With seven weeks remaining until the Democratic primary for an open House seat in Manhattan, the crowded race is beginning to show emerging signs of division over Israel and rising antisemitism, key issues in the heavily Jewish district where many voters closely identify with liberal Zionist sentiments.

The last week — which included two candidate forums focused on Jewish community issues and was punctuated by an anti-Israel protest near a synagogue in the district hosting an Israeli real estate event — highlighted some of the subtle ideological fault lines inflecting the June 23 race to succeed retiring Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY).

From recent efforts to block U.S. weapons sales to Israel to the intersection between anti-Zionism and antisemitism, the four top candidates in the closely contested race — state Assemblymembers Alex Bores and Micah Lasher, Kennedy scion Jack Schlossberg and former Republican attorney George Conway — are by varying degrees staking out differing views on Middle East policy as well as domestic concerns affecting the Jewish community, while continuing to reaffirm their support for the Jewish state.

Meanwhile, some recent endorsements that Bores received from left-wing advocacy groups hostile toward Israel have fueled skepticism of that support among Jewish leaders, along with speculation he is seeking to carve out a progressive lane for himself that has been largely unoccupied for most of the campaign.

The starkest disagreements were on display last Wednesday during a candidate forum at the Stephen Wise Free Synagogue on the Upper West Side, where Schlossberg, a social media influencer with a narrow lead in most private polls, notably said he would have joined most Senate Democrats who voted last month to restrict arms sales to Israel — even as he continues to back defensive aid to help boost Israel’s Iron Dome system.

For their parts, Conway and Lasher both confirmed they would have opposed the legislation introduced by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT). “I don’t support the withholding of aid from Israel,” Conway explained, drawing applause from the audience, while Lasher said he did not believe the bill “would have actually improved the lives of people on the ground,” echoing comments he had made in a candidate questionnaire opposing House legislation to block weapons sales to Israel. 

Bores, who had previously committed to the event, pulled out the day before, citing a scheduling conflict in Washington.

The forum, which took place a day after anti-Israel demonstrators had chanted antisemitic slogans near Park East Synagogue to oppose an Israeli real estate event featuring some advertising for settlements in the West Bank, drew other distinct contrasts among the candidates.

Schlossberg, for instance, condemned what he called the “antisemitic rhetoric” used by demonstrators who had shouted slogans such as, “We don’t want no Zionists here,” “Death to the IDF” and “We don’t want no two-state, we want ‘48.” 

Still, he added, “I don’t think that a land sale for real estate that is in violation of international law should be happening in a house of worship.”

In comparison, Lasher, a Jewish protégé of Nadler’s, questioned the protesters’ aims. The demonstration was more broadly about “framing Israel, and the idea of making aliyah to Israel, as illegitimate,” he argued. Earlier, he said the protest was “intended to create fear in the hearts of Jewish New Yorkers and stigmatize our community.”

“I think it’s important to speak with clarity,” added Lasher, who has touted his state legislation to ban protests directly outside houses of worship, which has been opposed by anti-Israel activists in the city. “When people are outside a synagogue shouting, ‘We don’t want two states, we want ‘48’ — that’s not about the question of West Bank settlements. That is about the legitimacy of Israel.”

Bores, whose state Assembly district includes Park East Synagogue, said in a joint statement with City Councilmember Virginia Maloney before the protest on Tuesday that the demonstration evoked “painful memories of times when people have been harassed while entering houses of worship.” He did not appear to have commented on the protest after it occurred.

While Bores has recently accepted support from some groups opposed to U.S. funding for Israel, he has indicated that he does not share such positions. He has rejected legislative efforts to condition aid — stating in one candidate questionnaire, for example, that “determining foreign policy through legislation that targets individual countries has overall not been beneficial for achieving universal rights.”

He reiterated that view last Monday during a separate forum at The Jewish Center, a Modern Orthodox synagogue on the Upper West Side, where he appeared with Lasher. “I support the consistent application of Leahy Laws across all countries,” he said, referring to U.S. laws banning security funding to foreign military units that engage in human rights violations. 

Lasher also agreed with that position. “It should be a universal standard,” he said.

“We should be able to stand up to people in our party,” Bores added at the forum last week, “and say how important our relationship is with the State of Israel and how important it is to ensure the rights of everyone in the region, including the Palestinians.”

Still, his recent endorsement from Our Revolution, a Sanders-aligned group that has advocated for cutting military funding to Israel, has fueled questions about the sincerity of his positions. His decision to pull out of the Stephen Wise candidate forum on short notice last week also raised eyebrows, particularly as he had done so after winning support from a City University of New York union that has called for divesting from Israel. 

