt message for lawmakers: houses of worship are under siege and many congregations simply cannot afford to protect themselves alone. They need help…and financial assistance.

Rabbis, pastors, Muslim leaders and other religious and security officials spent the past week urging the U.S. Congress to significantly expand federal funding for synagogue, church and mosque protection. The vehicle for doing so is the Nonprofit Security Grant Program.

The request is pretty massive – an increase of funding to $1 billion annually as threats against faith communities continue to rise nationwide.

The coalition includes multiple religious groups, but the reality is that much of the urgency surrounding the push centers on the Jewish community.

For many Jewish Americans, synagogue life today comes with armed guards, metal barriers, surveillance cameras and active shooter drills. In some cases, Jewish schools resemble hardened security compounds more commonly associated with government facilities than religious education centers.

Rabbi Yaakov Menken, Executive Vice President of the Coalition for Jewish Values, told ALL ISRAEL NEWS that the transformation of Jewish life in America is painfully obvious.

“It is very common today for a synagogue to have a combination lock on the door, to deter an invader. How many other American houses of worship have to lock their doors?”

Menken says the changes extend far beyond synagogue entrances. “My children all went to school in what you would describe as an armed compound, with high metal gates. Some even have guards with automatic rifles strapped to their chests. That has become the new normal.”

That “new normal” is visible at synagogues across America. The concern is not theoretical anymore. Jewish institutions across the country remain on edge following months of escalating antisemitic incidents tied to the aftermath of the Oct. 7 Hamas terror attacks against Israel and the war in Gaza.

Protest activity outside synagogues, threats against Jewish schools and rising online extremism have forced many congregations to significantly rethink security.

The truth of the matter is that for many Jewish Americans, especially, it can feel more like entering a hardened security zone. Welcome to the new reality of Jewish life in America.

During the recent Capitol Hill lobbying effort, Jewish leaders warned lawmakers that demand for security funding has far outpaced available federal resources.

Synagogues are applying for grants to install reinforced doors, bullet-resistant glass, panic buttons, fencing, surveillance systems and trained security personnel – but many are being turned away simply because the money is running out.

According to reports tied to the recent Capitol Hill push, only about one-third of applicants for the Nonprofit Security Grant Program received funding last year because demand vastly exceeded available resources.

The effort to increase federal funding comes as antisemitic incidents continue to surge nationwide. Jewish leaders argue the security burden on synagogues has become financially overwhelming and emotionally taxing.

At a recent Shabbat service in West Bloomfield, Michigan, Rabbi Jen Lader of Temple Israel spoke openly about the growing fear many Jewish families now carry with them into synagogue life. Temple Israel itself became the site of a frightening attack earlier this year. It helped fuel the lobbying push in Washington.

Eric Fingerhut, president and CEO of the Jewish Federations of North America, says synagogues increasingly operate under conditions once associated with airports, embassies or government buildings.

Take the Tree of Life Congregation in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, as an example. After the 2018 massacre that killed 11 worshippers there, security became key to rebuilding the synagogue in the safest way possible.

Armed security personnel, controlled entry systems and enhanced surveillance are now considered essential components of any future reopening effort. The attack permanently altered how many Jewish institutions nationwide approach security planning.

Meanwhile, Temple Emanu-El in New York City has invested heavily in layered protection measures, including expanded camera systems, reinforced entrances and close coordination with the NYPD.

Security officials at the synagogue consistently assess threats tied to anti-Israel demonstrations and online rhetoric targeting Jewish institutions.

In Los Angeles, Wilshire Boulevard Temple has dramatically increased physical security in recent years. The synagogue now employs extensive surveillance systems, controlled-access entry points and visible armed security presence during major events and Jewish holidays.

Leaders there say the climate changed substantially after antisemitic protests increasingly targeted Jewish neighborhoods and institutions following Oct. 7.

The federal grant program at the center of this additional funding was originally designed to help nonprofits vulnerable to terrorist attacks.

Funds can be used for fencing, reinforced doors, security cameras, alarms, training and armed personnel, but nowadays, the demand has exploded in ways that many religious leaders, especially Jewish officials, would rather not see.

Cover image: Temple Sherith Israel, 2266 California St., San Francisco by Sanfranman59, accessed via Wikimedia Commons with CC BY-SA 3.0 Deed

BALTIMORE (VINnews)-U.S. Rep. Randy Fine, R-Fla., lauded the Coalition for Jewish Values as a steadfast supporter of Jewish causes during a Zoom event this week launching the organization’s successful fundraising drive.

“There’s been no better ally in the work that I’ve done to fight for the Jewish people than the CJV,” Fine said in his keynote address.

Rep. Randy Fine, the keynote speaker, also said regarding CJV: “When these folks have come after me, and tried to categorize me or miscategorize me, you’ve been willing to publicly have my back, in a time when other so-called Jewish groups… were willing to take the easier path. … The times when I’ve been attacked the most for doing what is right, you all have been there.”

Senator James Lankford emphasized, in a pre-recorded address to CJV’s Rabbinic Circle, the organization’s role in defending religious liberty and confronting antisemitism: “I am proud to stand with you, shoulder to shoulder, to be able to protect religious liberty in our great country. We call it out, we identify it, we push where we can and make sure no one looks away when there are acts of antisemitism.”

Congressman Rich McCormick also praised CJV’s effectiveness and partnership with lawmakers on key issues: “I am really appreciative of CJV for working with me to get things across the finish line. I look forward to working with you in the future.”

Pastor Dumisani Washington, CEO of the Institute for Black Solidarity with Israel, praised CJV for working together against division and hate: “Really appreciate the work that you do. The people that come for the Jewish people are typically the same who come for Black Americans, that’s why it’s so important to build that firewall and to work together.”

And Kayla Toney, Counsel and Amicus Brief Coordinator for First Liberty Institute, highlighted the role of CJV after explaining that Amicus Curiae (Friend of the Court) briefs are “a way for outside groups to lend their expertise and influence.” She said that “This is something that I think CJV is very uniquely positioned to do really really well as a rabbinic organization. … You are in fact one of our very best Amicus supporters. … That’s a lot of time, that’s a lot of care, and these are cases that span the whole range of religious liberty issues. … To lend that expertise that the lawyers aren’t going to get right. We need the rabbis to help us, and the court in fact needs that guidance.”

“We are deeply grateful to our guest speakers for their kind words, and even more to our friends in and beyond the Jewish community who responded so generously to our campaign,” said CJV Executive Vice President Rabbi Yaakov Menken. “All sent the clear message that our mission matters, and that speaking boldly with clarity and conviction is more important now than ever.”