After Park East Turmoil, Momentum Builds for Legislation Barring Protests Outside Synagogues

By: Fern Sidman – Jewish Voice News

The furious debate over free speech, communal safety, and the limits of public protest in New York City intensified this week as legislative efforts to restrict demonstrations outside houses of worship—particularly synagogues—gained traction in the wake of last week’s harrowing protest at Manhattan’s Park East Synagogue. The incident, which drew several hundred demonstrators and featured chants calling for violence, has galvanized Jewish leaders, alarmed lawmakers, and sparked a push for legal protections that some argue are long overdue. As VIN News reported on Tuesday, the Park East episode has become a flashpoint in a city already grappling with mounting antisemitism and volatile political tensions.

The demonstration, organized by the Palestinian Assembly for Liberation Awda of New York and New Jersey, targeted an event promoting Jewish migration to Israel and Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria. What began as a protest quickly escalated into a spectacle of incendiary rhetoric. Chants of “death to the I.D.F.” and “globalize the intifada” reverberated through the normally quiet Upper East Side block, leaving congregants shaken and prompting an outpouring of concern from Jewish institutions and elected officials alike. According to the information provided in the VIN News report, the chants were not merely provocative—they were explicitly threatening, evoking the darkest fears of a community increasingly vulnerable amid a national spike in antisemitic incidents.

For worshippers entering Park East that evening, the atmosphere was nothing short of menacing. Videos that circulated online and were later reviewed by VIN News show protesters tightly packed along the synagogue’s entrance, waving signs, jeering at attendees, and screaming slogans that many Jewish leaders have denounced as genocidal. The chant “globalize the intifada,” in particular, struck a nerve. To Jewish New Yorkers, the phrase is not an abstraction: it is a call to replicate the waves of violence, terror attacks, and suicide bombings that have taken thousands of Israeli lives.

In this context, the proximity of the protest to a synagogue—not a government building or public square—was deeply distressing. Park East Synagogue is not merely a religious institution; it is a symbol of Jewish resilience, led by Rabbi Arthur Schneier, a Holocaust survivor who witnessed the burning of his synagogue in Vienna on Kristallnacht. As the VIN News report poignantly highlighted, last week’s demonstration held an eerie resonance for Schneier and his congregants. The sight of a Jewish house of worship surrounded by hostile protesters brought memories of past hatred painfully to the surface.

The political fallout from the protest was immediate. Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani, himself a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, issued a public statement in which he condemned the violent language used by the demonstrators. However, he simultaneously criticized the synagogue for hosting the pro-aliyah and pro-settlement event. This dual condemnation—of both protesters and the synagogue—struck many Jewish leaders as tone-deaf at best and deeply troubling at worst.

Mamdani’s statement unsettled segments of New York’s Jewish community, who interpreted his remarks as a form of victim-blaming. Many felt that by chastising the synagogue for organizing an event the protesters disapproved of, Mamdani blurred moral lines and failed to unequivocally defend a community under siege.

It was within this context that Rabbi Marc Schneier—founder of the Hampton Synagogue and son of Rabbi Arthur Schneier—approached Mamdani and urged him to back legislation that would prohibit protests directly outside houses of worship. According to a report in The New York Times, the mayor-elect responded enthusiastically, saying he “loved the idea” and wanted to explore it further. Rabbi Arthur Schneier reportedly echoed the same plea in his own conversation with Mamdani shortly thereafter.

State Senator Liz Krueger, whose district includes the Park East Synagogue, quickly emerged as a potential legislative champion. Speaking to reporters, Krueger confirmed she was considering introducing legislation in Albany that would bar protests from taking place directly outside religious institutions. While she emphasized the need for a thoughtful approach that respects constitutional boundaries, Krueger underscored what many Jewish leaders have long argued: the right to peaceful protest does not include the right to harass, intimidate, or endanger worshippers in their own sacred spaces.

As the VIN News report noted, the proposed legislation would not aim to stifle political expression but rather to establish a protective buffer zone so that congregants can enter and exit their places of worship safely and without fear. The concept is not unprecedented. Similar buffer laws exist around schools, hospitals, and reproductive health clinics, balancing free expression with public safety.

Advocates for the synagogue buffer zone argue that houses of worship, like medical facilities, are uniquely vulnerable and serve essential social, cultural, and spiritual functions deserving of heightened protection. They point to the alarming rise in antisemitic incidents across New York City—including vandalism, assaults, disruptions of Jewish events, and harassment near schools and synagogues—as evidence of a deteriorating climate that lawmakers can no longer ignore.

The idea of legislating protective zones around synagogues has been embraced by a wide range of Jewish leaders, who view such measures as both necessary and urgent. In communications with VIN News, several rabbis and community executives emphasized that houses of worship must remain sanctuaries—not battlegrounds for political protests.