Bores has otherwise claimed backing from New York Progressive Action Network, which likewise supports efforts to withhold U.S. military aid to Israel.

“There’s a lot of skepticism now,” said one Jewish community leader who is closely following the race, speaking on the condition of anonymity to address a sensitive issue. “You don’t get the endorsements of Our Revolution and PSC CUNY,” which represents faculty and staff in the university system, “without saying something differently privately than you do publicly.”

“There’s concern now that there wasn’t a few weeks ago,” the Jewish leader said, noting Bores had been calling community members to do “damage control” after receiving the Our Revolution endorsement. He has explained that the nod extends from their shared goal of regulating the AI industry, which is targeting the former Palantir employee aggressively in the race, according to the Jewish leader.

A spokesperson for Bores’ campaign did not respond to a request for comment about the endorsement last week.

While some Jewish voters in the district feel that Lasher’s views on Israel are to the left of their own, his outspoken opposition to rising antisemitism and commitment to Israel’s security are now appealing to a segment of the community that is questioning the apparent dissonance between Bores’ publicly stated positions and his endorsements from organizations with which he is not aligned on Middle East policy. 

A graphic circulating in local Jewish WhatsApp groups on Friday, which was shared with Jewish Insider, warned that “a Bernie Sanders PAC just endorsed Alex Bores” and that “Jack Schlossberg wants to cut arms sales to Israel,” highlighting the names in red.

“Micah Lasher is the clear choice. The community and rabbis are rallying behind him,” the message continued. “It’s time to unite to win this seat.” 

Garth Symonds, who chairs The Jewish Center’s committee to get out the vote, said in a statement to JI on Friday that Bores “has proven his toughness in the face of well-funded attacks by those resistant to AI regulation” and that he “appears to have a strong legislative record, but so does Lasher.”

“On Israel, Lasher has a supportive track record, whereas Bores appears close to some people in the Working Families Party, which is anti-Israel, and has been endorsed by One Revolution,” he said, claiming Lasher, a veteran Democratic operative, “has deeper political experience.”

The Working Families Party, which supports conditioning aid to Israel, chose not to issue an endorsement after soliciting questionnaires from Bores, Lasher and Schlossberg. But the group has recently indicated it could rethink that decision as Schlossberg has gained traction, saying “we can do better than that.” It is most likely to support Bores if it does weigh on the primary, City & State New York has reported.  

The House Oversight Committee asked the Trump administration on Monday to investigate if far-left billionaire Neville Roy Singham’s bankrolling of “extremist organizations fueling division and civil unrest across the United States” would qualify him for federal sanctions or make him eligible for criminal or legal penalties.

Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) and Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL), who chairs the Declassification of Federal Secrets Task Force, sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, requesting the Treasury look into “certain far-left entities, organized and funded by” Singham, as well as his failure “to register as a foreign agent under FARA.”

The lawmakers describe Singham as “a U.S. citizen with ties to the CCP” who has reportedly “been funding and supporting various extremist entities in the United States with the aim of causing destruction and division in our country.”

Singham is a financier who has been accused of funding groups to advance Chinese talking points as well as a network of anti-Israel protest groups responsible for unrest on college campuses, according to the Network Contagion Research Institute. 

“Neville Singham has spent millions funding militant organizations that have orchestrated violent riots and launched targeted hate campaigns against Americans with different beliefs,” Luna wrote on X.

The lawmakers noted in the letter that they are investigating efforts by the Chinese Communist Party “to sow discord in the United States,” writing: “It is imperative that we expeditiously halt the continued flow of funds and material support for malign activities conducted at the behest of the CCP.”

The letter cites reporting from the New York Times, the Free Press and a letter sent to former Attorney General Merrick Garland last year by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, while still serving as senator from Florida, and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) “raising concerns about Mr. Singham’s activities on behalf of the CCP.”

“It does not appear that the Biden Administration addressed this potential source of civil unrest,” the lawmakers wrote, citing reporting from data scientist Jennica Pounds alleging that Singham’s activities had recently “expanded to include the foment of unrest and civil disobedience in Los Angeles — prompting President Donald Trump to call in the National Guard to counter attacks on federal law enforcement officials.”

They added that, “It has been reported that Mr. Singham is ‘the main backer behind’ the Party for Socialism and Liberation, which has organized nationwide protests, including riots in Los Angeles.”

Singham, who resides in China, “created an elaborate dark money network which allows him to send funds to a series of non-profits,” the letter stated, later adding: “Mr. Singham has expanded his network to include not only far-left, pro-CCP entities, but also radical, antisemitic entities. One such organization is Shut It Down for Palestine (SID4P), an entity established in October 2023.”

