Uncategorized
Meet the rabbi running for State Assembly on the Upper West Side
(JTA) — Rabbi Stephanie Ruskay has worked for American Jewish World Service and the Jewish Service Corps. She’s been an associate dean for the last 10 years at the Conservative movement’s Jewish Theological Seminary.
Ruskay has made a point of centering justice at each of those organizations, including in the curriculum at JTS, where community organizing and social justice are part of her fourth-year seminar.
Now, Ruskay is hoping to bring that commitment to justice to a new, wider stage as she runs for State Assembly in Manhattan.
Ruskay, a self-described progressive, is running to represent the 69th district that includes parts of the Upper West Side, Morningside Heights and West Harlem. A victory would make her the first female rabbi to hold elected state office in American history.
In a phone interview, Ruskay said she would view being elected to the State Assembly as “an extension of her rabbinate.”
“I don’t feel like I’m changing careers,” she said.
The Assembly seat opened up in the fall when current Assembly member Micah Lasher, whom Ruskay praised, decided to run for Congress.
Ruskay has been endorsed by former Manhattan borough president and onetime Democratic mayoral nominee Ruth Messinger, a longtime Jewish mentor of Ruskay, and City Council member Shaun Abreu.
In a conversation this week, Ruskay talked about rabbis who sign petitions, the Jews who are wary about Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani, and why running for State Assembly is the next step in her career.
This interview has been lightly edited for clarity and length.
What prompted you to run for State Assembly? Why now?
I have felt like the country and the world are in a difficult spot, and I have been civically engaged and doing multifaith justice work for many years. And I felt like I needed to and wanted to be doing a bit more than I’m able to currently do. I’ve been watching the New York legislators and feeling like [they’re] doing a formidable job trying to make New York the safest it could be for all people in the face of real difficulty in the country, and I wanted to be part of that.
What would be your biggest priorities in office, and how do you describe yourself on the political spectrum?
First of all I would describe myself as a community organizer who listens to people and looks for the intersection of what they care about and I care about and meet it together. I’m a progressive and a Democrat. My priorities are immigration, housing, education, environment. In some ways they’re all bastions of democracy. Democracy did not used to be a thing we had to say was overtly a goal — it is today.
You’ve been endorsed by former Manhattan borough president Ruth Messinger, who was president of American Jewish World Service from 1998 to 2016. What’s your relationship with Messinger like, and have you spoken with other current or former elected officials or public figures?
Ruth has been my mentor and friend and teacher for many years. I worked for her at AJWS, and that was a place that really shaped my philosophy around how you partner with people. They work in the developing world with the philosophy that people know best what they need — we won’t tell you what you need, we’ll bring the resources we have and we’re going to work together. And the reason it’s in our self-interest [as Jews] is that we don’t think we can live in a world where other people’s dignity is not valued; it’s a diminishment of our ability to be human and Jews in the world. I was 22 then, I’m 51 now, so that was a formative time in my life.
I’ve been talking to current and former elected officials. We do plan to announce other endorsements in the coming weeks. I am a person who believes you can and should learn from everyone. I think my campaign is going to be a combination of lots of things I hear from other people who served over many decades.
The incoming Zohran Mamdani mayoral administration will take over in just a few weeks. There are many Jewish constituents who have concerns about a mayor whose views on Israel are completely opposed to theirs on Israel. What do you make of this moment for Jewish New Yorkers, and how do you view your role as a Jewish leader?
I feel like choosing to run for State Assembly is actually an extension of my rabbinate. I don’t feel like I’m changing careers. I feel like, if I take seriously the things that I teach about and preach about and study about related to caring for people who are poor and making a community that is safe for people and where people can thrive — that is some of what our texts teach, and the way you do that is you go be involved in how their lives unfold and be partners.
I’m doing this like I’ve done everything — you listen to people. So, of course, I have my own perspective on the election and voted. And if I want to be people’s representative, I have to listen to what’s on their minds, and take that into account in a serious way. So I’m hearing from people who are very excited, I’m hearing from people who are very anxious. And I’m hoping to be the representative of all those people. And you come in and bring their voices into the room.
What was your perspective during the election?
