Uncategorized
Jewish Democrats press for oversight as Trump’s Iran war rages on
After Congress failed to rein in President Donald Trump’s authority to wage war alongside Israel against Iran, Democrats say the fight over congressional oversight is far from over.
Jewish Democrats, many of whom support U.S. action to curb Iran’s nuclear program and dismantle its ballistic missile infrastructure, are grappling with how to respond as the midterm elections approach and opposition to the war runs deep within their party.
All but one member of the congressional Jewish Caucus voted last week for the War Powers Act resolution, which would have required the administration to halt U.S. strikes against Iran until it received congressional approval.
Trump further complicated things when he described the U.S. strikes as “war” in his public remarks and proclaimed Sunday that “everything is on the table,” including possible ground troops, in destroying Iran’s capabilities to develop nuclear weapons and creating the conditions for regime change. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, however, said Monday that the mission’s goal is to dismantle the Iranian “terroristic regime’s” ability to develop and launch missiles that threaten its neighbors and the broader region by land and sea. Seven U.S. servicemembers have been killed in Iranian missile strikes.
On Monday afternoon, Trump said the war could end “pretty quickly,” but that the U.S. has not yet “won enough.”
Halie Soifer, the head of the Jewish Democratic Council of America, said in an interview that members of Congress are exploring new ways to demand oversight as it becomes increasingly clear that the administration “lacks a coherent strategy in Iran.” She said lawmakers will have an opportunity to seek transparency from the White House about its objectives and the path forward in the conflict when the White House requests supplemental funding for the war.
The conflict is estimated to cost as much as $1 billion a day. The Pentagon is expected to request a defense supplemental package of up to $50 billion in the coming days.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer hasn’t outlined his strategy in public. In his response to the failed war powers vote, he pointed fingers at Republicans enabling Trump. “It’s another sign that this administration is allergic to having a plan and thinking about the consequences in advance,” he said. A Senate official, who requested anonymity to discuss internal conversations, said Democrats have been quietly talking with Republicans about negotiating a path forward, as some in the GOP appear increasingly uneasy about the war.
At a press conference Monday, Trump again called Schumer, America’s highest-ranking Jewish elected official, a “Palestinian” over his criticism of the war. “He’s gone from totally pro-Israel to totally pro-Palestinian,” Trump said. “He wants to protect the Iranian people, that are quite nasty.”
Senate Democrats have reportedly launched an effort to force top administration officials to testify in congressional hearings and are threatening to disrupt business if Republicans resist. Some members have already introduced five additional war powers resolutions seeking to halt U.S. strikes on Tehran as the situation unfolds.
Rep. Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey, who has at times crossed party lines in support of Israel and offered forceful support for action against the Iranian regime, both before and after the strikes began, introduced with a number of his colleagues a more moderate alternative that would order Trump to end the military campaign within 30 days unless Congress authorizes a formal declaration of war. Gottheimer ultimately voted in favor of the war powers measure last week.
Some Jewish Democrats took issue with that vote and want to move on. “Sadly, it is purely political games,” said Abe Foxman, the former head of the Anti-Defamation League.
Foxman noted that previous Democratic administrations conducted military operations without explicit congressional authorization. “Ninety-nine percent of Democrats are on record saying Iran is a terrorist state and cannot have nuclear weapons. So why this game?” he asked.
Recent polling in Israel suggests overwhelming support for the war effort across Israel’s political spectrum. Some 80% of Israelis support the military campaign, including 77% of voters who support opposition parties. A Jewish People Policy Institute survey of 692 American Jews with relatively strong ties to the Jewish community, Jewish identity or Israel found that 68% support the U.S. decision to go to war against Iran, while 26% oppose it.
Trump said Sunday that any decision on when to end the war with Iran would be made “mutually” with Netanyahu.
That gap between Israeli public opinion and Democratic sentiment in Washington has become a central talking point for Republicans, portraying it as evidence that the party is further drifting away from Israel ahead of the midterms.
