To show their congregations’ dissatisfaction with recent changes in U.S. immigration policy, some synagogues have declared themselves “sanctuaries” where those who have entered the country illegally can hide from law enforcement. Jonathan Tobin objects:

These institutions and their supporters say their decision is grounded in justice, history, and even Jewish liturgy [and canonical texts]. . . . The notion of “sanctuary” can [indeed] be traced to the Bible, [which prescribes the establishment of] “cities of refuge.” But there is no analogy between illegal immigration and a law to shield those who had committed manslaughter so as to prevent them from being killed outright as a matter of . . . blood vengeance. Jews are [likewise] commanded to “welcome the strangers” in their midst. . . . But here again, the link to contemporary controversies breaks down because nothing in Jewish law grants foreigners the right to enter the country and stay indefinitely without permission.

Far more compelling [at first blush] are arguments based in recent history. Liberals say that as the descendants of immigrants, Jews should support new arrivals. Most emotively, they point to the enactment of restrictive U.S. immigration laws in the 1920s that were aimed in part at European Jews and then America’s refusal to provide a safe haven for those fleeing the Nazi death machine. . . . But the notion that the Syrians, let alone those streaming over the border from Mexico, are analogous to Jews who were all marked for death by the Nazis is absurd. . . .

Few of those who might take advantage of sanctuary synagogues are actually fleeing persecution, and they can petition the government and courts for asylum. The overwhelming majority . . . are economic migrants. We can sympathize with their plight, but the hyperbolic claims about their being victims of injustice has little basis in fact. They broke a reasonable law enacted by a legitimate government, not a tyrannical regime, and like all those who violate the law, they don’t wish to be held accountable.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.