Uncategorized
When Jews really did wage a ‘war on Christmas’
(JTA) — On a frigid winter’s day in 1906, tens of thousands of Jewish parents in New York’s Lower East Side and Brooklyn kept their children home from school.
It wasn’t a snow day, but a protest: Activists and the Yiddish press had called for a boycott of the Christmas assemblies and pageants that they knew Jewish children would be obliged to attend on the day before the holiday.
“Jews Object to Christmas in the Schools,” blared the New York Times. The Brooklyn Eagle warned that “agitators” sought to rob Christian children of their traditions. The boycott was, depending on the source, a valiant cry for religious freedom, or the first shot in the 100-year-plus “war on Christmas.”
The episode is the subject of historian Scott D. Seligman’s new book, “The Great Christmas Boycott of 1906,” which reconstructs how a seemingly local dispute in one Brooklyn school exploded into a test case for religious freedom and civic belonging.
More than a century later, Seligman suggests, the issues it raised — over religion in public schools and the boundaries of church and state — remain strikingly familiar.
“As soon as I stumbled on the story, I knew there’d be a book,” said Seligman, who grew up in Newark, New Jersey, in the 1960s, when schoolchildren were still made to recite the Lord’s Prayer. “I was that kid in public school who always wondered why we were praying like Christians, and even why Christmas was a legal holiday.”
The book is the third installment in what’s become a trilogy about Jews engaged in mass action during the first part of the 20th century. “The Great Kosher Meat War of 1902” (2020) recalled a successful consumer uprising led by Lower East Side Jewish women fed up with the high cost of beef. In “The Chief Rabbi’s Funeral” (2024), Seligman explored how a vicious anti-Jewish riot on the Lower East Side led the city’s fractious Jewish community to organize as never before.
In practical terms, the Christmas boycott accomplished little, and even led to an antisemitic backlash. But it set a precedent for Jewish civic activism — and for a broader national debate about religion in public education that would stretch into the 21st century.
The spark came a year earlier, in December 1905, at Public School 174 in Brownsville. The Brooklyn neighborhood was a dense warren of immigrant Jews, many newly arrived from Eastern Europe, who eagerly sent their children to the public schools that were being filled nearly as fast as they could be built or renovated.
“The Catholics gave up on the public schools as irredeemably Protestant. The Jews loved public schools — they were a ticket to acculturation and advancement in a way they’d never had in the old country,” said Seligman. “All they wanted was to get the religious influence out.”
In a school assembly the day before Christmas, F. F. Harding, the school’s Presbyterian principal, read aloud from a text called “Gems of Wisdom from Bible Literature and Proverbs” and then addressed his 500 pupils, nearly all Jews.
“Now, boys and girls,” he said, “at this time of year I want you all to have the feeling of Christ in you. … Be like Christ.”
That message did not sit well with Augusta (“Gussie”) Herbert, a 14-year-old seventh grader. The daughter of a Jewish lawyer, Herbert stood up in front of the assembled students and asked why the Christian religion was being taught in a public school.
Her boldness shocked classmates and administrators alike. But she wasn’t alone. Dozens of Jewish children went home and told their parents that Christmas hymns and Bible readings had been part of their school day. Within days, Brownsville’s Jewish community was in an uproar.
Herbert’s father, Edward Herbert, brought the matter to Albert Lucas, a 47-year-old English-born activist who served as secretary of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America.
Lucas, born Abraham Abrahamson in Liverpool, was already a veteran of Jewish communal battles. He had led campaigns against Christian “settlement houses” that sought to convert Jewish children with free meals and holiday gifts. To him, the creeping Christianization of public schools was a subtler but equally serious threat.
“Lucas believed the schools were the front line in preserving Jewish identity in America,” Seligman said. “He saw it as his duty to protect children from being made to feel like second-class citizens.”
