Uncategorized
Long-delayed Pittsburgh synagogue shooting trial to begin Monday, igniting pain, fear and hopes for closure
(JTA) — Every Thursday, Brad Orsini gets on a conference call with dozens of other security specialists who, like him, focus on preventing threats to American Jews. But in a few days, and for the coming months, the conference call won’t just address the dangers of the present and future. It will also deal with events that occurred more than four years ago.
That’s because next week marks the beginning of the trial of the gunman who is accused of killing 11 worshippers in a Pittsburgh synagogue in October 2018.
Orsini, who oversaw the city’s Jewish communal security on the day of the attack in the neighborhood of Squirrel Hill, hopes to find a sense of closure in the alleged shooter’s prosecution. But he also knows that the trial threatens to broadcast the white supremacist ideas that lay behind the attack, and continue to pose risks for Jewish communities. And he worries that, in addition to providing a possible pathway for survivors and victims’ families to move into the future, it could also thrust them back into a painful past.
“It’s long overdue,” Orsini said. “This has been looming large over the Pittsburgh community and, quite honestly, the Jewish community in the nation. We’re all looking toward finishing this trial and prosecuting this actor for what he did.”
At the same time, he added, “This trial is going to reopen wounds that this community has suffered for almost five years now, and it’s going to have the ability to retraumatize many people in the community. And we have to be concerned about that.”
Beginning on Monday, those countervailing emotions and expectations will come to bear as the deadliest antisemitic attack in American Jewish history is litigated in court. The trial, which will begin with jury selection, is expected to last about three months. Few doubt the guilt of the accused shooter, Robert Bowers, whose name is hardly uttered by Jewish residents of Squirrel Hill. But what remains unclear is what the trial will mean for American Jews — and for the families most directly affected by the attack.
Some hope for the defendant to get the death penalty — even though that will mean prolonging the legal ordeal — while others have advocated against it. Some hope for the trial to shed light on the threat of white supremacy, even as renewed attention on the attack could inspire other violent extremists. And some hope the trial will help them move past the tragedy, even as they know it will be difficult to hear the details of the shooting laid out in court.
“The country is going to have to undergo this unprecedented trial of the country’s worst mass killer of Jews,” said Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of the Anti-Defamation League. “It’s going to be really hard, so I think our community is really going to have to buckle down and brace ourselves.”
The attack on Saturday morning, Oct. 27, 2018, killed 11 people from three congregations, all of which met at the same building, and injured six others, including four police officers. The defendant faces 63 criminal charges, including hate crimes and murder charges. He has pleaded not guilty. The prosecution is seeking the death penalty — a choice some relatives of victims are vocally supporting. Previously, leaders of two of the three congregations that suffered the attack had opposed the death penalty in this case.
“This massacre was not just a mass murder of innocent citizens during a service in a house of worship,” Diane Rosenthal, sister of David and Cecil Rosethal, who died in the attack, told local journalists, according to reporting by the Pittsburgh Union Progress. “The death penalty must apply to vindicate justice and to offer some measure of deterrence from horrific hate crimes happening again and again.”
For the survivors and families of victims, the trial will likely be especially painful. Some told the Pittsburgh Jewish Chronicle that they intend to take time off work, delay a vacation or be away from family for an extended period of time to be present at the proceedings.
“I want to see justice happen, but at the same time, I hate to think about the families having to potentially see images of what happened and things of that sort,” Steve Weiss, who survived the attack, told the weekly Jewish newspaper. “I’m sure they have mental images, but to have to actually see photos of victims and things of that sort I think can really be difficult for them.”
One thing few people question is the shooter’s guilt, despite his plea of not guilty. He offered to plead guilty in 2019 in exchange for taking the death penalty off the table, but prosecutors, determined to pursue capital punishment for the crime, rejected the plea.
It was the same thing that had happened in the case of the man charged with killing nine Black worshippers in a Charleston, South Carolina, church in 2015. But there, despite the rejected guilty plea, the trial took place a year and a half after the attack, and the shooter was sentenced to death. (In an illustration of the length of death penalty cases, his latest court proceeding happened in October, and he has not yet been executed.)
