Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)
(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)
This is a tough one.
Protesting the actions of a synagoge should be legal and protests are most effective outside the organisation itself. At the same time harassment based on identity needs to be prevented.
IMO that law should not exist. Anti-discrimination laws are enough of a tool that you don't need this sort of legislation.
What law? Official source?
Menin initially aimed to establish protest-free buffer zones of up to 100 feet outside synagogues but revised the bill after pushback from Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch, some progressive Jewish groups and free speech advocates, under threat of legal challenges.
A watered-down version of that legislation that allows the NYPD to determine how large buffer zones need to be on a case-by-case basis passed with a veto-proof majority last month. Mamdani allowed the bill to become law without his signature.
IndStand back again looking for any way possible to frame progressive Dems as bad
Mamdani allowed the bill to become law without his signature.
You are highlighting the wrong part of the sentence
So you're upset he didn't engage in some theatrics to veto the veto proof bill rather than to be upset with the counsel that put it out there?
Yes he did not put up a fight against very clear violations of the first amendement.
It wasn't his law, and there was nothing he could do about it. He didn't add his signature, which is a reasonable protest.
Grasping at straws to find fault here mate.
"We are powerless to do anything about this". Now that sounds very familiar.
He promised New York would be a city adhering to international law. By allowing sales of stolen Palestinian land in Synagogues, New York is directly in violation of international law.
Zohran has many levers to pull. But he refuses to pull them.
If you're not seeing Memdani as an ally in this cause, I really don't know what to say to you. There are very few politicians who are more supportive of the Palestinian people than he is, but you have got to pick your battles.
You've also got to support somebody, or you're just a nihilist.
What is with the black and white glasses where you have to support every single thing someone does? Mamdani is better than most but that does not mean he can never drop the ball.
I never said he hadn't dropped the ball. You're making the same point I am. It's okay to sometimes drop the ball. You've got to pick your battles, and you're bound to choose the wrong ones occasionally too.
Should he have picked this one? You seem to think so. What would you have had him do, that you think would have been the right thing? Just passionate condemnation of the law that was passed?
Mamdani was very passionate about New York following international law and making sure it would before he got elected.
This event is direct participation of New York in the genocide of Palestinians. Which does not really sound very compliant to me.