Lucas wrote to the city’s superintendent of schools, William Henry Maxwell, who had already issued a circular in 1903 reminding principals that “hymns containing reference to the tenets of any religious sect are out of place in unsectarian schools.” But enforcement was lax, and many teachers — Jewish and Christian alike — ignored the rule.
When word of Harding’s assembly reached Lucas, he pounced. Within two days, a petition circulated in Brownsville accusing the principal of “systematically Christianizing” Jewish children. The Hebrew Standard and Jewish Comment denounced the “proselytizing” in public schools, while the Brooklyn Eagle, the borough’s popular daily, defended the principal as merely promoting “good morals.”
In an unprecedented move, the Board of Education held a public hearing to weigh charges that a school principal had promoted religion. It drew a raucous crowd of 1,500.
The hearing revealed sharp divisions even within the Jewish community. Some defended Harding as a well-meaning educator; others accused him of deliberately blurring the line between civic virtue and Christian faith. In the end, the board gave Harding a slap on the wrist, in what Seligman calls “an early Easter gift.”
For Lucas and the Orthodox Union, the Harding verdict only confirmed that quiet lobbying wasn’t enough. They began to organize Jewish parents directly.
Their campaign reflected the broader social tensions of the time. Progressive reformers such as Superintendent Maxwell believed that public schools were engines of “Americanization,” meant to instill not only English and arithmetic but also civic and moral values. For many teachers, “being a good American” was synonymous with “being a good Christian.”
At the same time, America’s Jews were divided along class and ethnic lines. Uptown, German-born Jews — who had arrived decades earlier — feared that the noisy protests of their Yiddish-speaking coreligionists would jeopardize their own fragile acceptance. Downtown, newer immigrants saw those elites as assimilationist and out of touch.
By December 1906, with no change in policy, the Orthodox Union and the Yiddish press decided to act. Two newspapers — the Morgen Zhurnal and the Yidishes Tageblatt — called on Jewish parents to keep their children home on Dec. 24, when schools would hold Christmas exercises.
By most accounts, the response was overwhelming. In the Lower East Side and Brownsville, entire classrooms emptied out. Contemporary estimates suggested that between one third and twothirds of Jewish students were absent from heavily Jewish districts — perhaps 20,000 to 25,000 children citywide.
Anti-Jewish letters to the editor poured in, accusing the protesters of trying to “Judaize” the schools and “destroy” America’s Christian heritage. Protestant ministers accused Jews of ingratitude. Editorials described them as “latecomers, tolerated guests in a Christian country.”
Not all Jews supported the boycott. Abraham Stern, a German-Jewish member of the Board of Education, called the protesters “agitators” and said their actions lacked “the support of the more intelligent Jews of the city.”
Julia Richman, the city’s first female district superintendent — herself a Jewish reformer — said Christmas was both “religious and national” and should not be barred from schools “so long as it is not sectarian.”
Even some Reform rabbis dissented, including Judah L. Magnes of Temple Emanu-El, who favored cultural coexistence over confrontation.
But among the Yiddish-speaking press, the boycott was a point of pride. “Never before,” wrote one editor, “have Jewish workers stood up so boldly for their rights as Americans.”
Lucas and the boycotters were able to point to the New York State Constitution, which explicitly prohibited the use of public funds for schools teaching “the tenets of any religious sect” — a legacy of the long conflict between a Protestant establishment and Catholics.
But if law was on the side of the Jews, Seligman said, “the politics was not.” The Board of Education, caught between outraged Christians and emboldened Jews, eventually let the matter drop.
“At the end of the day, if you’re pushing for minority rights, you’re not going to get a lot of help from elected officials. Your best bet is always going to be the courts,” said Seligman.
By 1907, with no appetite for another boycott, the Orthodox Union’s activism around the issue waned. Hymns with religious themes were discouraged but not banned. Trees and wreaths returned to classrooms.
“The hot potato,” Seligman said, “remained in the laps of the school principals.”
