The anti-ICE uprisings in the US, the triumph of the Israeli hostage movement, grassroots protests worldwide, and as Trump desperately attacks journalists and clergy, have we reached a turning point?
I remember the day you were interrupted very well. You handled like the mensch that you are. Who knew it would be something you’d mention years later in this insane context! Keep up the good works! We are all right behind you!
To be clear, the ones who did that are wonderful people with whom I have longstanding friendships. Their action was rude but I blame Trumpism for that climate of rudeness too. My point is to point out the absurdity of calling this a constitutional crime against freedom of religion.
In the early 1980s, after having lived in Germany as an ex-pat for over 10 years and doing research on the 3rd Reich history of the little city where I lived, I´d read - as I had many times - of the atrocities perpetrated against the Jewish community back then. The distinct thought came to my mind, that "something like this could NEVER happen in America!" I´ve often thought of this moment the past year. With Steven Miller´s designs of multitudes of concentration camps throughout the USA (wherever he meets no resistance), the secrecy of what goes on in those that exist, a "final solution" may be in the makings when the regime gets tired of the cost of feeding so many people. I wouldn´t put anything past the "prince of evil." He is an expression of Trump´s rampant antisemitism, as was Epstein and Michael Cohen (who became Trump´s victim). But we Americans are more resilient than most peoples. We are ultimately NOT going to stand for this. The American spirit is an inspiration for many countries (thank you, Rabbi Hammerman, for the videos showing us this) who have been living under different forms of suppression for generations. These younger generations know that a better world is possible, and they have the communicative means to information which that young nazi soldier with his diary didn´t have (NY Times article). He surely didn´t know much about that bumm-turned-Führer whose ideals he was fighting for, and, young as he was, was full of patriotism and pride for his country like any other young soldier today. If he was a simple foot-soldier which is quite possible, he probably was killed, perhaps shortly after the last entry. (Most) Americans have known only freedom and unknown prosperity as opposed to most Europeans which still feel the effects of a world war having taken place on their own soil and in their spirits. That is why I have hope for my own America. And why the reminders of where these transgressions against humanity can lead to are so very important. Thank you for this brilliant essay, as always.
The parallel you draw between press freedom and spiritual leadership under assault is powerful. Don Lemon's case exemplifies how journalism that challenges authority becomes criminalized when a government views accountability as an existential threat. The connection to grassroots movements protecting democracy shows these aren't isolated incidents but a coordinated effort to silence dissent.
I think there are some conflicts in rights under the Constitution that merit a more careful approach to where free expression occurs and the extent to which a speaker or information seeker engages in acts that go beyond verbal expression. In relevant portions, the First Amendment provides as follows: "Congress [or any other local or state legislature] shall make no law ... prohibiting the free exercise [of religion] ... ; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
In the cases of Pretti and Lemon, my appreciation for their well-intentioned information-gathering (and horror at the ICE and Justice Department's excessive response) are tempered by evidence that such information gathering may have crossed over into intrusive actions that are not protected by the Bill of Rights. In Pretti's case, his video recording was fully protected, but his effort to physically protect a woman pepper-sprayed by ICE agents crossed a dangerous line from First Amendment fact-finding to physical obstruction with ICE officers that could be interpreted as obstruction with arrest or other police action. The rapid descent of ICE officers into killing a disarmed, largely subdued Pretti is abhorrent, but future civic fact-seekers should do what they can to stay focused on the camera they carry. The closest biblical parallel may be Moses striking down a cruel Egyptian taskmaster: his anger was just, but he soon realized he could not expect rulers to tolerate his empathetic reaction.
Don Lemon engaged in a different version of crossing over from information gathering to interference. He could enter a church service to photograph proceedings there, but if he is requested by clergy (alas, even clergy with a position in ICE) or congregation officers to leave the premises and not solicit comments from praying congregants, he is obligated under laws against trespass to leave quietly and to move any continued filming and questionning to the nearest public property outside the church.
(The definition of how far "outside" has become an issue in New York and elsewhere in terms of the boundary-setting for pro-Palestinian protests near synagogues. I think that the inside-outside distinction for non-congregants is a useful attempt to protect both protest and worship and related discussions from excessive interference.)
In the Lemon matter, ICE and the Justice Department should have at least initially left to the local police the discretion of how to respond to a church's request for removal of a trespasser. (By contrast, the interruption of your pulpit remarks a few years ago by a congregant was perhaps a more delicate matter best handled by congregation officers than by external security, as it involves dissent by an insider rather than staging by an outsider.)
Interesting observations, Jonathan and thank you for them. I guess in a normal and less topsy-turvy world this would make for a fascinating discussion. But in a normal world we wouldn’t have a president hell bent on intimidating journalists however he is able. “Freedom of religion” is just his current vehicle for revenge and stifling dissent. How well a given case fits into his vindictive narrative is almost beside the point.
I remember the day you were interrupted very well. You handled like the mensch that you are. Who knew it would be something you’d mention years later in this insane context! Keep up the good works! We are all right behind you!
