The anger is understandable. In January, when state Sen. Scott Wiener posted a video declaring that Israel had committed genocide in Gaza, many in San Francisco’s Jewish community — including both of us — felt a gut-punch of betrayal. In a joint statement, San Francisco Jewish institutions expressed that they were “deeply disappointed,” calling his position “both incorrect and lacking moral clarity,” and warning that the weaponization of the term genocide causes real pain given the community’s history with the Holocaust.
As the June primary approaches, some Jewish voters are still agonizing over whether Wiener, who has long been a staunch ally of our community, deserves our support at the ballot box. We think the answer is clear if we stay focused on the big picture and ask: Compared to whom?
Wiener himself acknowledged the weight of the moment, telling J. at the time: “And some people are just quite angry. I know what I said is a very significant statement by an elected Jewish leader … All I ask for the people who are really angry with me, as they’re angry with me, is to also remember the work that I’ve done for many, many years for the Jewish community and the many hits I’ve taken for this community over the last 2½ years.”
In his initial video statement Scott stated, “As a Jew, I am deeply aware that the word ‘genocide’ was created in the wake of the Holocaust, which was the industrial extermination of 6 million Jews. For many Jews, associating the word genocide with the Jewish State of Israel is deeply painful and frankly traumatic.”
Yet he didn’t deploy it carelessly — he agonized over it publicly, and he owns the consequences.
Before his election to the California Senate, Wiener served on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, representing the district once held by Harvey Milk. He has spent decades in the trenches standing up for Jewish causes — not as a campaign promise, but as a consistent pattern of action.
Wiener is a leader in the fight against antisemitism, consistently calling it out on both the right and the left — be it the administration’s empowerment of far-right antisemitic conspiracists, or the casting out from progressive spaces of Jews who support Israel’s existence. He has vocally opposed antisemitism in the local community, including the targeting of Jewish-owned businesses and Jewish kids in public schools and antisemitic environments at University of California, San Francisco, and San Francisco State University.
In the last legislative year alone, he played a critical role passing AB 715, the bill combatting antisemitism in K-12 schools. Beyond this landmark victory, Wiener has long championed California’s nonprofit security grant program, which has helped Jewish and Muslim institutions improve security against hate crimes.
This is not the résumé of someone indifferent to Jewish safety. This is someone who has, as he put it himself, “gone to the mat” for this community repeatedly. He also remains a dedicated Zionist, having visited Israel on an emergency legislative delegation organized by JCRC and the Los Angeles Jewish Federation in the aftermath of Oct. 7.
Now look at the alternatives. One of Wiener’s top challengers, Saikat Chakrabarti, a centi-millionaire, is running a well-funded campaign closely aligned with the anti-Israel left, embracing some of the most extreme voices in that camp, including antisemitic podcaster Hasan Piker.
Chakrabarti opposes AB 715 — the very law Wiener called “a big step for the Jewish community” — and has attacked Wiener for supporting it.
Both Chakrabarti, and Wiener’s other viable opponent, San Francisco Supervisor Connie Chan, have received the endorsement of AROC Action, an organization responsible for instigating many incidents of antisemitic bullying in K-12 schools, as well as the organizer of marches and rallies across San Francisco with violent rhetoric that has spiraled into antisemitic vandalism. The distinction matters: Wiener criticizes the Netanyahu government. Chakrabarti and Chan’s backers have undermined Jewish safety and seek Israel’s outright destruction.
Finally, moderate Marie Hurabiell, a late entry in the race, has garnered some positive attention in the Jewish community, but lacks the record, the name recognition and traction to prove viable. Additionally, her recent troubling comments condemned by LGBTQ+ groups in the city should give our community pause.
This race has become something of a proxy battle in the war for the identity of the Democratic Party — a test of whether a progressive candidate can still win in a deep-blue district without embracing anti-Zionist politics. The outcome will shape the party’s direction on Jewish issues for years.
There is a version of Jewish political engagement that seeks to punish anyone who uses the word genocide, regardless of their record, regardless of their opponents. That posture may be emotionally satisfying, but it is also strategically self-defeating.
Wiener made a statement that many in the community found painful. But he did not abandon his commitment to Jewish security, Jewish education or the physical safety of Jewish institutions. He did not endorse the groups that chant for the elimination of the Jewish state. He did not cast Israel’s existence as a “colonial project” that needs dismantling.
Our community must play the long game. We must hold leaders accountable without cutting off allies who have bled for our causes. We must distinguish between someone whose words caused pain and someone whose agenda poses genuine danger.
Nancy Pelosi served San Francisco in Congress for nearly 40 years. Her successor could serve for decades, with a platform to shape our city and our country, and its environment for the Jewish community long after President Trump, Prime Minister Netanyahu and the current war with Iran and its proxies have exited stage right.
Vote accordingly.