It would take until the 1960s, with the Supreme Court’s Engel v. Vitale decision, for school-sponsored prayer to be declared unconstitutional. Even then, Seligman notes, “Christmas programs persisted, largely unchallenged.”
Seligman ends his book by drawing a line from 1906 to today. America’s Jewish population, he notes, is more assimilated and less religious than it was in Lucas’s day. But even as the number of self-identified Christians has been shrinking, Christian nationalists are louder and more politically powerful. And the Supreme Court, increasingly sympathetic to religious expression, has eroded some of the wall between church and state that figures like Lucas fought to preserve.
Jews, writes Selgiman, “are ostensibly in more or less the same position in which the New York Board of Education left them in 1907: forced to accept celebrations of a holiday in which they do not believe in the public schools attended by their children, paid for in part by their tax dollars.”
For Seligman, the lesson of 1906 is less about Christmas than about vigilance. The false accusation of a “Jewish war on Christmas,” he writes, “is as inevitable today as it was in 1906 — if not more so.”
And Gussie Herbert’s defiant question — “Why are you teaching the Christian religion in a public school?” — still echoes, more than a century later, whenever Americans debate where faith ends and the public square begins.
The post When Jews really did wage a ‘war on Christmas’ appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
White House Religious Liberty Panel Member Decries ‘Zionist Supremacy,’ Vows Not to Resign Despite Backlash
Carrie Prejean Boller speaks during a White House Religious Liberty Commission hearing on Feb. 9, 2026. Photo: Screenshot
Carrie Prejean Boller, a member of the White House Religious Liberty Commission, has vowed to combat so-called “Zionist supremacy” in the United States, sparking fresh outrage amid ongoing furor over her recent comments condemning the Jewish state and defending antisemitic podcaster Candace Owens.
“I will continue to stand against Zionist supremacy in America. I’m a proud Catholic. I, in no way will be forced to embrace Zionism as a fulfillment of biblical prophesy [sic]. I am a free American. Not a slave to a foreign nation,” Prejean Boller posted on the social media platform X on Tuesday.
Thank you all for the love and support I’ve received. I will continue to stand against Zionist supremacy in America. I’m a proud Catholic. I, in no way will be forced to embrace Zionism as a fulfillment of biblical prophesy. I am a free American. Not a slave to a foreign nation.
— Carrie Prejean Boller (@CarriePrejean1) February 10, 2026
The comments came on the heels of furor over Prejean Boller’s conduct during Monday’s hearing of the 13-member White House Religious Liberty Commission, which descended into a tense back-and-forth after she asked pointed questions about Israel’s policies and whether rejection of the Jewish state’s legitimacy should itself be labeled antisemitic.
The council was established by US President Donald Trump to examine religious freedom issues and was intended to focus on concrete challenges facing Jewish communities, including bias and harassment. Prejean Boller’s conduct, which included an impassioned defense of antisemitic personalities Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson, and her peddling of unsubstantiated claims that Israel has intentionally starved and murdered Palestinian civilians, raised alarm bells among pro-Israel advocates.
“I would really appreciate it if you would stop calling Candace Owens an antisemite,” Prejean Boller said to Seth Dillon, CEO of the political satire site Babylon Bee, during the hearing. “She’s not an antisemite. She just doesn’t support Zionism, and that really has to stop. I don’t know why you keep bringing her up, and Tucker.”
Owens, one of the country’s most popular podcasters, has spent the past two years spreading antisemitic conspiracy theories on her platform. She has called Jews “pedophilic,” argued that they oppress and murder Christians, and asserted that they are responsible for the trans-Atlantic slave trade.
Prejean Boller, a conservative activist and former Miss California, repeatedly pressed witnesses about Israel’s actions in Gaza and religious leaders on their views of Zionism, drawing audible boos from the audience and confusion from her colleagues. At one point she asked a Jewish activist if he would condemn Israel’s military response to Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel, despite the hearing’s official focus on domestic antisemitism. Prejean Boller also donned a Palestinian flag pin on the lapel of her suit, telegraphing her support for the anti-Israel ideological cause.