Amid an alarming rise in political violence, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro said Tuesday that the way to combat extremism and division is by bringing people together and restoring their faith in the government — a civic-minded strategy that included some thinly veiled swipes at President Donald Trump and the hardline rhetoric he has adopted since conservative activist Charlie Kirk was killed in Utah last week.

Shapiro and his family survived an April arson attack that damaged the governor’s residence in Harrisburg while they slept, hours after hosting a Passover Seder there. The alleged arsonist acted to protest Shapiro’s stance toward the Palestinians, according to a police search warrant. 

“I believe we have a responsibility to be clear and unequivocal in calling out all forms of political violence, making clear it is all wrong,” Shapiro said in a keynote address at the Eradicate Hate Global Summit, a Pittsburgh conference created in the aftermath of the 2018 mass shooting at the Tree of Life synagogue. “Unfortunately some, from the dark corners of the internet all the way to the Oval Office, want to cherry pick which instances of political violence they want to condemn.”

Shapiro called for dialogue and a rejection of the demands for revenge that have permeated social media since Kirk’s murder last week. The speech did not name Trump, although Shapiro called for Trump to act with “moral clarity” in a post on X on Monday. 

Widely rumored to be considering a 2028 presidential run, the speech offered Shapiro a chance to deliver a wide-ranging speech to a national audience.

“We need to create more opportunities for peaceful and respectful dialogue, respecting each other’s fundamental rights as Americans,” said Shapiro. “Prosecuting constitutionally protected speech will only further erode our freedoms, deepen the mistrust. That is un-American.” Attorney General Pam Bondi said on Monday that the U.S. would be “targeting” hate speech, which she said was different from free speech — a statement she attempted to walk back a day later after facing bipartisan pushback.

There is a better way, Shapiro added: “That better way is the Pennsylvania way.” 

“Those who stoke division will want to have us believe words are important, but we also need action,” said Shapiro. “We need to make sure people are safe here in Pennsylvania and all across America, safe to exercise their fundamental rights and freedoms, whether they’re debating on a college campus, praying at a synagogue or church or spending time at home with loved ones.” 

Americans should do more to address hate online, and to teach people to better distinguish “fact from fiction” on the internet, argued Shapiro. But more than that, he said, they need to see and trust that the government actually can make their lives better.

“There’s a deeper issue at the root of this dangerous rise of political violence. Too many people don’t believe that our institutions and the people in them can solve problems anymore. They feel alone, ignored, shut out by a government that isn’t working for them,” said Shapiro. “It leads to a belief among some that the only way they can address their problems is through violence.” 

The ways to prove otherwise, Shapiro said, are simple — helping people get driver’s licenses quickly, giving kids free breakfast at school and “building a government that works for Pennsylvanians and gets stuff done.” 

Shapiro leaned on Jewish teachings in his speech, referring as he often does to how his faith underpins his public service. 

During a speech at the Eradicate Hate Global Summit in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Gov. @JoshShapiroPA shared the story of an 82-year-old Christian chaplain of a local fire department, who gave Shapiro and his family a letter signed by each member of their department after an April… pic.twitter.com/jqTD9U7S3U

— Jewish Insider (@J_Insider) September 16, 2025

“My faith has taught me that no one is required to complete the task, but neither are we free to refrain from it. It means that each of us has a responsibility to get off the sidelines, get in the game and do our part,” Shapiro said.  

After the attack on the governor’s mansion, Pennsylvanians “were united in speaking and acting with moral clarity, making clear that hatred and violence has no place here in Pennsylvania,” said Shapiro. 

He shared the story of the 82-year-old Christian chaplain of a local fire department, who gave Shapiro and his family a letter signed by each member of their department. On the back, the chaplain had written by hand what he said was the most important blessing in his life, from the Book of Numbers.

May the Lord bless you and keep you. May the Lord make His face shine upon you and be gracious to you. May the Lord turn His face toward you and give you peace.

“I wept when I read that prayer that he wrote,” said Shapiro, who recalls then telling the chaplain that he recites that prayer — known as the Priestly Blessing in Judaism — to his children each night. He then proceeded to do so in Hebrew, and offered his own benediction about the power the prayer holds for a nation reeling from violence. 

Yivarechecha Adonai v’yishmerecha. Ya’er Adonai panav eilecha v’chuneka. Yisa Adonai panav eilecha v’yasem l’cha shalom. 

“Those are words of healing, words of hopefulness to me,” said Shapiro. “They are also words that again remind us of our shared humanity.” 

Senate Republicans are, at least publicly, showing some signs of division on the possibility of a U.S. strike to eliminate the deeply entrenched Iranian nuclear facility at Fordow, as the Trump administration appears to be increasingly discussing the prospect.