To be clear, the ones who did that are wonderful people with whom I have longstanding friendships. Their action was rude but I blame Trumpism for that climate of rudeness too. My point is to point out the absurdity of calling this a constitutional crime against freedom of religion.
Rabbi I do fully understand what you are saying about everything.
Next No Kings march is March 28.
And we must keep our eyes on election shenanigans planned by the regime.
Thanks for the date. I e been wondering, frozen stiff, when the next March will be. I’m changing my sign. Rid U.S. NOW of Homeland Security!
Good will defeat evil this year!
One small step for mankind, one giant step for DEMOCRACY. One step at a time!
In the early 1980s, after having lived in Germany as an ex-pat for over 10 years and doing research on the 3rd Reich history of the little city where I lived, I´d read - as I had many times - of the atrocities perpetrated against the Jewish community back then. The distinct thought came to my mind, that "something like this could NEVER happen in America!" I´ve often thought of this moment the past year. With Steven Miller´s designs of multitudes of concentration camps throughout the USA (wherever he meets no resistance), the secrecy of what goes on in those that exist, a "final solution" may be in the makings when the regime gets tired of the cost of feeding so many people. I wouldn´t put anything past the "prince of evil." He is an expression of Trump´s rampant antisemitism, as was Epstein and Michael Cohen (who became Trump´s victim). But we Americans are more resilient than most peoples. We are ultimately NOT going to stand for this. The American spirit is an inspiration for many countries (thank you, Rabbi Hammerman, for the videos showing us this) who have been living under different forms of suppression for generations. These younger generations know that a better world is possible, and they have the communicative means to information which that young nazi soldier with his diary didn´t have (NY Times article). He surely didn´t know much about that bumm-turned-Führer whose ideals he was fighting for, and, young as he was, was full of patriotism and pride for his country like any other young soldier today. If he was a simple foot-soldier which is quite possible, he probably was killed, perhaps shortly after the last entry. (Most) Americans have known only freedom and unknown prosperity as opposed to most Europeans which still feel the effects of a world war having taken place on their own soil and in their spirits. That is why I have hope for my own America. And why the reminders of where these transgressions against humanity can lead to are so very important. Thank you for this brilliant essay, as always.
Thank you!
The parallel you draw between press freedom and spiritual leadership under assault is powerful. Don Lemon's case exemplifies how journalism that challenges authority becomes criminalized when a government views accountability as an existential threat. The connection to grassroots movements protecting democracy shows these aren't isolated incidents but a coordinated effort to silence dissent.
Thank you for this.
You’re welcome!
I think there are some conflicts in rights under the Constitution that merit a more careful approach to where free expression occurs and the extent to which a speaker or information seeker engages in acts that go beyond verbal expression. In relevant portions, the First Amendment provides as follows: "Congress [or any other local or state legislature] shall make no law ... prohibiting the free exercise [of religion] ... ; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
In the cases of Pretti and Lemon, my appreciation for their well-intentioned information-gathering (and horror at the ICE and Justice Department's excessive response) are tempered by evidence that such information gathering may have crossed over into intrusive actions that are not protected by the Bill of Rights. In Pretti's case, his video recording was fully protected, but his effort to physically protect a woman pepper-sprayed by ICE agents crossed a dangerous line from First Amendment fact-finding to physical obstruction with ICE officers that could be interpreted as obstruction with arrest or other police action. The rapid descent of ICE officers into killing a disarmed, largely subdued Pretti is abhorrent, but future civic fact-seekers should do what they can to stay focused on the camera they carry. The closest biblical parallel may be Moses striking down a cruel Egyptian taskmaster: his anger was just, but he soon realized he could not expect rulers to tolerate his empathetic reaction.
Don Lemon engaged in a different version of crossing over from information gathering to interference. He could enter a church service to photograph proceedings there, but if he is requested by clergy (alas, even clergy with a position in ICE) or congregation officers to leave the premises and not solicit comments from praying congregants, he is obligated under laws against trespass to leave quietly and to move any continued filming and questionning to the nearest public property outside the church.
(The definition of how far "outside" has become an issue in New York and elsewhere in terms of the boundary-setting for pro-Palestinian protests near synagogues. I think that the inside-outside distinction for non-congregants is a useful attempt to protect both protest and worship and related discussions from excessive interference.)
In the Lemon matter, ICE and the Justice Department should have at least initially left to the local police the discretion of how to respond to a church's request for removal of a trespasser. (By contrast, the interruption of your pulpit remarks a few years ago by a congregant was perhaps a more delicate matter best handled by congregation officers than by external security, as it involves dissent by an insider rather than staging by an outsider.)
Interesting observations, Jonathan and thank you for them. I guess in a normal and less topsy-turvy world this would make for a fascinating discussion. But in a normal world we wouldn’t have a president hell bent on intimidating journalists however he is able. “Freedom of religion” is just his current vehicle for revenge and stifling dissent. How well a given case fits into his vindictive narrative is almost beside the point.