“Trump Derangement Syndrome is melting Democrats’ brains,” said Sam Markstein, a spokesperson for the Republican Jewish Coalition. “Democrats continue to play politics with the national security of the United States, and the American people will remember in November.”
Jewish Democrats say lack of oversight and strategy complicates support
Pro-Israel groups aligned with the Democratic Party pushed back, insisting their position reflects concern about strategy and constitutional authority rather than any sympathy for the Iranian regime.
Amanda Berman, head of the liberal feminist Zioness Movement, said the debate over Trump’s approach has been mischaracterized in a binary and partisan manner, with Republicans defending the unlimited use of force without congressional authorization and most Democrats portrayed as broadly opposing military action to curb Iran.
The narrative should be that this is about process, not outcome, Berman said. “Congress has to determine whether the war is in the best interest of the people of the United States, and I believe that there is a strong argument that it is in the best interest,” she said. “The issue is that there is a lack of clarity around the strategy and the goals.”
JDCA’s Soifer, who was a national security adviser to former Vice President Kamala Harris while she was in the Senate, said it “oversimplifies it to characterize our position as opposition to the war.”
“We support some of the short-term tactical gains that have been made, and we support Israel in its efforts to ensure its security,” Soifer said. “But no, we will not stop pressing the administration to fulfil its responsibility to explain to the American people how it’s going to achieve its objectives in this war, and what those objectives are.”
Brian Romick, president of Democratic Majority for Israel, said the party’s voters overwhelmingly “agree on the fundamental threat posed by Tehran. He pointed to the House resolution reaffirming the U.S. position that Iran remains the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism that passed last week with bipartisan support, 372 voting in favor and only 53 Democrats voting against.
“Ending Iran’s nuclear threat, ballistic missile program and ability to sponsor terrorism will unequivocally make the world safer,” Romick said. At the same time, he said, lawmakers are seeking clarity from the administration about its long-term strategy.
The pro-peace J Street group lobbied Congress to support the war powers resolution, saying it was opposed to any action against Iran without congressional oversight. Jeremy Ben-Ami, J Street president, said at its annual conference in Washington, D.C. last week that their position applies to all administrations. “This idea of presidential ability to use the armed forces at their whim is a very dangerous one,” he said.
Ben-Ami also said J Street supports a diplomatic solution to end the war, even if it would come with strict terms set by Trump. “The right way to get out of this will be through some form of diplomatic agreement,” he said.
The post Jewish Democrats press for oversight as Trump’s Iran war rages on appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Bret Stephens, a stalwart Israel defender, calls out ‘Jewish terrorists’ in West Bank
(JTA) — Bret Stephens, the Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times columnist known as one of the paper’s most consistent defenders of Israel, used his Tuesday column to take direct aim at the country’s handling of settler violence in the West Bank — warning that unchecked attacks now pose a threat to Israel’s security and to Zionism itself.
Stephens, who has spent years pushing back on what he sees as double standards applied to Israel, wrote that he decided to speak out against what he called “Jewish terrorists” despite his reluctance to feed the volume of global condemnation facing Israel.
“That’s not only because the terrorism is a menace to Palestinian lives and property, or an affront to Jewish ethics, or a stain on Israel’s reputation — though it’s all those things,” he wrote. “It’s also a direct threat to Israel’s security and statehood, and thus to Zionism itself.”
Stephens’s column drew heavily on a public letter sent Sunday to President Trump by Matan Vilnai, a retired IDF deputy chief of staff, on behalf of Commanders for Israel’s Security, an organization representing hundreds of retired senior Israeli officers. The letter cautioned that Israeli security services have been effective against Palestinian terror groups but hamstrung when it comes to curbing Jewish extremists. The letter warned about the consequences of Israeli inaction in curbing attacks on Palestinians.
“Unless arrested swiftly and decisively, escalating violence in the West Bank is poised to ignite the region and carries severe ramifications for both Israeli security and U.S. regional interests,” wrote Vilnai.