In contrast, the Pittsburgh trial is not starting until four and a half years after the shooting there. Part of the reason for the delay stems from the work of the defense team, which has pushed back the trial through various court filings. The alleged shooter’s lead attorney, Judy Clarke, has defended a series of high-profile attackers: the Unabomber, the attacker in the 1996 Atlanta Summer Olympics bombing and the Boston Marathon bomber, among others. According to Pittsburgh’s local CBS affiliate, her singular goal is to avoid the death penalty for her client.
But in many other ways, the parallels between the Charleston trial and this one are clear. Both concern shootings by alleged white supremacists in houses of worship, tragedies that have become gruesome symbols of a national rise in bigotry. In both, the culpability of the defendant was assumed before the trial began. Like the Pittsburgh defendant, the Charleston shooter has been lionized by white supremacists, including some who cited him as an inspiration for their own violent acts.
And in both cases, there is an understanding that a conviction does not heal the wounds opened by the shooter.
“This trial has produced no winners, only losers,” said the judge in the Charleston shooter’s trial, Richard Gergel, according to the New Yorker. “This proceeding cannot give the families what they truly want, the return of their loved ones.”
Still, some who are watching the Pittsburgh trial closely hope that it will bring new facts and connections to light. Amy Spitalnick, the executive director of Integrity First for America, a nonprofit that spearheaded a multimillion-dollar victory in a civil trial against the organizers of the 2017 far-right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, hopes that the Pittsburgh trial illustrates the links among different white supremacist shootings — such as the attacks in El Paso, Texas; Christchurch, New Zealand; and at a synagogue in Poway, California.
Those attackers spouted similar conspiracy theories and referenced other recent violent attacks in their manifestos. Spitalnick said that the accused Pittsburgh shooter allegedly communicated with the organizers of the Charlottesville rally on the social network Gab, which is known as a haven for right-wing extremists.
“Trials like this can really be illustrative of how deep the poison of white supremacy and antisemitism goes,” she said. In the Charlottesville trial, she said, “The reams and reams of evidence… really helped pull back the curtain on what motivated the defendants, how they operated, the tools and the tactics of the movement, the conspiracy theories at its core.”
There’s also the possibility that, with the attack resurfacing the shooter’s motivations, and putting him back in the spotlight, it will act as an inspiration for other white supremacists. In the years following the synagogue shooting, Pittsburgh became a kind of pilgrimage site for the defendant’s admirers — leading to continued harassment of local Jews.
“We’re giving a platform to an individual who is a Jew hater, who wanted to kill all Jews,” Orsini said. “What does that spark in other like-minded people? We need to be very cognizant throughout this trial on what kind of chatter is going to be out there on the deep dark web, or even in open portals.”
In the face of concerns about retraumatization, Greenblatt said the ADL is preparing resources on how to discuss the trial with students and amid the Jewish community.
“To relive the horrors of, the grief of, the event — this thing being constantly in the news — it’s going to be hard to avoid, it’s going to be difficult and it could be grisly and upsetting,” Greenblatt said. “I would much prefer this trial didn’t happen — I would much prefer this crime never happened, I would much prefer that those people were all still with us today — but this is where we are.”
He added, “If there might be some ability to raise awareness among the non-Jewish population of what we’re facing, [that] would be of value.”
One potential challenge for American Jews as a whole, Spitalnick said, is that federal prosecutors don’t necessarily share the needs of Jews who will be following the proceedings. While the trial will conjure a mix of emotions for Jews locally and beyond, she said, prosecutors will be more focused on the nuts and bolts of what happened that day and the details of the accused attacker’s actions and motives.
“We’re going to probably spend a lot of time hearing from the prosecution about what motivated him, but it’s not through the lens of what we as Jews think about when we think about Jewish safety,” she said. “It’s through the lens of making the case that this guy did what he did motivated by this extremism and hate… It’s going to be very deliberate and tactical and precise, versus where we as American Jews have been thinking about this from a deeply personal, communal safety perspective.”
