July 8, 2025|י"ב תמוז ה' אלפים תשפ"ה The Pulpit Must Not be a Political Podium… Most of the Time
Print Article
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 (Misheli 21:1) “פַּלְגֵי־מַ֣יִם לֶב־מֶ֭לֶךְ בְּיַד־ה' עַֽל־כּל־אֲשֶׁ֖ר יַחְפֹּ֣ץ יַטֶּֽנּוּ – The heart of a king is like a stream of water in the hand of God, 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 God-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.