Stephens pointed to last week’s rampage by extremist settlers through several Palestinian villages — attacks that reportedly included arson at a home and two mosques and an assault on a stonecutting factory — as evidence the problem has become routine rather than exceptional. He cited Israeli military figures showing nationalistic and settler-related crimes climbed to 867 incidents in 2025, up from 682 the year before.
Stephens also cited Eran Shamir-Borer of the Israel Democracy Institute, a former IDF legal official, who told him the government has specifically declined to place suspected Jewish settlers under administrative detention. The practice, imprisoning individuals without formal charges, is regularly deployed against suspected Palestinian terrorists.
The columnist dismissed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s public framing of the violence as the work of roughly 150 “juvenile delinquents,” as he did in an interview with NBC earlier this month. Stephens argued that a government capable of eliminating a Hamas commander deep inside Iran cannot plausibly claim it’s unable to rein in a few hundred vigilantes.
Stephens is known, and widely admired within the pro-Israel community, for his robust defense of Israel, from refuting the charge of “genocide” directed at Israel to condemning what he has called the “hyperbolic and often conspiratorial hatred of the country.” Editor of the conservative Jewish thought journal Sapir, Stephens was also chosen to give the annual “State of World Jewry” address at the 92nd Street Y earlier this year.
“I think it is really important that people like Bret Stephens are speaking up about settler violence, and I think that it also shows how terrible that it’s become,” said Rabbi Jill Jacobs, CEO of T’ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights, in an interview with JTA. “Even people who are pretty, let’s say, hesitant or who almost never criticize Israeli policy are speaking up.”
But she also suggested that the issue goes beyond a failure to enforce the law or hold settlers accountable, and instead reflects the priorities of Netanyahu’s right-wing government.
“This is actually government policy because this is violence that is designed to take more and more of the West Bank,” said Jacobs. “There’s already been not just violence, but expulsions, shoving Palestinians to smaller and smaller areas and, ultimately, annexing the West Bank or at least as much of it as possible.”
Liberal Jewish groups like T’ruah, including Torat Zedek and Bnei Avraham in Israel and the U.S-based groups Smol Emuni, J Street and New Israel Fund, regularly condemn the settler violence and call on Israeli security forces to hold the perpetrators accountable. They also take part in “protective presence” visits to the West Bank in solidarity with Palestinians threatened by Jewish settlers.
The largest Jewish organizations have been less vocal on the topic, although the American Jewish Committee and the Union for Reform Judaism have issued statements condemning settler violence.
Right-leaning groups have either downplayed the extent of the violence or say Jews living in the West Bank have been provoked by neighboring Palestinians. On the same day that Stephens’s column appeared, the media watchdog group HonestReporting ran an article saying that the major news outlets disproportionately focus on settler violence, and run many fewer articles about Palestinian attacks on Jewish civilians. It also cited official Israeli data suggesting that violence by Jewish civilians in the West Bank had declined significantly since March.
Nevertheless, Stephens appeared to be echoing a growing sentiment even on the right that the settler violence is both wrong and a black eye for Israel at a time when its reputation is suffering around the world.
“I don’t think there are many supporters of Israel in the U.S. who are happy with how Israel has handled, or really mishandled, settler violence,” said David E. Bernstein, a professor at George Mason’s Antonin Scalia Law School and a frequent commentator on Jewish affairs, in an email exchange with JTA. “To me, it’s anti-Zionist to allow settlers to flout the law and public policy, whether by violence or by setting up illegal outposts, because Zionism means accepting the legitimacy of the Israeli state, and radical settlers who don’t are no different than extremist Haredim [Orthodox] in not doing so.”
Last week, Israel’s Channel 13 reported that the government had approved a plan in March to tackle violence by extremist settlers but kept the plan secret due “to political considerations.” The report didn’t say whether the plan has been implemented.
The post Bret Stephens, a stalwart Israel defender, calls out ‘Jewish terrorists’ in West Bank appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Netanyahu drags Mamdani into his reelection campaign as face of antisemitism
For nearly two years, Zohran Mamdani has made Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a central political target. Now Netanyahu is making Mamdani part of his own reelection campaign.