“Since we’ve mentioned Israel a total of 17 times, are you willing to condemn what Israel has done in Gaza?” Boller asked Jewish activist Shabbos Kestenbaum.
During the hearing, she also accused Rabbi Ari Berman, president of Yeshiva University, of Islamophobia after he declared that anti-Zionism — the belief that Israel does not have a right to exist —is an antisemitic ideology. Berman argued that attempts to delegitimize the existence of the world’s sole Jewish state, while showing ambivalence toward the existence of dozens of Muslim states, indicates anti-Jewish sentiment.
Panel members repeatedly stressed that American universities and communities must do more to confront bias and ensure Jewish students can live without fear of harassment.
Members of the commission expressed visible surprise at Prejean Boller’s line of questioning and repeated downplaying of antisemitism. Kestenbaum took aim at Prejean Boller after she asserted that the young activist had conflated antisemitism with harboring anti-Israel sentiment.
“She decided that this should be a debate on Israel’s conduct in Gaza, which I’m not entirely sure how that affects American students being discriminated against,” Kestenbaum said, “given that there are hundreds of millions of Catholics, including some who are on this commission, speaking at this commission today, who would vehemently disagree with such a grandiose assertion.”
Spectators suggested that the hearing also spotlighted deeper fissures within the conservative movement. Prejean Boller’s impassioned defense of Owens and Carlson, who have spent the past few years peddling anti-Israel conspiracies, suggest that their narratives may be penetrating deeper into the Republican base. The hearing also raised questions about the White House’s vetting process for the commission.
A recent analysis by the Jewish People Policy Institute found that both Carlson and Owens dramatically increased the volume and intensity of negative content about Israel in 2025, with Owens also incorporating explicit antisemitic language and conspiracy narratives, including accusations of disproportionate violence and undue influence over US policy into her commentary.
Carlson, the former Fox News host whose podcast remains influential among conservative audiences, has in recent years amplified fringe voices, including figures such as white nationalist streamer Nick Fuentes. Carlson’s interviews have featured conspiratorial depictions of “Christian Zionists” as afflicted by a “brain virus,” and his platforming of extremists and Holocaust minimizers has drawn widespread condemnation from lawmakers and civil rights advocates across the ideological spectrum.
Some prominent conservative voices have demanded for Prejean Boller to resign or be removed from the commission, arguing that her views are counter to the mission of the initiative. Prejean Boller has repeatedly refused to relinquish her position, arguing that her Catholic faith does not allow for support of Israel and doing so would signal a surrender to “Zionist supremacy.”
However, conservative reporter and podcaster Laura Loomer stated that sources at the US State Department are pressing for the Trump administration to remove Prejean Boller from the panel.
“Carrie’s behavior is unacceptable and is not representative of the Trump administration’s values. We have asked the White House to take action,” Loomer posted on social media, attributing the quote to an unnamed State Department official.
Uncategorized
13-Year-Old Boy Brutally Assaulted in Paris in Second Antisemitic Attack in Less Than a Week
Tens of thousands of French people march in Paris to protest against antisemitism. Photo: Screenshot
In a shocking second antisemitic attack in less than a week, a 13-year-old boy in Paris was brutally beaten Monday by a knife-wielding assailant, prompting authorities to open a criminal investigation and step up security amid a rising tide of antisemitism.
On his way to a synagogue in Paris’s 18th arrondissement, the schoolboy was physically attacked by a group of five assailants who beat him, pressed a knife to his throat, called him a “dirty Jew,” and stole his belongings, the French news outlet Le Parisien reported.
According to the Paris prosecutor’s office, the victim was walking to a synagogue, clutching his kippah in his hand rather than wearing it for fear of being recognized, when five attackers confronted him; stole his AirPods, sneakers, and coat; and forced him to empty his pockets.