President Donald Trump held a Situation Room meeting with his national security team on Tuesday after publicly suggesting that the U.S. might join Israel’s operations in Iran. Israel is believed to need U.S. assistance to destroy Fordow, and officials have said their operations will not end without hitting the site.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), asked by reporters about striking the nuclear site, reiterated what he told Jewish Insider a day prior. “How can you be successful without taking out Fordow?”

A senior Republican senator who requested anonymity to discuss internal conference dynamics, estimated that a vast majority of the conference, around 90% of Senate Republicans, are at least privately united on the issue of the U.S. supporting Israel in bombing the Fordow facility if Israel needs such support. 

Other Senate Republicans with whom JI spoke on Tuesday did not fully echo that view.

Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) said he’d want the U.S. to get involved directly in Israel’s campaign if the U.S. believes there is an imminent threat to the U.S., or if Israel is not able to fully destroy Iran’s nuclear program on its own.

“If we have intelligence saying that they were a true threat and that they’re going to go after us, then I want to be proactive not reactive,” Mullin said. “And if for some reason Israel can’t finish the job, President Trump has made this point very clear, in no way are we going to allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. So if for some reason the job can’t be finished, then that’s the time for us to have to go finish it.”

Experts largely believe that Fordow will be able to continue operating and Iran’s nuclear program will survive if the U.S. does not join Israel’s strikes on Iran.

Asked about striking Fordow, Sen. Ted Budd (R-NC) said, “I think we need to make sure we force Iran to the table and that we’re strong,” adding that diplomacy should be “the primary effort and we do it through being strong.”

Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) said that Fordow needs to be eliminated but warned that a strike on the site would leave the nuclear materials there buried.

“I’m a little confused on all the conversation about dropping a bunker buster on a mountain that’s filled with enriched uranium, and how that solves the problem,” Lankford said. “If you’re going to try to get enriched uranium out of the country, dropping a big bunker buster on it may disable the centrifuges in [Fordow], but you still have 900 pounds of enriched uranium sitting there.”

He also said that the U.S. may not be able strike Iran before Iran attacks U.S. personnel, unless Trump can present to Congress and the American people evidence of a direct threat toward the United States, as was the case in the 2020 strike that killed Quds Force head Gen. Qassem Soleimani.

Meanwhile, multiple Senate Democrats who spoke to JI on Tuesday said they haven’t yet made up their minds about two separate pieces of legislation, led by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-VA) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT), which aim to block U.S. involvement in Iran without direct congressional approval. None said affirmatively that they plan to join either effort.

Sanders’ bill was introduced with seven Democratic co-sponsors. Kaine’s resolution is likely to come up for a vote under special procedures in the coming weeks.

Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), who led legislation in the House in 2020 to block U.S. attacks against Iran in the wake of the killing of Soleimani, said she hasn’t yet decided whether she’ll support the new legislation.

“We’re just looking at it pretty closely now,” Slotkin said, noting her past work on the issue.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) said he needed to look at Kaine’s resolution more closely, but said that from his understanding, “it seems to articulate what is our constitutional responsibility, and in no way constrains the president from any legitimate exercise of war powers and foreign policy.”

Asked about striking Fordow, Blumenthal added that Israel “seems to be prevailing tactically, and I believe it has the right to defend itself against the existential menace of a nuclear armed [Iran],” which would also be “a threat to the entire world, including the United States.”

“I support our providing the means for Israel to defend itself against Iran’s retaliation,” he continued. “I’m concerned about U.S. personnel in the region, and I hope that a wider conflict can be avoided.”

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said she hasn’t yet had the opportunity to review the legislation.

Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) said that he was planning to review the legislation on Tuesday evening.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), an isolationist-leaning Republican who supported a similar effort in 2020, said “you’ll know soon” if he’ll support the new legislation. He has argued that the administration would need congressional approval for operations against Iran barring an imminent threat.

An effort in the House led by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) that mirrors Kaine’s resolution to block U.S. military action against Iran without congressional authorization, on which the sponsors could force a vote, is picking up support from a group of progressive Democrats.

That resolution is co-sponsored by an expanding group of House progressives, including Reps. Ro Khanna (D-CA), Don Beyer (D-VA), Greg Casar (D-TX), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Nydia Velázquez (D-NY), Lloyd Doggett (D-TX), Chuy Garcia (D-IL), Delia Ramirez (D-IL), Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), Summer Lee (D-PA), Jim McGovern (D-MA), Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), Mark Pocan (D-WI), Paul Tonko (D-NY), Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ), Becca Balint (D-VT) and Val Hoyle (D-OR).