But not everyone is convinced. Civil liberties advocates caution that any such law must be carefully tailored to avoid infringing on First Amendment rights. The American Civil Liberties Union, while not commenting specifically on the Park East proposal, has historically opposed government-mandated protest restrictions, arguing that they set dangerous precedents.

Legal scholars consulted by VIN News expressed mixed views. Some note that buffer zones can be upheld by courts if they are content-neutral and narrowly crafted to promote a legitimate public interest—such as safety. Others warn that any law regulating protest locations may face challenges, especially if it is perceived as targeting a particular ideology or political movement.

One constitutional attorney told VIN News: “The key legal question will be whether the law seeks to regulate behavior—like harassment—or speech itself. The former may be permissible. The latter almost certainly is not.”

The Park East protest, while local in scope, has resonated nationally. As the VIN News report indicated, the United States is experiencing an unprecedented surge in antisemitic rhetoric and behavior, a trend accelerated by international conflicts and intensified by polarization at home. Synagogues, Jewish schools, and community centers have found themselves on the front lines of this rising hostility.

Against this broader backdrop, the Park East protest appears less an isolated incident than a harbinger. The chilling effect on Jewish worshippers—some of whom told VIN News that they were afraid to attend services the following week—illustrates the real and immediate impact such protests can have on religious freedom and communal life.

The symbolic significance of targeting a synagogue with chants advocating death and violence cannot be overstated. As one Jewish community leader put it in an interview with VIN News: “If protesters want to criticize Israeli policy, they should do so at City Hall or in Washington. Surrounding a synagogue—even one hosting a political event—is an act that crosses a moral line.”

The coming legislative debate will force New Yorkers—and their elected representatives—to confront a profound question: How does a democratic society protect its most vulnerable communities without infringing on cherished freedoms?

Jewish leaders argue that the right to worship safely is fundamental. Civil libertarians warn of the slippery slope. And political leaders, from Mamdani to Krueger, are now navigating this delicate terrain with heightened urgency.

What is clear is that the Park East incident has shifted public consciousness. It exposed vulnerabilities that many Jewish communities had feared but hoped were exaggerated. It demonstrated how easily political anger can spill into spaces meant for sanctuary. And it ignited a conversation about the responsibilities of government when minority communities feel threatened.

With momentum building for legislation to bar protests directly outside synagogues and other houses of worship, New York stands at a crossroads. The path it chooses will not only shape the security of its Jewish community but will set a precedent for balancing free expression with communal safety in an age defined by volatility and rising extremism.

As the debate unfolds, one thing is certain: The Park East protest may well be remembered as the moment when New York lawmakers—and New York’s next mayor—were forced to reckon with the consequences of allowing hatred to masquerade as protest, and intimidation to pass as free speech.

And as VIN News continues to report, the Jewish community is demanding not only words, but action.

Why wasn’t TJV aggressively reporting this from the start about the evil Muslim nazimonster Mamdani:

The Islamists’ Trojan horse
The twin causes of Palestinianism and human rights have destroyed the West’s moral compass

The Islamists’ Trojan horse
The twin causes of Palestinianism and human rights have destroyed the West’s moral compass
MELANIE PHILLIPS
NOV 28

Zohran Mamdani arrested for disorderly conduct in demonstration against Israeli “genocide” seven days after October 7 2023 Hamas-led atrocities

The “progressive” world is defined by its unchallengeable adherence to two causes: Palestinianism and international human-rights law. The two are symbiotically linked.

“Progressives” believe that these stand for conscience, morality and the betterment of the human race. In fact, both of them have destroyed the West’s moral compass altogether.

They are the principal drivers of the tsunami of Israel demonisation and Jew-baiting that’s engulfed the Jewish world since the Hamas-led atrocities in Israel on October 7, 2023.

This infernal axis is perfectly encapsulated in the person of New York’s mayor-elect, Zohran Mamdani.

After the mob attack on Park East Synagogue on New York City’s Upper East Side over the meeting it hosted by Nefesh B’Nefesh to provide information about aliyah, or immigration to Israel, Mamdani said: “

These sacred spaces should not be used to promote activities in violation of international law.

This was clearly ridiculous. Moving to Israel isn’t a violation of international law, nor is any meeting to provide information about doing so. Moving there is no more unlawful than someone moving to the United States, the course pursued by Mamdani’s own parents.

The mayor-elect’s office later said that Mamdani had meant “settlement activity beyond the Green Line” was a violation of international law. That’s untrue in itself, but it’s not what he said and misrepresents the event that he denounced.

It’s quite clear that he believes all immigration to live in Israel is illegitimate because he believes that the existence of Israel itself is illegitimate, as was obvious from his pre-election performances as a street agitator screaming for the destruction of the world’s only Jewish state.

Mamdani made this “violation” remark for one baleful purpose — to delegitimise the right of Jews to live in their own ancestral homeland. That’s because he wants to delegitimise Israel itself by any means possible.

