Faith lifted Pittsburgh Jews in long wait for massacre trial

PITTSBURGH — Three Jewish congregations, resolute in their defiance of the hatred that tried to destroy them, are still waiting for justice.

But united in their horror and grief, they haven’t been standing still as the criminal case for the massacre that changed everything has crawled through the federal court system.

Four and a half years ago, a gunman invaded the Tree of Life synagogue on a Sabbath morning and killed 11 worshippers from the three congregations that shared the building — Dor Hadash, New Light and Tree of Life. The shooting, in the Squirrel Hill neighborhood at the heart of Jewish Pittsburgh, was the deadliest antisemitic attack in U.S. history.

On Monday, jury selection is scheduled to begin in the long-delayed trial of the suspect, accused of dozens of charges including hate crimes resulting in death.

The three congregations are wary of what’s to come. Some members may be called to testify, and they’re bracing for graphic evidence and testimony that could revive the traumas of the attack on Oct. 27, 2018 — often referred to around here as simply 10/27.

The tension can be felt in private conversations and encounters — the griefs, the anxieties, the feelings of being in a media fishbowl.

But each in their own ways, members are finding renewed purpose in honoring those lost in the attack, in the bold practice of their faith, in activism on issues like gun violence and immigration, in taking a stand against antisemitism and other forms of bigotry.

“We don’t want to be silenced as Jews,” said Rich Weinberg, chair of the social action committee for Dor Hadash. “We want to be active as Jews with an understanding of Jewish values. ... We are going to still be here. We will not be intimidated.”

That was evident even in subtle details of a Passover service held earlier this month in New Light’s chapel, joined by some members of Dor Hadash.

Some offering Yizkor, or remembrance, prayers were doing so in honor of slain loved ones. One prayer was read in memory of the “Kedoshim of Pittsburgh, murdered al kiddush Hashem” — holy martyrs, killed while sanctifying God’s name. The prayer, modeled on prayers for Jewish martyrs of medieval Europe, has been woven into the ritual fabric of Jewish Pittsburgh.

One of those leading Passover prayers was Carol Black, who survived the attack that claimed the life of her brother, Richard Gottfried, and two other New Light members, Melvin Wax and Daniel Stein. They had led much of New Light’s ritual worship.

“Rich and Dan and Mel were our religious heart,” said Stephen Cohen, co-president of New Light. “And we had some very big shoes to fill.”

Members such as Black and Bruce Hyde have stepped into them. Hyde said when he once read a passage that had been read by Stein, he felt his presence: “He was up there with me.”

Cohen said the congregation had three priorities after the attack: to memorialize those lost, to continue their ritual life and to further religious education. New Light, like Tree of Life, is part of the moderate Conservative denomination of Judaism.

The congregation dedicated a monument honoring its three martyrs — shaped with images of Torah scrolls and prayer shawls — at its cemetery, where it also created a chapel adorned with stained glass windows and other mementos honoring the victims.

New Light Co-President Barbara Caplan said her dream for the congregation is “that we have many more years of Friday night services, Saturday morning services, holidays together, where we just go on being the family that we are.”

Cohen said the congregation has been overwhelmed by support from Christian, Sikh and other communities and wanted to build on those relationships. It has held Bible studies with local Black churches, and members visited the Mother Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina, drawing solace from a congregation that lost nine members to a racist gunman in 2015. “I’ve never been part of a group hug of a hundred people,” Cohen recalled.

All three of the modest-sized congregations have been meeting in nearby synagogues since the attack closed the Tree of Life building.

Rabbi Jeffrey Myers had been leading Tree of Life Congregation for just over a year when he survived 10/27. He carries the scarred memories of the gunshots that killed seven members: Joyce Fienberg, Rose Mallinger, Cecil and David Rosenthal, Bernice and Sylvan Simon and Irving Younger. Andrea Wedner, Mallinger’s daughter, was wounded in the attack.

Myers continues to speak forcefully against the bigotry behind it.

His mission is “primarily to help my congregation community heal,” Myers said. “But beyond it is to speak up, to be a voice, to say, ‘No, this isn’t okay. It’s not acceptable. It never was. And it can never be.’”

He’d like to think the trial will expose the dangers of rising bigotry, but “it takes a concerted effort to be able to … walk a mile in someone else’s shoes,” he said. But it affects more than Jews. ”Someone who is an antisemite is most likely also the possessor of a long laundry list of personal grievances and other groups that that person does not like.”

