By: Fern Sidman

In an incident that has rapidly reverberated across Washington, social media, and Jewish communal institutions worldwide, the Coalition for Jewish Values (CJV) has issued a forceful public denunciation of the anti-Israel organization known as Code Pink, accusing it of unmasking itself as an antisemitic movement following a highly charged confrontation in a hallway of the United States Capitol. According to a report that appeared on Thursday at VIN News, the episode has intensified an already volatile debate over the boundaries between political protest, anti-Zionism, and outright hatred toward Jews.

At the center of the controversy is Rabbi Yaakov Menken, executive vice president of the Coalition for Jewish Values, an umbrella organization representing more than 2,500 traditional Orthodox rabbis across the United States. Rabbi Menken asserts that he was verbally accosted on December 12 by Code Pink activists solely because of his visibly Jewish appearance—an allegation that CJV leaders say speaks volumes about the nature of contemporary antisemitism cloaked in political rhetoric.

The confrontation, captured on video and widely circulated online, shows Rabbi Menken walking through a Capitol hallway when a Code Pink activist shouts “Free Palestine” at him. Walking alongside the protester was Medea Benjamin, Code Pink’s co-founder and one of its most prominent public faces, who soon echoed the chant. As the exchange escalated, Rabbi Menken is seen turning toward the radical, left-wing agitators, accusing them of targeting him not for any policy position or political action, but simply because he is Jewish and visibly so.

According to footage reviewed and reported on by VIN News, the activists responded with inflammatory epithets, including calling the rabbi a “racist” and a “baby-killer.” The encounter concluded with one pro-Hamas terror supporter declaring “from the river to the sea,” a phrase that many Jewish organizations—among them CJV—interpret as a call for the elimination of the State of Israel.

For CJV leadership, the symbolism and substance of the incident were unmistakable. “After this incident, only those who harbor antisemitic bias themselves can question whether Code Pink is an anti-Jewish hate group,” said Rabbi Ze’ev Smason, vice president of the Coalition for Jewish Values, in a statement cited in the VIN News report. Rabbi Smason went further, asserting that the slogans used during the confrontation “echo German chants of the 1930s, despite using Israel as a euphemism for their underlying targets.”

One of the most troubling aspects of the incident, according to Rabbi Menken and other CJV leaders, is the assertion that he was not attending any Israel-related hearing or event at the Capitol that day. Rather, he maintains he was passing through on unrelated business when he was singled out.

In subsequent social media posts, Rabbi Menken emphasized that he was targeted based on his attire—specifically, his kippah and traditional Orthodox clothing. This detail has become central to CJV’s argument that the confrontation represents not political protest but discriminatory harassment.

CJV views the episode as a stark illustration of how anti-Zionist and pro-terror activism can devolve into antisemitism when Jewish identity itself becomes the trigger for hostility. “They found a new pretense to hate Jews,” Menken said during the exchange, a remark that has since been widely quoted.

Code Pink, founded in 2002 and known primarily for its anti-war activism, has long been a vocal critic of U.S. foreign policy and Israeli government actions. The organization has staged protests in Congress, disrupted official hearings, and aligned itself with a broad range of progressive causes. In the past, Code Pink has stated that it opposes antisemitism and does not condone hatred toward Jews.

However, as of the latest report by VIN News, Code Pink has not issued a public response specifically addressing the Capitol hallway confrontation or the accusations leveled by the Coalition for Jewish Values. This silence, CJV leaders argue, is itself telling.

“The absence of any meaningful repudiation of this behavior speaks louder than any press release,” one senior CJV figure told VIN News on condition of anonymity. “When your activists shout genocidal slogans at a rabbi because he looks Jewish, and your leadership walks alongside them, there is no plausible deniability left.”

The incident has reignited a long-simmering debate within academic, political, and religious circles over the distinction—if any—between criticism of Israel and antisemitism. CJV’s position, articulated forcefully in the wake of the confrontation, is that while policy criticism is legitimate, the targeting of Jews as Jews crosses an unequivocal moral and ethical line.

As VIN News has chronicled in recent months, Jewish organizations worldwide have reported a sharp rise in antisemitic incidents following the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war. These incidents have ranged from vandalism and harassment to physical assaults, often justified by perpetrators as expressions of solidarity with Palestinians.

Rabbi Smason’s reference to European antisemitism of the 1930s underscores the gravity with which CJV views the moment. “The chants may be updated, the slogans rebranded,” he said, “but the instinct to single out Jews in public spaces remains chillingly familiar.”

Beyond the immediate dispute between CJV and Code Pink, the episode has sparked broader concerns about the safety of visibly Jewish individuals in political and civic spaces. If a rabbi can be accosted in the halls of Congress, critics ask, what message does that send about the boundaries of acceptable conduct elsewhere?

Several Orthodox Jewish advocacy groups have privately expressed alarm that the normalization of such confrontations could embolden further harassment. Capitol Police have not publicly commented on whether any review of the incident is underway.

Legal experts consulted by VIN News note that while the First Amendment protects political speech, it does not shield harassment or intimidation based on religion. Whether the Capitol confrontation rises to that threshold remains a matter of debate, but the optics alone have proven deeply unsettling for many observers.

For the Coalition for Jewish Values, the incident marks a turning point. CJV leaders say they are no longer willing to extend the benefit of the doubt to organizations that claim to oppose antisemitism while tolerating—or participating in—behavior they view as overtly hostile to Jews.

“This is not about silencing criticism of Israel,” Rabbi Menken wrote in a follow-up post highlighted by VIN News. “It is about recognizing when Jews themselves become the target, when our very presence is treated as provocation.”

As the video continues to circulate and the debate intensifies, the confrontation has become emblematic of a larger reckoning underway in American public life. The question facing advocacy groups, lawmakers, and civil society at large is whether clear moral lines can be reasserted in an era when political passions increasingly spill into personal hostility.

With Code Pink yet to respond directly and CJV pressing its case in the court of public opinion, the episode remains unresolved. What is clear, however, is that the Capitol hallway confrontation has crystallized anxieties that have been building for years.

The stakes extend far beyond a single altercation. They touch on fundamental questions of religious freedom, civic discourse, and the capacity of democratic societies to confront hatred—however it is packaged—without equivocation.

In that sense, the exchange between a rabbi and a group of activists may come to be remembered not merely as a viral video, but as a stark warning: that when political slogans become instruments of dehumanization, the line between protest and persecution has already been crossed.