This is the second time he’s made a notable comment involving international law. Weeks ago, he said that if Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu set foot in New York, Mamdani would have him arrested under the terms of the arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court.

But this was again absurd. He would have no power to do so. Such an arrest could only be carried out by the federal authorities. And no such arrest could be made by them either because the United States isn’t a signatory to the ICC.

Why, then, is Mamdani so keen to cite international law, which has nothing at all to do with New York?

It’s because international law is a key weapon deployed by the “eighth front” of the war against Israel. This eighth front (the other seven are the countries encircling Israel in a “ring of fire”) is the war of the mind.

It is conducted through the entire global apparatus of international human-rights law and the humanitarian establishment, and laundered by the media to demonise and delegitimise Israel in the West and cause people to press for Israel’s extermination.

The United Nations, the international courts and the big NGOs like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International constitute a global infrastructure to promote the Palestinian cause; give the lies of “occupation” and Palestinian rights to the land a spurious justification in international law; and isolate Israel in the court of public opinion.

For the Palestinian Arabs, international human-rights law is a key weapon to destroy Israel. In the 1960s, when they realised they couldn’t achieve this through war, the Palestinian terrorist leader Yasser Arafat and his allies in the former Soviet Union invented the bogus identity of a Palestinian people and thus claimed the right to self-determination.

This hooked Western progressives for whom, as the Palestinian Arabs and their Soviet strategists well understood, universal human rights have become the nearest thing to a religion. To these liberals, campaigning for the Palestinians meant campaigning for justice and the rights of the oppressed.

All the Palestinian Arabs then had to do was to hit Israel with fake accusations of human-rights abuses, and Western liberals would be turned into a weapon to bring about Israel’s destruction. This has been carried out to the letter, turning justice into lawfare and bodies such as the International Court of Justice or International Criminal Court into kangaroo courts captured by Israel’s enemies.

The Palestinian cause has had an even deeper effect. It has simply corrupted discourse and morality in the West. By adopting Palestinianism as their badge of moral worth, people have signed up to an agenda of lies that they assume is incontrovertible truth.

Convinced that the Palestinians are the wretched of the earth, Western liberals refuse to see that they are actually supporting a genocidal agenda. By internalising Palestinian Jew-hatred, they now see nothing wrong in themselves spewing out vicious antisemitic tropes.

Demonising Israel in the name of anti-racism, they have turned morality inside out, reversing victim and aggressor. That’s why, after the terror attacks on October 7, so many of them denied Israeli victimisation and instead grotesquely blamed Israel for abuses such as war crimes or genocide, of which Israel was innocent but of which the Palestinians were guilty.

This pathological projection by aggressors of their own evil deeds onto their victims is hardwired into the Palestinian cause and indeed the Islamist world.

The Islamists do this because they believe that Islam is perfection, and everything beyond it is the province of the devil. Islamist aggression against the West is therefore falsely framed as a defense against Western attacks on Islam.

This was why British Muslims in Birmingham justified their exclusion of the Maccabi Tel Aviv away-fans from the club’s match against Aston Villa in October by claiming that the Israeli fans had a record of violence.

They based this on the utterly false assertion that a violent, pre-planned Arab “Jew-hunt” against Maccabi fans at a match in Amsterdam last year, in which the Israelis were chased through the city, beaten and one of them forced into a canal, was in fact a major attack by Israeli “hooligans” against local Muslims.

By allowing the Palestinian cause to subvert their ability to distinguish truth from lies and right from wrong, Western progressives have damaged something rather closer to home than the truth about the Israel-Arab impasse. It meant that they can’t see how their own society is being Islamised.

That’s why the knee-jerk response after any Islamist atrocities in the West is to worry about attacks on Muslims. It’s why in Britain, any criticism of the police delivering “two-tier justice” by treating Muslims less harshly than others, or concern about attempts to Islamise the curriculum of some state-run schools, or speaking about the overwhelmingly Muslim identity of the rape and grooming gangs is all denounced as “Islamophobia” and silenced.

Palestinianism is the Trojan horse for the Islamisation of the West.

Mamdani is motivated above all by his passion for the Palestinian cause and his hatred of Israel.

It’s clear from his transition team — a nightmarish collection of Israel-haters, nihilists and ultra-leftists — that he intends to drive a wedge down the middle of the Jewish community by using anti-Zionist Jews as human shields to protect him from charges of antisemitism as he pursues his vendetta against Israel.

New York Jews who denounce Israel will receive protection and favours; Jews who are assumed to support Israel will be thrown to the wolves.

Zohran Mamdani arrested for disorderly conduct in demonstration against Israeli “genocide” seven days after October 7 2023 Hamas-led atrocities
The “progressive” world is defined by its unchallengeable adherence to two causes: Palestinianism and international human-rights law. The two are symbiotically linked.