Members are each recovering in their own ways, congregation president Alan Hausman said.

Each week when he makes announcements, Hausman said he includes this one: “It’s OK not to be OK, and we will get through this together.”

On Sunday, the day before jury selection, the Tree of Life Congregation is having a closure ceremony for its historic building. The congregation and a partner organization plan a major overhaul of the site, which will combine worship space with a memorial and antisemitism education, including about the Holocaust.

“We’re not really leaving, we will be back,” said Hausman.

“Hopefully we’ll be once again a happy, grounded, 160-year-old congregation,” added member Audrey Glickman, a survivor. “Back to being a solid group of people who come together regularly and do our thing.”

Dor Hadash, founded 60 years ago, is Pittsburgh’s only congregation in the progressive Reconstructionist movement of Judaism. Many members are drawn to its interlocking focuses on worship, study and social activism.

It was that activism that appears to have drawn the shooting suspect — who fulminated online against HIAS, a Jewish refugee resettlement agency — to the address where Dor Hadash met. The congregation was listed on HIAS’ website as a participant in a National Refugee Shabbat, which wove concern for migrants into Sabbath worship.

On 10/27, members Jerry Rabinowitz and Dan Leger were gathering for a Torah study when they heard the gunshots and ran to help. Rabinowitz was killed, and Leger seriously wounded.

But the attack has only emboldened Dor Hadash members.

They were soon organizing what became a separate group, Squirrel Hill Stands Against Gun Violence, advocating for gun safety legislation. And they redoubled their support for immigrants, refugees and their helpers such as HIAS. The congregation has sponsored a refugee family originally from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. And they have taken a strong stand against rising antisemitism and white supremacy.

“I think advocacy has been a huge part of our healing,” said Dana Kellerman, communications chair for Dor Hadash. Advocacy “isn’t just about making myself feel better,” she added. “It is about trying to move the needle so that this doesn’t happen to somebody else.”

The congregation has been growing since the attack, said its president, Jo Recht. The historically lay-led congregation has hired its first staff rabbi, Amy Bardack. Her formal installation is this Sunday — a date that wasn’t specifically chosen in advance of the trial but that provides a welcome occasion of celebration.

“There are a lot of people who are seeking some way to help so that the world is a more compassionate place,” Recht said.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/v1WTZ3X
via IFTTT

Read More

Spain ships 10 Leopard tanks to Ukraine

The tanks will first make their way to Poland by sea.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/oMYV01w
via IFTTT

Read More

Bragg drops bid to block former Trump investigator from testifying to Congress

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg dropped his lawsuit against the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee after the two sides reached a “settlement agreement” that will clear the way for the panel to interview a former prosecutor who investigated former President Donald Trump.

Aides to Bragg and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) announced the agreement late Friday after the lawsuit had escalated to an appeals court following a federal judge’s decision to decline to block a subpoena to the former prosecutor, Mark Pomerantz.

Pomerantz, who worked for the Manhattan district attorney’s office before quitting and writing a book about his experience investigating Trump, is set to testify before the Judiciary committee on May 12, according to Jordan spokesperson Russell Dye.

The filing to dismiss the case does not describe the terms of the arrangement, simply calling it a settlement agreement. “[A]ll parties have agreed that the … appeals should be dismissed,” it says.

While Dye characterized the development as the district attorney’s office having withdrawn its appeal of the district court’s decision, a spokesperson for Bragg described it as a “successful” effort to wrest a concession from the committee: the presence of Bragg’s general counsel during the Pomerantz interview. Bragg’s office called it an “agreement that protects the District Attorney’s privileges and interests.”

House deposition rules typically prohibit government counsel from participating, but committees routinely sidestep those rules to reach agreements with otherwise reluctant current and former government officials. In recent years, lawmakers have permitted lawyers for various federal agencies to appear in order to assert any privileges. 

The House Judiciary Committee issued the subpoena to Pomerantz in the wake of Bragg filing criminal charges against Trump late last month. Bragg then sued Jordan and the Judiciary panel, seeking a court order preventing the House from enforcing the subpoena.

The Judiciary committee claimed it wants to study the potential effects that the threat of a future prosecution could have on a president while he is in office. Bragg’s office argued, however, that the House had no legitimate legislative purpose in issuing the subpoena and instead intends to examine the district attorney’s internal deliberations regarding the Trump indictment.

