Judge dismisses Trump administration lawsuit over West Orange synagogue protest

A federal judge last week dismissed the federal government’s civil suit against protesters whose demonstration outside a West Orange synagogue in 2024 devolved into a brawl, with the judge finding the Trump administration failed to support their claims against them.

Counts against individuals and organizations sued under a federal statute that bars physical obstruction or threats of force to interfere with free expression at a place of worship or reproductive health clinic could not stand because the government had failed to allege a claim under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, the judge said.

“The FACE Act does not impose liability for disruptive, offensive, or hostile advocacy,” Judge Katharine Hayden ruled.

The federal government’s claims against Altaf Sharif for allegedly charging at Moshe Glick, the organizer of the Nov. 13, 2024, real estate event and memorial that was the protesters’ target, could not form the basis of a claim because they did not argue his force was aimed at stopping a religious observance, Hayden said.

The government had alleged Sharif charged Glick after the latter man batted aside a vuvuzela an unnamed protestor was blowing directly into his ear. Sharif’s alleged charge was interrupted by pepper spray deployed by David Silberberg, a worshipper who Sharif put into a headlock and released after Glick struck him with a flashlight.

Claims against Eric Camins were dismissed because his shout of “the Jew is here” against Silberberg did not plausibly solicit or facilitate the use of force against him, Hayden ruled.

“There needs be context to infer that ‘the Jew is here’ is a statement inciting violence. The complaint does not supply that,” the judge said.

Another protestor, Tova Fry, could not face charges for sending Glick a letter that demanded he cancel the event under the threat of legal action because the statute bars only threats of physical violence. She could not be sued for her presence at the Nov. 13, 2024, protest based on the complaint because it does not allege Fry, personally, did anything illegal there.

The statute requires more than being part of a group, or crowd of protesters, Hayden ruled.

“The complaint does not allege that Fry blocked a door, or stood in a walkway, or touched a worshiper, or blew a horn, or said anything to anyone at the synagogue,” the judge wrote.

The judge dismissed claims against Matt Dragon, who the government alleged led the protest, because the Trump administration’s complaint did not claim he employed force, obstructed access, or moved to interfere with worshippers. The complaint, the judge wrote, only notes he was there and told Fry where the entrance to the synagogue was.

The Party for Socialism and Liberation New Jersey and Americans for Palestine New Jersey, who publicized the protests outside Glick’s home and synagogue, could not face charges over social media posts noting the demonstrations because those posts did not include a threat of force, the judge wrote.