The 50-second video released Wednesday on Netanyahu’s political social media channels builds on comments the Israeli leader made on Fox News this week, portraying Mamdani as the face of a worldwide surge of antisemitism directed at Israel. It intersperses footage of pro-Palestinian demonstrations and antisemitic incidents with recent clips of Mamdani condemning Israel’s conduct in the Gaza war after the mayor backed off a vow to have the Israeli prime minister arrested during an upcoming visit to New York. It also features Mamdani’s wife, artist Rama Duwaji, who liked social media posts that supported Palestinians immediately after the Oct. 7, 2023 attacks. (Mamdani said his wife is a private citizen and does not work in his administration.)
The clip ends: “No one will stop me from fighting for the truth of Israel.”
The video comes as Netanyahu faces one of the toughest reelection campaigns of his political career, trailing his rivals ahead of Israel’s Oct. 27 election, which could determine not only his political future, but also his legacy and potentially his freedom as he faces a corruption trial.
The fight with Mamdani has become politically useful for Netanyahu. His main rivals — former Israel Defense Forces chief Gadi Eisenkot and former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett — are seen as more moderate leaders who could rebuild strained ties with Democrats and win back support for Israel among Americans.
Joel Rubin, a Democratic commentator and foreign policy expert, said in an interview that turning Mamdani into a symbol of today’s Democratic Party gives Netanyahu a way to challenge one of his rivals’ central arguments that they are better positioned to course-correct the U.S. political shift against Israel. “For Netanyahu, it’s very important to try to portray the Democrats as Mamdani and make the argument that only he can stand up to that,” Rubin said.
Mamdani has positioned himself as a prominent progressive critic of Israel amid the war in Gaza, a position that helped propel his rise and which has become increasingly part of national Democratic Party politics.
Mamdani’s high-profile confrontation with Netanyahu escalated when he announced a review of whether he had the legal power to arrest the Israeli prime minister when he visits the city for the United Nations General Assembly in September. Experts on Israeli politics warned of an unintended consequence: would allowing Netanyahu to cast himself once again as Israel’s defender against international efforts to isolate the Jewish state.
“Many Israelis are sick of him and hope to vote him out,” Former U.S. Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro wrote on X on Saturday. “The only possible outcome of a fruitless attempt to arrest him in NYC would be to give him a political boost at home. That would be an own goal.”
Some political strategists argue that Mamdani and his allies have little reason to mind if Netanyahu remains in power. “I bet they’re rooting for Bibi, in a perverse way,” said Matt Bennett, co-founder and executive vice president of the centrist Democratic think tank Third Way, in an interview with the Forward discussing how Israel is reshaping Democratic politics.
While still serving as a New York state Assembly member, Mamdani zeroed in on the Israeli prime minister as an enemy, leading chants of “Netanyahu, you can’t hide, we charge you with genocide,” during a protest in Oct. 2023.
Throughout his mayoral campaign last year, Mamdani repeatedly injected Netanyahu into New York politics., Mamdani first pledged to arrest Netanyahu shortly after he launched his campaign. According to a report, members of Mamdani’s inner circle were pushing for him to make this arrest declaration. After his election, already knowing the city lacked the authority to arrest Netanyahu, Mamdani proceeded with the review. When it concluded he did not have the power to arrest Netanyahu, Mamdani used a mayoral address to declare him a war criminal and then encouraged New Yorkers to protest him on his UN visit. Critics say the episode was a calculated political move aimed at energizing the pro-Palestinian and progressive base that helped elect him.
“There is a core principle amongst the left in American politics that having someone to organize against is crucial to growing numbers and persuasion, and for Mamdani, having the foil of Netanyahu is an incredibly valuable tool for motivating support,” said Rubin, who led Jewish outreach for Bernie Sanders’ 2020 presidential campaign.
Whether that principle translates into votes for Netanyahu’s coalition in Israel’s Oct. 27 election remains to be seen. At the moment, Mamdani and Netanyahu have become unlikely political assets for each other, each giving the other a powerful opponent to campaign against.