I think this is an exciting and anxiety-provoking time all at the same time, and so we now have a mayor-elect, and I think that you go in and you be a partner and you represent your people. And when we agree, I’ll be very excited to work together, and when we don’t agree or when I know that I represent people who have a very different perspective from what’s happening, then my job is to bring that into the room. In organizing, we say no permanent friends and no permanent enemies. You work with people who you can work with at every moment, and that’s what I’ll do as an assemblyperson.
Earlier in the fall, there was a letter signed by 1,100-plus rabbis from New York and around the country, which called out anti-Zionism and specifically named Mamdani. I’m curious what went into your decision not to sign the letter, and what you made of this huge open letter as it was circulating?
I’m an administrator at the [Jewish Theological] Seminary, so we don’t sign letters at all, it’s just the institutional policy. I think the war of the letters is a challenging thing. I understand what would move somebody to sign on, either they feel personally very moved or they’re getting a lot of pressure from constituents and they want to go on the record. I don’t know, I guess in 50 years we’re going to look back at this time and decide if all the letter-signing was productive or not.
In my time working, I have seen people choose to sign letters and then have enormous ramifications in looking for jobs. It’s very complicated, and at some point there’s too much noise of too many letters and it’s hard to keep track of. And you have to ask yourself, are all the letters making an impact, and in what way?
According to your campaign site you would be the first female rabbi elected to state office in American history. What does that mean to you?
I’m not doing it to be history-making, I’m doing it because I feel like I don’t know what else to do in this time. It happens to be that a female rabbi has not done that before — maybe I’ll start a trend and there will be tons of us, you know, the first of many. But I think if you want to walk the walk, you have to not be inhibited by not having seen it before. This is my idea of what I could do that would have even more impact than I’m having now.
Could you tell me more about your experience as associate dean of JTS? What have you learned from the role, and how might that inform how you operate as a State Assembly member?
I love my job. I feel like it’s always different. The student body is constantly changing, you’re constantly having to ask, ‘Why are we doing it this way?’ We are continuously experimenting. And the world doesn’t stay still — I’ve been there 10 years, you don’t do the same thing for 10 years. You’re constantly trying to meet the moment, and the moment has changed a lot.
I recently had a chance to meet someone who’s an Assemblyperson, and watching how they interacted in the community made me think there was a lot of similarity between constituent services and what we do in the dean’s office. In the dean’s office, students come in with individual issues — it could be about money, course requirements, a lot of things. And you have to try to help the person who’s right in front of you, but you also have to think, ‘Who else is struggling with this issue?’ And is there a policy that would help alleviate this issue for more people?
What’s been your career journey as a rabbi, and how did that lead you to your role with JTS?
I grew up in the Conservative community. I was born in Manhattan, lived in a Mitchell-Lama building [for moderate and middle-income families], 50 West 97th St., until I was 7, and then we moved to Mahopac, which is in Putnam County. We spent a lot of time at our synagogue, and we learned about tradition and history. But justice at that time was not a piece of Jewish life that we talked about in a big way. I thought, how come these feel like separate endeavors? And so I think a lot of my career is about trying to integrate those two things and be part of leading in the Jewish community in a way in which justice and service were as important as all of the other halachic observances — not more important, but as important.
So prior to rabbinical school, I served for a year in Bulgaria in the Jewish community for the Jewish Service Corps for the Joint Distribution Committee, and then worked at American Jewish World Service. Part of my role with AJWS was communicating with rabbis around the country, trying to raise up justice work and civic engagement and international development into what they were doing in communities. I thought, ‘Rabbis play a really important role in setting the agenda for the Jewish community,’ so I thought, ‘I would like to become one!’
I went to rabbinical school at JTS, I worked at Auburn Theological Seminary running their multifaith conflict resolution and leadership program for teenagers — Israelis, Palestinians, South Africans, Northern Irish and American kids. After rabbinical school, I worked at Avodah, the Jewish Service Corps, and led alumni and community engagement. And through that work, I ended up having a relational meeting with someone at JTS — and the next thing I knew, I worked there. The challenge was: Maybe you can come here to make justice more central to how we train students. And I thought, I don’t know if I can. But if I don’t try, I definitely won’t.