A federal judge rejected Bragg’s position. “The subpoena was issued with a ‘valid legislative purpose’ in connection with the ‘broad’ and ‘indispensable’ congressional power to ‘conduct investigations,’” U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil wrote.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/SX8mc1q
via IFTTT

Read More

Opinion | The Supreme Court Stopped Short of a Radical Act

The Supreme Court pulled back from the edge. In suspending the district court’s nationwide bar on the abortion pill mifepristone, the high court’s conservative majority (with two exceptions) declined to embrace the radicalism of its ideological allies. The move not only ensures access to a drug long deemed safe by the FDA but may help bolster the court’s increasingly tenuous public credibility.

The Supreme Court has recently experienced a sharp decline in popular support. That should not be surprising amid evidence suggesting that people view courts as being impartial if judicial decisions match their policy preferences. The series of high-profile rulings advancing policy interests aligned with the Republican Party’s right flank — on reproductive choice, on guns, on climate change — are shaping public opinion. They are likely driving Democratic voters to see the federal courts as instruments for the delivery of far-right policy preferences.

The decision to maintain the status quo on mifepristone by the same court that struck down Roe v Wade may be a quiet nod to the waning legitimacy of the court, and a concern about further backlash.

But what if the politics of judicial reform are already shifting under the justices’ feet?

The high-profile state Supreme Court race in Wisconsin — and the potential fallout — suggests that may be the case. During the midterms, that quintessential purple state delivered slim victories to a Democratic governor and a Republican senator. Less than five months later, though, a left-leaning candidate, Judge Janet Protasiewicz, ran up a double-digit advantage over her right-of-center opponent.

The Protasiewicz win fits awkwardly with a well-hallowed chestnut of political wisdom — that the politics of judicial power aren’t symmetrical across the party line. Simply put, Republican voters tend to have stronger feelings than Democrats about judicial appointments, and cast their votes in primaries to punish or reward candidates on that basis. In contrast, there’s some evidence that Democratic voters punish candidates who center campaigns on the courts. Republicans, indeed, have kept their eyes on the prize by prioritizing ideological consistency. Democrats such as President Joe Biden have instead aimed for representativeness across gender, ethnicity and professional grounds. The result is a less ideologically consistent and less coherent bench of Biden and Obama appointees.

In addition to his own centrist, institutionally minded temperament, it is likely this uneven pattern of voter attention to the courts that shaped the way in which the Biden White House has so far approached the politics of court reform. Rather than embracing calls on the left to expand the Supreme Court, the newly inaugurated president created a sprawling, bipartisan commission to study the question of reform. The body was largely staffed with legal academics of diverse views and partisan orientations. It was entirely predictable that such a group would not reach a consensus on reform. The commission was plainly designed to delay, and hence deflate, the push for structural change to the federal courts. And so it did — producing an extensive and academic report that elicited precisely nothing of political or practical significance.

But Wisconsin’s judicial election earlier this month suggests that the White House’s assessment of how judicial politics plays among Democratic voters no longer holds water. That election may signal a broader shift in the tectonics of voter mobilization in respect to courts and judges more generally.

The most obvious reason for thinking something has changed is that it was Democrats, and not Republicans, who were galvanized by the judicial election. These voters, moreover, were moved by the issue of judicial power but were not motivated as much by the goal of electing Democrats. In a state Senate race held that same day, the Republican candidate eked out a win. That too was a highly consequential election, giving Republicans a Senate supermajority and the votes to oust officials through impeachment.

Nor can it be said that the issue of abortion made all the difference: The question of reproductive choice plainly loomed large in November 2022. And yet GOP Sen. Ron Johnson, always a reliable voice for the anti-abortion position, retained his seat. Plainly, abortion politics explains in part why Protasiewicz won — but it can’t be the whole story.

In the wake of her election, we may also see more realignment in the politics of court reform. Until now, it has been Democrats on the left of their party who had pressed hardest for changing the courts through structural reform or other measures.

But in Wisconsin, Republicans were talking of impeaching Protasiewicz… before she had even won the election, let alone taken office. This is all the more remarkable because — unless she’s committed a crime — Protasiewicz can be impeached only for “conduct in office,” according to the state constitution, i.e. for things she presumably may do in the future.

Some state GOP lawmakers have since backed away from such talk, and in any event, the Democratic governor would be empowered to appoint a replacement. But the legislature could respond to rulings they dislike with the kinds of other tools that progressives have been advocating at the national level: measures such as jurisdiction-stripping and changes to the size of the court.