The deliberate and detailed work of prosecutors, however, may not be at cross purposes with the emotional needs of Jews, Orsini said. When the trial ends, he said, the establishment of Bowers’ guilt may itself prove to be transformative for how Jews relate to the tragedy, in Pittsburgh and beyond.
“The fact that this individual has not been fully brought to justice… and is not convicted yet of this mass shooting — in some way, yes, that closure and finality will be done at the end of this trial,” he said. “The community can kind of regroup and truly become resilient once this phase is over with.”
—
The post Long-delayed Pittsburgh synagogue shooting trial to begin Monday, igniting pain, fear and hopes for closure appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Anti-Israel Republican Thomas Massie ousted from Congress as Trump endorsee wins primary
(JTA) — The only Republican to refrain from supporting Israel in the immediate aftermath of Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack will exit Congress following a decisive primary loss on Tuesday.
Rep. Thomas Massie, who has represented Kentucky’s 4th Congressional District since 2013, lost to Ed Gallrein, an endorsee of President Donald Trump who drew support from pro-Israel PACs.
Massie conceded the election on Tuesday night — but not without a dig at Gallrein’s purported relationship to Israel.
“I would’ve come out sooner, but I had to call my opponent and concede. And it took a while to find Ed Gallrein in Tel Aviv,” he said in his concession speech.
With almost all ballots counted on Tuesday night, Gallrein had drawn 55% of the votes.
The result means that Massie, the most anti-Israel Republican in Congress and the only Republican to vote at times with far-left Democrats on measures opposing Israel, will leave Congress at the end of the year.
The Republican Jewish Coalition, which long opposed Massie, congratulated Gallrein in an extensive statement that cast the primary as a referendum on the Republican Party’s recent divide over Israel. The party is increasingly split between acolytes of Trump and those who believe Trump has been too accommodating to Israel.
“Kentucky Republicans sent an unmistakable message: there is no place in the Republican Party for those who turn their back on the MAGA agenda,” said CEO Matt Brooks.
He added, “We know that Ed Gallrein, a 5th-generation Kentucky farmer, decorated Navy SEAL, and true MAGA patriot, will serve with honor and distinction, as he has his entire career.”
Brooks criticized both Massie’s record in Congress and his behavior as a candidate, saying, “Notably, Massie’s conduct throughout this campaign — trafficking in antisemitism and bottom-of-the-barrel nativism at a time when Jew-hatred is on the rise — was wildly unacceptable and outrageous from an elected member of Congress.”
A widely condemned pro-Massie campaign ad last week claimed that a Gallrein win would bring “trans woke madness” to Kentucky at the behest of billionaire Jewish Republican donor Paul Singer. The ad placed a rainbow Star of David next to a photo of Singer’s head.
The ad came amid a blitz that watchdogs say made the race the most expensive congressional contest in U.S. history, with an estimated $32.6 million spent according to the advertising tracking firm AdImpact. That includes $5 million from a PAC affiliated with the Republican Jewish Coalition and a reported $2.6 million from PACs affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the pro-Israel lobby.
Massie’s record in Congress has placed him far outside the Republican mainstream. In October 2023, he voted with the progressive “Squad” against a resolution expressing support for Israel in the wake of the Oct. 7 attack. The next month, he was the only member of Congress from either party to vote “no” on a resolution affirming Israel’s right to exist. Last year, Massie called for ending all U.S. military aid to Israel.
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post Anti-Israel Republican Thomas Massie ousted from Congress as Trump endorsee wins primary appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Jewish groups rally behind bipartisan Senate antisemitism bill with $1B security allocation
(JTA) — Major U.S. Jewish organizations are calling for the quick passage of new bipartisan Senate legislation aimed at protecting Jews and Jewish institutions from antisemitism.