Favorite spot for Jewish food in the district?
I’m going to say I spend an equal and large amount of time at both Kosher Marketplace and Six 60 One. And I meet people I know at both places regularly.
The post Meet the rabbi running for State Assembly on the Upper West Side appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
With anti-Arab campaign ad, Netanyahu stoops to new moral and political lows
Israeli election campaigns have often been ugly. They have featured exaggeration, fearmongering and outright deception. But even by those standards, the first major campaign advertisement by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party, posted on Netanyahu’s X account on Tuesday, managed to shock much of the country.
The AI-generated video depicts former military chief Gadi Eisenkot, who has become the standard-bearer for the opposition, walking through a sunlit field toward a young Jewish man before passing him by to embrace Mansour Abbas of Ra’am, the United Arab List, instead.
The young man looks strikingly like Eisenkot’s son, Gal, who was killed fighting in Gaza in late 2023 — although Likud insists he isn’t meant to. Strictly speaking, there is enough difference to sustain the protestations. The young man has longer, wavier hair than Gal Eisenkot did — just enough, perhaps, to preserve plausible deniability. Yet almost everyone I know believed they were watching a father joyfully approaching his slain son, seemingly restored to life, only to ignore him in favor of an Arab political leader at a time when Arab political participation in Israel is particularly contentious.
The only possible explanation: Likud wants their campaign to be as mean as possible. Or perhaps that they believe that anything that creates a buzz — and therefore distracts from the governing coalition’s disastrous and controversial policies, including a wildly unpopular recent legislative blitz — is a good thing.
And buzz there is. The perception that a father’s personal loss had been weaponized for electoral gain struck many as a line that simply should not be crossed. “This is Netanyahu, and this is his machine of incitement”, wrote Einav Zangauker, whose son was held hostage in Gaza by Hamas, on social media. “This isn’t politics,” Zangauker added, but rather “an attack on a bereaved father and an assault on his dignity. It is the lowest of the low.”
“I turn to elected representatives, activists, and all candidates from all parties, and demand that you do not cross red lines. Do not turn rivals into enemies,” Israeli President Isaac Herzog said. “I call on the people of Israel, in a clear voice: Remember that elections are not a civil war.”
But even if one puts aside the controversy surrounding the young man altogether, the advertisement remains deeply troubling. It is, at its core, an exercise in incitement against Ra’am — and, by extension, against the very idea that Arab citizens may legitimately participate in governing Israel.
Abbas himself accused Netanyahu of “trying to incite between different parts of society”; about a fifth of Israelis are Arab, and the ad was obviously trying to delegitimize collaboration with the parties who generally represent them.
From Likud’s perspective, that too is logical — so long as they ignore the goal of Israel remaining a democratic country in which component ethnic groups live in harmony. It’s logical because Arab parties have always been part of the opposition to Likud and the chances are high that Eisenkot might need them, even passively, to successfully craft a coalition after the Oct. 27 election.
This isn’t just dangerous. It ignores the essential role that Arab parties have played in building toward a strong Israeli future.
Ra’am, under Abbas, has been the most integrationist Arab party Israel has ever seen. Abbas broke with decades of Arab political orthodoxy by arguing that Arab citizens should seek influence through practical cooperation with whichever Zionist government Israelis elected. He has repeatedly recognized Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people while demanding full equality for its Arab citizens.
Whatever one thinks of his politics, these choices have represented one of the boldest experiments in Jewish-Arab partnership since the state’s founding.
That experiment briefly succeeded. Ra’am joined Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid’s coalition in 2021 and demonstrated that Arab participation in government could become something ordinary rather than revolutionary.
More awkward still for Likud, Netanyahu himself spent some weeks after the 2021 election attempting to persuade Abbas to support — or even participate in — his own coalition. Those negotiations failed for one principal reason: Far-right firebrand Bezalel Smotrich — now Netanyahu’s finance minister — refused to countenance a government dependent on an Arab party. Without Ra’am, Netanyahu lacked a majority.
It is therefore surreal to portray Eisenkot’s willingness to work with Ra’am as somehow beyond the democratic pale, when not so long ago, Netanyahu himself tried to do precisely the same thing.