If the political script on judicial power gets flipped in Wisconsin — if GOP legislators act to rein in a liberal-leaning court — what could this bode for a broader change nationally? Or what happens if conservative federal judges or Supreme Court justices advance a far-right agenda reviled by progressives and even many centrists?

Surely, the next time Democrats have full control of Washington, the push to overhaul the judiciary will be a top priority, if they have the votes.

Even apart from its precedent-shattering opinions, some justices are doing little to build trust in the court. ProPublica’s revelations that Justice Clarence Thomas both received expensive gifts and engaged in six-figure real-estate transactions with a conservative billionaire will add fuel to the fire of public suspicion. Democratic calls for Thomas’ impeachment are, of course, unlikely to lead to any legislative action. But in striking contrast to the impeachment calls targeting Protasiewicz, they draw public attention to judicial behavior that plainly raises serious ethical questions, even if it doesn’t in the end cross a line into rank illegality.

All this means that the political dynamics of court reform are on the verge of a momentous shift: Democratic voters are likely to be more energized, and more likely to stomach what might have once seemed explosive measures. And for once, they may even be willing to reward candidates for public office who promise to follow through.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/RjUfD5e
via IFTTT

Read More

FAA to lose top leader, just as air travel heats up

The acting head of the Federal Aviation Administration said Friday that he plans to leave his post as soon as this summer, creating an even bigger leadership void at the top of an agency that has already been without a Senate-confirmed leader for over a year.

It’s an especially fraught moment for the aviation system to be without a Senate-confirmed top leader amid an uptick in near-misses and just as air travel is projected to come roaring back to pre-pandemic levels.

Acting Administrator Billy Nolen announced his departure on Friday evening in an internal memo reviewed by POLITICO. Nolen, in the memo, said he told Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and the White House that he will depart when a new FAA administrator is nominated “this summer," Nolen wrote.

"I have given everything to this agency, and now it’s time to do the same for my family, who have sacrificed so much and supported me during my time at the FAA,” he continued.

The FAA has been without a Senate-confirmed administrator since April 2022. Nolen, a longtime aviation safety executive and former airline pilot, joined the FAA in January 2022 as Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety before being elevated to the top job.

Nolen's departure will open up an even bigger leadership void at FAA, which already has a number of senior officials working in acting capacities. There is not a dedicated succession plan in place at FAA. Nolen, for example, was chosen by the White House as acting administrator even though he was at the agency for less time than current Deputy FAA Administrator Bradley Mims.

A senior administration official who was granted anonymity to speak candidly said Nolen is expected to leave the FAA sometime this summer no matter what the confirmation process looks like for his eventual replacement, though a departure date hasn't been finalized yet.

"Billy is a tremendous leader, a true expert and a dedicated public servant," Buttigieg said in a statement. "I can speak for everyone at DOT in saying that his skill and expertise are a great asset to the department, and will continue to be as FAA prepares for its upcoming leadership transition."

The White House has struggled to find a permanent leader for the FAA that can be confirmed.

Denver Airport CEO Phil Washington’s nomination languished for months amid concerns about his resume and he eventually withdrew from consideration after a barrage of Republican criticism and having failed to convince every Democratic senator. The White House has not named a new nominee.

The administration official said that Buttigieg asked Nolen to stay on longer after Washington withdrew, but Nolen told the secretary and White House that he wasn't interested in the permanent role. The official, who added that the White House was slow to engage with Nolen after Washington withdrew, said a new nominee for the permanent FAA role is not imminent.

Many in the aviation industry have seen Nolen as a logical candidate for the permanent FAA role. He recently made the decision to call a safety summit in the wake of a string of near misses involving commercial aircraft on runways and at airports across the country. And Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) publicly supported Nolen's ascension to the permanent FAA role as an alternative to Washington, who he opposed.

House Transportation Committee Ranking Member Rick Larsen (D-Wash.) said in a statement that the FAA administrator position "is an important one for the aviation safety of the flying public, and we need a Senate confirmed leader in place as soon as possible.”

Nolen's departure was first reported by the Wall Street Journal.  

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/IAzrbMh
via IFTTT

Read More

Jim Justice plans Senate launch for next week

Gov. Jim Justice is planning to launch a long-awaited campaign against Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) next week, handing Republicans a well-funded and popular recruit in their best opportunity to flip a Senate seat.

