08 Jul THE PULPIT MUST NOT BE A POLITICAL PODIUM…. MOST OF THE TIME

The IRS announced it

will break with a long-
standing rule and now

allow houses of
worship to endorse
candidates for political
office without losing
their tax-exempt status.
Since 1954, a provision in the tax code called
the Johnson Amendment mandates that

nonprofit organizations could lose their tax-
exempt status if they participate in or intervene

in “any political campaign on behalf of or in
opposition to any candidate for public office.”
The rule was violated regularly in some
houses of worship, but the IRS rarely enforced
it. In explaining the change, the agency
advised that when a house of worship, “in
good faith speaks to its congregation, through
its customary channels of communication on
matters of faith in connection with religious
services, concerning electoral politics viewed
through the lens of religious faith,” it neither
participates nor intervenes in a political
campaign.
This means rabbis can now legally endorse
candidate from the pulpit.
But should they?
I don’t believe so. In many or even most
elections, reasonable people can come to a

reasonable conclusion in either direction.
Sure, it is fair, maybe even constructive at
times, to try to persuade others to see things as
you do, but if you can’t, the best practice is to
acknowledge that not only is the other person
entitled to his or her perspective, but their
opinion is reasonable, legitimate, and fair. The
fact that they arrived at a different conclusion,
even one you are convinced is wrong, doesn’t
mean they have corrupt character, less
patriotism, compromised commitment to
Israel, or less devotion to Torah.
Rabbis and shuls should be spaces where
people with diverse opinions can congregate,
connect, learn together, daven together and
work together on the issues that unite us. If
rabbis begin to offer public endorsements,
especially from the pulpit, will those who
disagree with his conclusion still feel
comfortable being part of that shul? What will
the impact be on public discourse and debate
within the community if the rabbi publicly
weighs in endorsing one side, particularly
invoking his Torah authority in doing so?
Will those who disagree with the rabbi’s
endorsement and choice continue to turn to
him for direction, guidance, and support?
Will they ask him their halachic questions,
want him to officiate at their simchas and
lifecycle events, trust him to advise on
sensitive matters?

If the answers to these questions is no, even if
it is a small percentage of the shul/community
who will feel alienated, is the endorsement
worth it? Rabbonim are shepherds, charged
with loving and caring for their flock. If some
will be driven from the herd or who walk
away feeling unwanted, the shepherd has
failed in his mission.
Ultimately, as Shlomo HaMelech taught
ַּפְּלְֵגֵי־ַ֣מ�ִ֣יִם ֶלֶב-־ֶ֭מֶ֭לְֶך ְּבַּיַד־ה‘ ַֽע�ֽל-־” (21:1 Misheli(
like is king a of heart The – ּכל־ֲאֲֶׁ֖ש֖ר ַיְַחְֹּ֣פ�֣ץ- ַיֶַּֽטּֽנּו
a stream of water in the hand of G-d, wherever
He wishes, He will direct it.” We say every
single day in our prayers, “Al tivtechu
b’nedivim, don’t place your faith and trust in
princes and diplomats.”
As G-d-fearing Jews, we recognize that it is
the Master of the Universe who orchestrates
domestic, foreign, and of course all policies
and their consequences. To be a student of
Torah and of Jewish history is to recognize the
Almighty’s guiding hand. His hand guided our
history and ultimately, it is His hand that is
guiding our destiny.
I said above that in most elections reasonable
people can come to a reasonable conclusion in
either direction, but like almost every rule,
there are exceptions and we are living through
one.
One group of clergy didn’t wait for the IRS to
change its rule before making a public
endorsement. In an article titled, “We are
NYC rabbis who support Zohran Mamdani
– Here’s why,” they write:
My co-authors (listed below) and I are
among many New York City rabbis who
voted for and proudly support Zohran
Mamdani in the race for New York City
mayor. Our religious tradition calls us to
pursue justice and invokes our responsibility
to bring it into the world. For many of us,

the campaigns of Mamdani and mensch co-
endorser Brad Lander marked the first time

in a long while that we witnessed the Jewish
call for justice clearly reflected in the
platforms and character of mayoral
candidates. We are confident that Zohran
will carry those values forward – we hope,
all the way to Gracie Mansion.
Supporting Zohran and Brad was, for us, an
explicitly Jewish act, and we’re kvelling
over our contribution as Jewish New Yorkers
to Mamdani’s historic victory…
We believe that rent is too high, buses are
too slow, and New York should be a
welcoming, safe home for everyone – no
matter where we came from or how long
we’ve been here. Like Mamdani, we
believe…that the Israeli government’s
treatment of Palestinians in Gaza and the
West Bank is horrific and cannot be ignored.
These convictions reflect a shared political
ethic – not identical political beliefs – and
they are strong enough to support both real
coalition and real community.
The blatant smear tactics we see used
against Mamdani are frequently deployed

against Muslim elected officials and leaders of
color who dare to criticize Israel. These
accusations are not about protecting Jews.
They are about shutting down necessary
reckoning with our city and country’s
complicity in Israel’s occupation…
We believe that Jewish safety will not be
secured by demanding unconditional support
for Israel or imposing litmus tests on public
officials around language. It will be secured
through effective policy, education, solidarity,
and shared struggle. That is what Mamdani
offers…
Absurd, dangerous, and deeply disturbing
articles like this one make this New York
mayoral election an exception in which
reasonable people should not be able come to
certain conclusions and rabbis should be
vocally opposing this article and this
candidate. But let’s be clear about the
parameters. Mamdani’s socialist views, calls
to defund the police and dishonesty on his
college application don’t, in my opinion,
justify rabbis issuing an endorsement for his
opponents. We should, however, call out and
voice opposition to a candidate who is openly
against Israel in the clearest possible terms
and who proudly stands with antisemites.
I recognize that people will disagree about
where to draw the line and when to make the
exception, but I hope that reasonable people
can agree that stopping the election of a
candidate who is undeniably and objectively
anti-Israel and by extension antisemitic is not
a violation of a rabbi’s responsibilities but the
fulfillment of it.
Mamdani has refused multiple times to
recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish
state, and he has supported the BDS movement
against Israel. While he hasn’t himself used
the phrase, “Globalize the Intifada,” he has
refused to condemn those who do and defends
their right to use the expression. As the
intifada is actually being globalized with Jews
suffering attacks around the world in growing
numbers, in no place more than New York
City, defending the expression is egregious
and incites violence against Jews. The founder
of the Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) at
his alma mater, Mamdani has accused Israel
of “genocide” and “apartheid,” and has vowed
that as mayor he would arrest Benjamin
Netanyahu.
Despite the IRS’s rule change, don’t expect to
see political endorsements from the BRS
pulpit. But stopping Mamdani isn’t a question
of politics, it is about self-preservation and the
safety and security of the Jewish community.