The Jewish American Security Act is sponsored by James Lankford, a Republican from Oregon, and Jacky Rosen, a Jewish Democrat from Nevada. It would require the federal education department to adopt a civil rights strategy to fight antisemitism and would force social media platforms to share more details about how they handle antisemitism online.
The legislation also proposes $1 billion in security funding for houses of worship and other at-risk nonprofits, a key demand in a six-point security proposal that Jewish Federations of North America has been promoting on Capitol Hill.
The legislation was announced Tuesday as hundreds of Jewish advocates traveled to Washington, D.C., on Tuesday to promote the call for the $1 billion allocation, which would triple the amount appropriated by Congress this year for security at houses of worship.
“Jewish Americans are being targeted, attacked, and killed simply because of who they are. This alarming trend demands a comprehensive, bipartisan approach that addresses both the seeds and the impacts of this vile hatred,” Rosen, who is famously a former synagogue president, said in a statement.
The bill follows several other recent attempts to advance antisemitism legislation in Congress.
In December, four progressives in the House of Representatives introduced the Antisemitism Response and Prevention Act, which calls for fully funding the federal Office of Civil Rights while also repudiating the Trump administration’s tactics around antisemitism that progressives say “weaponize” antisemitism in support of a repressive agenda. It has not advanced in the Republican-led House.
A Senate bill sponsored by Chuck Schumer, the Antisemitism Awareness Act, meanwhile, failed to advance despite intense advocacy by Jewish groups. It would have enshrined the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism, which is contested on both the left and the right for its citation of some forms of Israel criticism as antisemitic and examples that some conservative Christians say would constrain their religious expression.
A wide swath of Jewish groups are endorsing the Jewish American Security Act, including JFNA, the Anti-Defamation League and the Jewish Council for Public Affairs. Organizations affiliated with the Reform, Conservative and Orthodox movements of Judaism — which are often split politically — also signed on.
“At this perilous moment of violent antisemitism experienced by congregants, clergy, and congregations in our own Reform Jewish community and beyond, the need for meaningful steps to bolster security and the fight against hate is vital,” Rabbi Jonah Pesner, director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, said in a statement. “The Jewish American Security Act strengthens the government tools and funding that will be available to help us meet this moment and uphold the American commitment to religious freedom.”
One group that opposed the Antisemitism Awareness Act is listed among supporters of the new legislation: the Nexus Project, which launched to fight antisemitism and simultaneously “speak out when fears of antisemitism are cynically exploited to stifle legitimate criticism of Israel or US policy.” It is a critic of the IHRA definition of antisemitism.
The Nexus Project did not respond to a request for comment on Tuesday.
Unlike the Antisemitism Awareness Act, the new legislation does not seek to enshrine IHRA into law. While the legislation’s prognosis is not clear, the omission could prove to be one less hurdle in a Congress where appearing to support Israel is increasingly a third rail.
Lankford said in a statement that Jewish Americans are facing “an unprecedented surge in antisemitism” and that action was needed.
“These are not just numbers, these are real stories impacting real people,” he said.
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post Jewish groups rally behind bipartisan Senate antisemitism bill with $1B security allocation appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
With AOC backing and anti-Israel message, Chris Rabb vies for open House seat in Philadelphia
(JTA) — A Philadelphia Democratic primary on Tuesday could poise Chris Rabb — a progressive state lawmaker who is staunchly critical of Israel — to become the newest member of Congress’ “Squad.”
Rabb has made opposition to Israel and AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobbying group, a focal point of his campaign in Pennsylvania’s Third Congressional District.
He also recently made headlines when it was reported that his Instagram account had shared a post saying the Bondi Beach massacre was a false flag by “Zionists”; he disavowed the post and said it was shared by a former staffer.
Rabb’s top two opponents are Sharif Street, a state senator who’s garnered support from J Street and figures in the political establishment such as Sen. Cory Booker; and Ala Stanford, a pediatric surgeon who has faced scrutiny for being boosted by a group that’s alleged to be a shell organization for AIPAC.
The victor will become the Democratic nominee for a November general election they are almost assured to win in the country’s “bluest House district.”