The boy also told authorities that he was shoved, punched in the face, and threatened with a knife to his throat before his attackers stole his belongings, shouting antisemitic remarks throughout the assault.
Local police have arrested and taken an 18-year-old suspect into custody after he was recognized during the assault by someone on a video call with the victim. The four other attackers remain at large as of this writing.
The prosecutor’s office has opened an investigation into armed robbery and armed violence, committed as a group and aggravated by discrimination, as authorities continue to work to identify and apprehend the remaining suspects.
This latest antisemitic attack marks the second such incident in less than a week, underscoring a growing climate of hostility as Jews and Israelis face a surge of targeted assaults.
Over the weekend, three Jewish men wearing kippahs were physically threatened with a knife and forced to flee after leaving their Shabbat services near the Trocadéro in southwest Paris’s 16th arrondissement, European Jewish Press reported.
As the victims were leaving a nearby synagogue and walking through the neighborhood, they noticed a man staring at them. The assailant then approached the group and repeatedly asked, “Are you Jews? Are you Israelis?”
When one of them replied “yes,” the man pulled a knife from his pocket and began threatening the group. The victims immediately ran and found police officers nearby. None of the victims were injured.
Like most countries across Europe and the broader Western world, France has seen a rise in antisemitic incidents over the last two years, in the wake of the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
According to the French Interior Ministry, the first six months of 2025 saw more than 640 antisemitic incidents, a 27.5 percent decline from the same period in 2024, but a 112.5 percent increase compared to the first half of 2023, before the Oct. 7 atrocities.
Last week, a Jewish primary school in eastern Paris was vandalized, with windows smashed and security equipment damaged, prompting a criminal investigation and renewed outrage among local Jewish leaders as targeted antisemitic attacks continued to escalate.
Uncategorized
Over 90% of American Jews Feel Less Safe After Recent Antisemitic Attacks, Survey Finds
A friend organized a vigil for Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Lynn Milgrim, both Israeli embassy workers who were allegedly murdered by an anti-Israel activist, in Washington, DC on May 22, 2025. Photo: ZUMA Press Wire via Reuters Connect
Nearly all Jews in the United States feel less safe after a recent wave of antisemitic attacks, and the majority have changed their behavior over the last year as a result, according to a major new survey.
The American Jewish Committee (AJC) on Tuesday published its annual State of Antisemitism in America report, revealing a growing level of fear among American Jews — especially the 31 percent directly targeted by antisemitic hate themselves in the past year. Of those who reported being the target of antisemitism, 80 percent said they changed their behavior in response.
“We need Americans to wake up to the reality of what their Jewish neighbors are experiencing,” AJC CEO Ted Deutch said in a statement announcing the report.
The AJC’s researchers found that 91 percent of American Jews feel more unsafe in the country following last year’s antisemitic attacks against Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro’s residence in April and pro-Israel demonstrators in Boulder, Colorado in June, in addition to the slayings of Israeli embassy staffers Sarah Milgrim and Yaron Lischinsky at the Capital Jewish Museum in May.
Seventy-eight percent of survey respondents said they feel less safe as a Jewish person in the US because of Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of southern Israel. During the onslaught, Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists perpetrated the biggest single-day massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, killing 1,200 people and kidnapping 251 hostages.
“Right now, in America, when Jews gather, whether at synagogue or a community event, it’s routinely behind metal detectors and armed guards,” Deutch said. “No one in America should have to change their behavior because of what they believe, but that’s how most Jews are living their lives. What we’re asking for is what every other minority group expects in America: the freedom to be who we are without fearing for our safety.”
The report documents that 55 percent of Jewish respondents to the survey said they changed their behavior in response to fears of antisemitism, while 17 percent noted they have considered leaving the US in the past five years as a result of rising hate, an increase from 13 percent in 2024.
Majorities of American Jews are attuned to the threats of online hate and the dangers of the popular large language model (LLM) chatbots marketed as so-called “artificial intelligence,” including SpaceX’s Grok, OpenAI’s ChatGPT, and Anthropic’s Claude.