He will make his announcement on Thursday evening at The Greenbrier, his luxury resort in White Sulphur Springs, W.Va., according to an invitation to the event obtained by POLITICO. A GOP strategist close to Justice confirmed the details. Thursday is also the governor’s 72nd birthday.

Justice, a coal mining magnate who is friendly with former President Trump, has hinted at a Senate run for months. POLITICO reported earlier this week that Justice could launch a bid before the end of the month. He was heavily recruited by the National Republican Senatorial Committee and has been in contact with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

Still, Justice is known to change plans suddenly. While the event is set for Thursday, he could still punt a decision to later.

In the primary, he will first have to face GOP Rep. Alex Mooney, for whom the anti-tax Club for Growth has already pledged to spend at least $10 million. But Justice, who is worth hundreds of millions, could invest some of his own funds into the race.

Mooney is a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus and would likely try to run to the right of Justice, who was elected as a Democrat before switching parties. Justice allies have signaled that they will use Mooney’s Maryland roots against him. He was a state senator there before moving across state lines ahead of his 2014 run for Congress.

Both Mooney and Justice are seeking Trump’s support.

Manchin, meanwhile, has not said whether he will run for reelection and does not expect to make a decision until the end of the year. He faces a tough road in a state that Trump carried by 39 points, and he has also left the door open on a run for president.

Burgess Everett contributed to this report.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/Toear3n
via IFTTT

Read More

DOJ probing Southwest Airlines holiday flight meltdown

The Justice Department has joined an ongoing Transportation Department probe into Southwest Airlines' December meltdown where some 16,000 flights were canceled, with regulators examining whether Southwest set schedules it knew it couldn't properly staff.

"The DOT team probing whether Southwest engaged in unrealistic scheduling of flights is also closely coordinating with DOJ and FAA," DOT spokesperson Kerry Arndt said in a statement to POLITICO. "DOT will leverage the full extent of its investigative and enforcement power to ensure consumers are protected and to hold Southwest accountable for any violations of the law."

Arndt said DOT's focus remains on Southwest's scheduling practices. The airline's cascading flight cancellations stranded passengers for days following severe winter weather that affected major airports from Dec. 21 to 26. Other airlines were able to recover relatively quickly from the storm's impacts, but Southwest was hampered by an outdated internal scheduling system and its own route network.

"As part of this investigation, DOT has conducted on-site audits of Southwest’s refunds and reimbursements records, met with numerous Southwest officials to assess the causes of Southwest’s system-wide winter holiday breakdown, and is examining tens of thousands of pages of documents," Arndt said.

Southwest Airlines and the Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Background: DOT Secretary Pete Buttigieg announced his agency's investigation into Southwest in January, focused on whether Southwest engaged in unrealistic scheduling that would be considered an unfair and deceptive practice under federal law. DOT also worked with Southwest to determine how many affected passengers were eligible for refunds under federal law.

Southwest CEO Bob Jordan previously said that “basically anybody” who dealt with flight issues between Dec. 24 and Jan. 2 was “refunded or [we] gave you a travel credit.” Jordan said that many Southwest passengers were given free tickets and rewards points, along with reimbursing customers who had to buy another airline ticket, stay in a hotel, buy a meal or hire a taxi.

In response to the December meltdown, Southwest investigated itself with the help of an outside consulting firm and promised to upgrade its winter infrastructure and implement software updates.

But Senate Commerce Chair Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), whose panel oversees the airline industry, has continued to push Southwest for more details about how many passengers were involved, how many were issued cash refunds versus vouchers for future flights, how many were rebooked and when the airline plans to upgrade its internal systems that caused the debacle. Cantwell said Southwest has provided some information but not enough. Recently she has complained that Southwest was withholding details her office had requested.

And Southwest on Tuesday asked the Federal Aviation Administration to "pause" all flights for about 40 minutes due to what the airline said was "data connection issues resulting from a firewall failure." More than 2,000 flights were delayed across the country, though cancellations were minimal.

Both Buttigieg and Cantwell said they are keeping close tabs on Southwest following the latest inconvenience for travelers.

"This is another demonstration that Southwest Airlines needs to upgrade their systems," Cantwell said in a statement. Buttigieg added that DOT is "watching to ensure that Southwest Airlines takes care of all passengers who were affected by their technical problems."

What's next: Southwest reports its latest quarterly earnings next week.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/YyI8ARi
via IFTTT

Read More