At a time when Democratic voters are overwhelmingly sympathizing with Palestinians over Israelis, the turnout for Rabb, who has centered pro-Palestinian advocacy in his bid for Congress, could signal how those sentiments translate to electoral results.
Efforts to install a new “Squad” member have so far fallen short this cycle, though those candidates — like Nida Allam in North Carolina — were up against incumbents, or, as in the case of Kat Abughazaleh in Illinois, lacked Rabb’s experience in elected office.
Rabb’s campaign has picked up momentum in recent weeks. He’s been endorsed by a number of left-wing House representatives including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, Ro Khanna and Summer Lee, who is also from Pennsylvania. He also rallied alongside the progressive streamer Hasan Piker, a staunch critic of Israel who has been accused of antisemitism, in Philadelphia.
If elected, Rabb’s platform would make him one of Congress’ farthest left candidates on Israel. He supports a complete embargo on arms sales to Israel. He posted on X last week that “the Nakba never ended,” and said he would co-sponsor a resolution with Omar and Tlaib to “recognize the Nakba and reaffirm Palestinian refugees’ right to return.”
Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin, who is Jewish and has sponsored the Block the Bombs to Israel Act, endorsed Rabb. He has also been endorsed by anti-Zionist group Jewish Voice for Peace, and a slew of left-wing groups including Democratic Socialists of America and the Working Families Party, as well as groups that explicitly work to counter AIPAC such as Track AIPAC and PAL PAC.
The super PAC American Priorities, which seeks to be a counterweight to AIPAC’s super PAC, United Democracy Project, has spent more than $400,000 boosting Rabb, according to FEC filings.
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, who is Jewish and supports a continued U.S.-Israel relationship, was reportedly rumored to be working behind the scenes to quietly derail Rabb’s campaign; Shapiro has not publicly weighed in on the race and did not respond to a request for comment.
The latest polling data to come out of this race was collected in early April, and had Stanford leading with 28% with Rabb trailing by 5 percentage points and Street in third at 16%. But much has changed in the weeks since those polls, including a significant mobilization from the left to back Rabb.
The poll was also conducted by 314 Action Fund, a political action committee that endorsed Stanford. A few weeks after the polling was released, Drop Site News, which has an anti-Israel bent, reported that the group is operating as a shell organization for AIPAC, the way other groups did in Illinois races earlier this year. AIPAC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Stanford’s reported support from AIPAC has thrust her into the spotlight on Israel. During a tense moment at a candidates’ forum last month, Stanford was pressed by an audience member on whether she believed Israel was committing a genocide.
She refused to use the term to describe Israel’s military actions, and said, “For Israelis who have been accused of committing it, it’s hurtful for them.”
Stanford has been endorsed by the district’s representative, Dwight Evans, who is retiring at the end of this term, and a handful of other U.S. House representatives including Madeleine Dean and Chrissy Houlahan from Pennsylvania. Hawaii’s Jewish governor, Josh Green, also endorsed Stanford.
Meanwhile, Street has the chance to become Pennsylvania’s first Muslim member of Congress. He has been critical of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, saying he should be prosecuted for war crimes, but is far more moderate on Israel than Rabb and has made the subject less central to his campaign messaging. Like Stanford, he has not referred to Israel’s military actions as a “genocide” and advocates for a two-state solution, as well as continued U.S. aid to Israel.
Booker traveled to Philadelphia on Monday to stump for Street.
Street is the son of former Philadelphia mayor John Street and has the support of a number of state legislators and City Council members, as well as the Philadelphia City Democratic Committee. Rue Landau, the only Jewish member of the City Council and its first openly LGBTQ member, has endorsed Street.
Street is listed as “primary approved” on the website of liberal pro-Israel advocacy group J Street, which has recently drifted to a position that advocates for continued weapons sales, but a phasing out of military subsidies, to Israel.
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post With AOC backing and anti-Israel message, Chris Rabb vies for open House seat in Philadelphia appeared first on The Forward.