Nor should anyone pretend that Arab parties suddenly became relevant because of Eisenkot. Since the emergence of today’s political blocs, Arab parties have almost invariably belonged to the anti-Likud camp. Any center-left coalition aspiring to govern has depended, directly or indirectly, on their parliamentary support. That is not a distortion of Israeli democracy. It is one of its enduring structural realities.
Which brings us to the larger significance of this episode.
Many Israelis have long predicted that this Likud campaign would barely concern policy at all. They expected, instead, an effort to delegitimize any prospective change government by portraying it as illegitimate because it relied on Arab parties. They expected renewed attempts to cast Arab political participation as inherently suspect. They expected emotional manipulation to substitute for argument and personal attacks to eclipse serious debate. Some feared renewed efforts to discourage Arab turnout and disqualify Arab parties from the ballot.
That appears to be exactly what they’re getting.
The remarkable thing is not merely that Likud produced this advertisement, but that doing so was effectively its first act of the campaign, which kicked off after the Knesset recently went into recess.
Before voters had heard competing visions for Israel’s economy, security or diplomacy, the country’s governing party chose to launch its campaign by inflaming fears about Arab political participation while employing imagery that countless Israelis immediately interpreted as mocking one father’s unbearable personal loss.
By the next day, competing ads using a similar aesthetic were put out by opponents of Netanyahu. One depicted Netanyahu on a similar field running past a soldier to hug a Haredi politician holding a sign that says — as many Haredi anti-draft protesters chant — “we’d rather die than serve.”
One reason AI is so attractive to political strategists is because it blurs responsibility. Images can be carefully engineered to evoke a conclusion while remaining just different enough to deny that such a conclusion was ever the intention. The technology offers something every spin doctor craves: emotional impact coupled with plausible deniability.
“I do not think we can allow this to continue,” lamented David Lau, a former chief rabbi of Israel, who has served in the military. “We must stop all these disputes, all this talk, and all these behaviors. This path does not lead to building anything. It does not lead to peace. It is a bad path, and I am even more concerned about the next generation.”
It is entirely possible that this advertisement will prove to have established the moral tone of the campaign. Israel deserves better.
The post With anti-Arab campaign ad, Netanyahu stoops to new moral and political lows appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Reed College agrees to sweeping reforms as part of Title VI antisemitism settlement
(JTA) — Reed College has agreed to a host of far-reaching institutional changes, including asserting that targeting Jewish Zionists will be considered discriminatory, in order to settle multiple federal antisemitism investigations, parties to the complaint announced Wednesday.
The settlement was announced by the Anti-Defamation League and the Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, which jointly filed the complaint, under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination at any institution receiving federal funds. It comes as campuses across the country, facing threats of losing federal funding under the Trump administration, have demonstrated willingness to negotiate new antisemitism protections.
As part of the agreement, the private Portland, Oregon, liberal arts school says it will insert language into its discrimination policy asserting that “for many Jewish people, Zionism is integral to their religious, ancestral and/or ethnic Jewish identity,” and that “targeting Jews on the basis of their Zionist identity” will be considered discriminatory.
The school will also contract a third-party consultant to monitor and report on its effectiveness in adhering to antisemitism protections, role that is unusual in similar Title VI agreements. The agreement says Reed will “consider” the International Holocaust Remembrance Association’s working definition of antisemitism, which includes some criticisms of Israel, and implement antisemitism training for faculty and staff.
“We take concerns about antisemitism, and all forms of unlawful discrimination, seriously, and we will continue to support the well-being, safety, and success of every member of our community,” a Reed College spokesperson told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency in a statement acknowledging the agreement. Reed declined to comment further.
ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt and Brandeis Center officials praised the agreement in a release as a potential model for other colleges.
“We believe it should serve as a model for other schools,” Denise Katz-Prober, director of legal initiatives at the Brandeis Center, told JTA about the agreement. The required language in Reed’s discrimination guidelines, she said, is “very clear about what constitutes anti-Zionist conduct in violation of civil rights and in violation of the policy.”
“This outcome demonstrates how the Title VI process can work to effectively protect Jewish students,” Greenblatt said in his own statement.
