A pro-Palestinian group wants Pittsburghers to decide whether to bar the city from doing business with entities that work with Israel, but opponents to the proposal on Tuesday called the measure antisemitic and challenged the effort in court.

A petition to add a referendum to November’s general election ballot, filed with the county Aug. 6, faces challenges from multiple fronts, including the Jewish Federation of Pittsburgh and the City of Pittsburgh Controller’s Office — both of which filed actions on Tuesday in Allegheny County Common Pleas Court.

The case will be heard on Monday before Judge John T. McVay Jr.

The Pittsburgh Democratic Socialists of America, which sponsors the referendum question, say that the point is to put pressure on the government to urge Israel to enter a ceasefire in Gaza.

“At a time when so many of us are struggling to pay the bills and put food on the table, billions of our U.S. taxpayer dollars are being used to fund Israel’s war crimes,” they said on their website, No War Crimes on our Dime.

The referendum seeks to amend Pittsburgh’s Home Rule charter and prohibit the city from doing business with entities that work with or in Israel until “Israel ends its military action in Gaza, fully allows humanitarian assistance to reach the people of Gaza, and grants equal rights to every person living in the territories under Israeli control.”

But the Jewish Federation of Pittsburgh and its supporters said that the referendum is blatantly antisemitic and Pittsburgh’s controller said it could seriously hamper community health and safety by interfering with the city’s ability to provide essential services.

“It could prevent us from carrying out basic city functions, like providing electricity, purchasing life-saving medications, buying protective equipment for first responders, and even fueling police vehicles — to name a few,” said Controller Rachael Heisler. “It would severely disrupt the city’s entire contracting process, causing tremendous inefficiency and creating a massive risk of financial waste.”

For example, according to the petition, Duquesne Light provides electricity to the majority of the city. But the utility is also part of a consortium with Israeli groups that received a grant from the Department of Energy for energy infrastructure cybersecurity.

City vehicles rely on gas from companies with holdings in Israel, the objectors said, and medications used by EMS are sourced by Israeli pharmaceutical companies.

Laura Cherner, the director of community relations at the Jewish Federation, said that the wording of the referendum is concerning.

“The implications could be so broad, sweeping,” she said.

Would it mean that the Pittsburgh police could not respond for an emergency at the federation because their organization conducts business in Israel, she asked.

“The way that it would impact synagogues and Jewish institutions is unknown,” she said.

Rabbi Seth Adelson of Congregation Beth Shalom in Squirrel Hill, is one of the people challenging the referendum.

“From my perspective, this referendum would, in fact, make Pittsburgh less safe for Jews, because we rely on the safety provided by the Pittsburgh police on high holidays, on our greatest days of the Jewish year,” he said. “We need those police to protect us.”

Jeffrey Finkelstein, the executive director of the federation, said that the referendum targets only Israel.

“That makes this clearly and undeniably antisemitic,” said

The federation’s court filing quotes Pennsylvania’s anti-boycott, divestment and sanctions litigation, passed in 2016, which is known as the Prohibited Contracts Act.

The act makes it illegal for any company contracted by the state to discriminate against Israel or others doing business there. The court challenge argues that the referendum, if passed, would violate state law.

But the petitions also challenge the signatures collected to get the referendum on the ballot. They allege that the parties failed to follow the proper procedure both to submit the referendum petition and in collecting signatures for it.

Under the law, the parties were required to collect 12,495 signatures — or 10% of the number of electors voting for governor in the last general election in Pittsburgh, which was 124,586.

According to the challengers, some of the signers indicated they were from Somerset County, or “Alleghany County.”

Others, they said, listed an address where they were not registered to vote, and other signatures appear to have been collected outside of the window of time allowed by law.

While the referendum petition asserted 15,253 total signatures, the challengers assert that 10,387 of those must be stricken.

Therefore, they said, they cannot meet the required number of signatures to get on the ballot.

The DSA said in an emailed statement that it is committed to getting the issue on the ballot.

“It is disheartening and concerning to see the Jewish Federation of Pittsburgh attempting blatant voter suppression rather than let Pittsburghers vote in November on how we want our tax dollars spent,” said Matt Rubin, field director for No War Crimes on our Dime.

“The challenge they’ve brought is carried out by a legal team best known for attempting to invalidate hundreds of thousands of voters on behalf of former President Trump’s campaign following his loss in the 2020 election, and it seems they’re once again working to overturn the will of thousands of voters.”

Two of the attorneys listed on the Jewish Federation’s challenge are Ronald L. Hicks Jr. and Carolyn B. McGee.

They previously worked for Porter Wright Morris & Arthur LLP and represented the Trump campaign in a lawsuit filed in the Middle District of Pennsylvania on Nov. 9, 2020, alleging voting irregularities in that year’s general election.

However, both Hicks and McGee, just a few days later, filed a motion to withdraw from the case. A New York Times story said at the time that attorneys at the firm had voiced concern that the work was helping Trump to undermine election integrity.

Hicks and McGee are now at Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP.

Messages left with both attorneys were not returned late Tuesday.

Copyright ©2025— Trib Total Media, LLC (TribLIVE.com)