The post Netanyahu drags Mamdani into his reelection campaign as face of antisemitism appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
As Conservative rabbis, we’re rethinking our communities’ policies toward interfaith families
(JTA) — As Conservative/Masorti rabbis, we see firsthand the joy of couples building a life together in the Jewish community, and the pain of those who feel shut out because one of them is not Jewish.
We think of the community member, though not Jewish, who developed a profound love for davening (prayer) and Torah study, and has supported his children’s and grandchildren’s Jewish education and observance of mitzvot. We think of another community member who faithfully drove her four children to Hebrew school for years and, after her youngest child’s bat mitzvah, chose to convert to Judaism herself.
It is time for our halacha, or Jewish law, to address issues facing intermarried couples and families robustly.
The two of us had the honor of joining colleagues in co-authoring a teshuvah — a rabbinic response to questions of Jewish law — that does just that. The Rabbinical Assembly’s Committee on Jewish Law and Standards has approved a teshuvah that seeks to honor these couples and families and their commitment to Jewish life in our congregations and communities.
Since we are part of a movement that balances a commitment to halacha with the realities of modern life, our work is grounded in traditional Jewish texts, laws and principles while also reflecting the core belief that welcoming others and extending hospitality are essential Jewish values.
Based on halacha and Jewish tradition, the teshuvah affirms the longstanding standard of Conservative/Masorti rabbis that clergy may officiate only at weddings where both partners are Jewish. It emphasizes that while a wedding is a significant moment that often singularly drives these conversations, there are many other important life-cycle moments that rabbis can offer as occasions for Jewish celebration and reaffirmations of commitment to mitzvot.
Through this teshuvah, we formalize a public mishebeirakh (blessing) before or after the wedding day for a couple committed to building an exclusively Jewish home, as well as a hanukkat habayit ceremony to dedicate their home.
We welcome non-Jewish parents on the bimah during their children’s b’nei mitzvah and offer “mazal tov” and other basic gestures of inclusion to intermarried couples, both of which were once considered unacceptable. Our goal in doing so is to inspire the couple and family to grow in Jewish living.
We affirm that synagogues may not hire intermarried individuals as clergy but may hire intermarried individuals for other roles, and that rabbis may officiate at funerals for non-Jewish family members and support a Jewish mourning process when a non-Jewish loved one dies.
It’s been about 40 years since the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards, which sets halachic policy for our movement internationally, broadly addressed questions around intermarried couples and families. We have learned over time that those intermarried couples who choose to embrace Jewish life are integral to the fabric of Conservative/Masorti communities.
We invite these couples to engage meaningfully in Jewish practice at home and in community, and, if they are having children, to raise them as Jews. Sometimes they may even choose to convert to Judaism at some point.
We do so because, as rabbis, we enjoy the privilege of being invited into people’s lives, and our role is both pastoral and educational. As people figure out their own identities and relationships, our role is to help them integrate Jewish tradition. As couples turn toward each other and seek to integrate Judaism into their lives, we are here to help them chart a course and to bring Torah into the conversation and observance of mitzvot into their lives.
We aim to inspire the couple to grow in Jewish living, observing mitzvot, studying Torah and searching for God in daily life. To do so, we must create gateways so everyone can find a place to learn and find joy and inspiration in our traditions, within the boundaries of halachic standards and principles.
Many of the practices in the teshuvah are already in place in some communities. Some offer solutions that speak most directly to realities in North America, and we call on local rabbis to interpret them in light of the circumstances in their local communities.
In the days of the Mishnah and the Talmud, when faced with new and challenging circumstances, our rabbis found creative and often beautiful solutions to embody the Torah as they understood it. As we follow in their footsteps, we use the wisdom we have inherited to both uphold and transform those values and honor the halachic principles that are central to our rabbinates and communities.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of JTA or its parent company, 70 Faces Media.
The post As Conservative rabbis, we’re rethinking our communities’ policies toward interfaith families appeared first on The Forward.