Around 100 students at Reed College are Jewish, or about 7% of the total student body, according to estimates from Hillel International. A request for comment to the director of PDX Hillel, which serves Jewish students at Reed and others in the region, was not immediately returned.
The resolution stems from two anonymous Title VI antisemitism complaints from Jewish former Reed students, both filed in 2024 under the Biden administration. One of those cases related to a student whose dorm-room mezuzah was vandalized, and who herself was later pelted with rocks, during a pro-Palestinian demonstration in spring 2024. The student later left the school out of concern for her safety.
Both of the described acts would have already been considered violations of school policy for reasons unrelated to the student’s Jewish or Zionist identity. Brandeis’s Katz-Prober argued both should have also been considered in the context of her targeting by anti-Zionist activists.
“It might be difficult for someone to, at first glance, understand whether it was simply an assault or an assault motivated by bias,” she said. The case, she said, demonstrated how in some cases, “‘Zionist’ is merely a codeword for Jew.”
Katz-Prober also touted the agreement’s mandate that the school bring on a third-party compliance consultant, separate from its Title VI coordinator. While she insisted that such a role would be “independent” and free of bias, she noted that both the ADL and the Brandeis Center would have a role in their selection.
“Both sides get a say,” she said.
The post Reed College agrees to sweeping reforms as part of Title VI antisemitism settlement appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Arizona Rep. Andy Biggs cruises to GOP nomination for governor amid allegations of antisemitism
(JTA) — Arizona Rep. Andy Biggs, who has drawn criticism for ties to white nationalist figures, will officially be the Republican nominee for Arizona governor, after winning the primary on Tuesday night.
Biggs, who is backed by President Donald Trump, has drawn criticism for encouraging Stew Peters, an internet personality, and appearing on his show. Peters has labeled Judaism a “death cult” and has called for a “final solution” that involves the deportation of American Jews, and multiple watchdogs identify him as promoting antisemitism.
“Keep preaching,” Biggs told Peters at the end of his June 2023 appearance on the show, during which they discussed government corruption and Biggs agreed with Peters that the FBI should be abolished.
Biggs, 67, who won handily with 73.4% of votes according to multiple media outlets, will challenge Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs in what is expected to be a competitive race in November. Biggs has represented Arizona’s 5th Congressional District, which is outside of Phoenix, since 2017.
His opponent in the GOP primary, Rep. David Schweikert, had put out a campaign mailer in March tying Biggs to white supremacy and antisemitism. The mailer featured mentions of Biggs’ interview with Peters as well as Biggs’ endorsement of Texas GOP candidate Brandon Herrera, who owned a copy of “Mein Kampf.”
Biggs’ campaign did not respond to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency’s request for comment, but in a local TV interview last month he called the accusations politically motivated and said, “This notion that I am antisemitic is absolutely one of the most ludicrous, insane arguments ever.”
In 2024, Biggs opposed the bipartisan Antisemitism Awareness Act, which passed in the House of Representatives. Biggs wrote that he opposes antisemitism and that the “pro-Hamas, pro-genocide, anti-Israel events happening across the nation are sickening.” He rejected the legislation, he said, because it was “so poorly drafted that it violates the Constitution and could have serious ramifications for the Christian community.” Right wing Republicans objected especially to the bill citing a definition of antisemitism that included as an example the claim that the Jews killed Jesus.
That same year, Biggs attended a rally co-sponsored by the Proud Boys, an extremist militia style group. In 2019, he spoke at a “Patriotism over Socialism” rally in Arizona, which watchdogs warned would draw extremist groups.
Media Matters, a group that mostly monitors right-wing groups, in 2023 wrote that “the links between Biggs and far-right extremists have been well-documented,” citing among other things his ties to another far-right group, the Oath Keepers.
The Republican Jewish Coalition did not respond to a question over whether it would support Biggs’ run for governor.
At a campaign event on Tuesday, Hobbs skewered Biggs for his denial of Trump’s 2020 election loss, and for not acknowledging Hobbs’ narrow 2022 gubernatorial victory over Republican Kari Lake.
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post Arizona Rep. Andy Biggs cruises to GOP nomination for governor amid allegations of antisemitism appeared first on The Forward.