Seventy-three percent of American Jews who were surveyed said they have experienced online antisemitism, and 65 percent expressed concerns at either the “very” or “somewhat” levels that LLM chatbots will spread more bigotry against Jews.
In addition, 69 percent of American Jews worry that information and misinformation from LLMs will inspire antisemitic incidents, according to the data.
More American Jews surveyed in 2025 said they saw antisemitism on social media platforms than those in 2024. Jews reporting seeing antisemitism on billionaire Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook social media website rose from 47 percent in 2024 to 54 percent last year, while those experiencing the hate on his Instagram photo-sharing app shot up from 32 percent to 40 percent.
American Jews seeking to enjoy online videos also reported rising bigotry targeting them on Alphabet’s YouTube (increasing from 27 percent to 38 percent) and Oracle’s TikTok (up from 18 percent to 23 percent).
The picture of life for younger American Jews is much more dire than for the middle-aged and elderly, with 47 percent of respondents 29 and younger saying antisemites had personally targeted them in the last year. This compares to 28 percent for Jews 30 and older.
The survey also affirms reports in recent years of increased antisemitism at the outposts of American academia.
Among Jewish college students, 42 percent said they experienced antisemitism while on campus, and 25 percent reported feeling or being excluded from a group or event because of their Jewish identity.
Jewish institutions remain widely under threat, with 28 percent of respondents saying that antisemites had targeted at least one synagogue, Jewish school, or community organization where they affiliated.
The survey also found that the protest slogan “globalize the intifada,” which references previous periods of sustained Palestinian terrorism against Jews and Israelis and has been widely interpreted as a call to expand such violence, provokes fear among 88 percent of Jewish respondents, with 27 percent saying they would feel “very unsafe” hearing the words. Among the general public, only 13 percent of respondents said they knew the phrase while 32 percent had heard the similar controversial war cry “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.”
More Americans (73 percent) knew the “Free Palestine” chant. The AJC noted that the alleged killer of Milgrim and Lischinsky “is reported to have shouted ‘Free Palestine’ during the shooting. The alleged attacker in Boulder is also reported to have yelled ‘Free Palestine’ as he threw a Molotov cocktail at the crowd of people gathered to support hostages held by Hamas in Gaza, ultimately leading to the death of 82-year-old Karen Diamond.”
In a parallel survey the AJC conducted of the American general public, researchers found that 70 percent of respondents called antisemitism a problem, 63 percent said it had increased since Hamas’s Oct. 7 atrocities, and 45 percent had seen or heard an antisemitic incident in the last 12 months.
Deutch on Tuesday highlighted some of the key findings in an op-ed published by the New York Post announcing the report.
“Among Americans who know a Jewish person, only 54 percent said they had personally seen or heard one or more antisemitic incidents in the last year,” Deutch wrote. “Among those who don’t know any Jews? Thirty-two percent.”
Deutch continued, “I am not advocating for special attention or treatment for my community. I’m calling for, rather, the same care, awareness, and collective outrage we would rightly see if these daily assaults were being made against members of any other religious or ethnic group in the United States.” He warned that “the fortress of metal detectors and bulletproof glass we’ve built around the Jewish community is a physical sign of the deep cracks undermining the foundation of our society.”
Holly Huffnagle, the AJC’s director of antisemitism policy, warned in a statement that tolerating the spread of antisemitism “corrodes social trust, legitimizes extremism, and weakens the democratic institutions that protect everyone, making a clear, dedicated government response not just optional, but necessary.”
The AJC’s survey took place between Sept. 26 and Oct. 29, 2025. Researchers drew data from responses provided by 1,222 Jews, ages 18 and up, as well as 1,033 adults in the general population. The margin of error for Jewish respondents was +/-3.7 percent while for the general population it was 3.4, at a 95 percent confidence level.