Interfaith group’s lawsuit against pro-Palestinian protesters will proceed, federal judge rules

A federal judge largely denied a motion to dismiss a lawsuit accusing pro-Palestinian protesters of disrupting interfaith worship events in San Diego County.SAN DIEGO (CN) — A federal judge in San Diego ruled mostly in favor of an interfaith organization that is suing a group of pro-Palestinian protesters who it says targeted their worship services and members over its support for Israel.In a hearing Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Andrew Schopler mostly denied a motion by the defendants to dismiss the lawsuit brought by the Christian & Jewish Alliance, finding that — at this point — they adequately claimed the protesters disrupted and blocked the entrance to what plaintiffs described as three interfaith events it hosted last year.The religious organization accuses eight individual defendants and 40 unnamed defendants of violating the Freedom of Access to Clinical Entrances Act, or FACE Act. The statute authorizes the ability to pursue criminal or civil charges against someone who obstructs the entrance of a medical facility, but it also prevents the obstruction of places of worship.The Christian & Jewish Alliance says it invited members of the Mission Church and guests to worship and learn about how to support Israel at an event held at the church’s Carlsbad, California, location on March 19, 2025. The event, which drew about 400 attendees, also included a speech from a former member of the Israeli Knesset, Einat Wilf.The plaintiffs say the protesters infiltrated the event under false names and then, at staggered intervals, shouted epithets to disrupt Wilf’s speech. When apprehended by security, the protesters physically resisted their removal.The protesters also demonstrated outside the church, in what the plaintiffs describe as a “mob,” occupying the space in front of the church’s entrance and shouting with bullhorns. The plaintiffs say the protesters created an obstruction that forced the event attendees to walk through a chaotic bottleneck.But the defendants say they never protested any worship-based part of the event.“It was only after Dr. Wilf’s speech began that the defendants inside began their protest,” defense attorney Thomas Harvey said. “Everyone can understand, if your plan was to disrupt religious worship, you wouldn’t wait for that to be over.”But the plaintiffs’ attorneys disputed this.“The entire event was worship,” attorney John Brinkerhoff contended. “The whole thing was.”Schopler, a Joe Biden appointee, ultimately sided with the plaintiffs on their pleadings.“The defense was plausibly aware that the natural and probable consequences during a Wednesday night worship event would interfere with a worship exercise, even if their intent was to not disrupt such an exercise,” he told the courtroom.About a dozen people sat in the audience dressed in Palestinian keffiyeh scarves in support of the defendants.“I have to assume the facts are true and interpret it in the light most favorable to plaintiff,” he told the defense attorneys. “I can see how on summary judgment you may win as the facts come out.”The plaintiffs also say the protesters returned to demonstrate in front of the church during an Easter service the following month with bullhorns and signage accusing the church members of supporting genocide.The protesters again demonstrated against the Christian & Jewish Alliance on Sept. 7, 2025, at the Legacy International Center. The plaintiffs say a group of demonstrators slowly marched back and forth in the parking lot with bullhorns and signs to denounce Israel and occasionally hit passing vehicles with their hands in an attempt to intimidate attendees.Defense attorneys argued that venue did not qualify as a place of worship. Schopler disagreed in his denial of the motion to dismiss.However, Schopler also denied a motion by the plaintiffs to grant a preliminary injunction that would bar some of the defendants from demonstrating at the church in the future.Brinkerhoff argued his clients’ actions at all of the events were protected religious activity and the defendants created a violent and fearful atmosphere that discouraged their members from attending the interfaith events. He argued the plaintiffs have suffered irreparable harm that has resulted in declining membership and canceled pro-Israel events in the last 13 months.“The church and plaintiffs can’t take that risk,” he said of scheduling new events. “That chill is the irreparable harm.”The defense attorneys accused the plaintiffs of fusing political support for Israel with religious belief.“I think we can all agree that Israel-Palestine is a hot-button issue,” attorney Ben Gharagozli said. “By their standard, any type of institution, religious or not, who wants to hold a pro-Israel event, should get a federal preliminary injunction.”The defendants also filed an anti-SLAPP motion against the plaintiffs’ trespass claims, a type of motion aimed at blocking frivolous lawsuits that target protected speech. However, Schopler did not rule on that motion.In their complaint, the plaintiffs describe an increasingly anti-Semitic environment in the U.S. since the conflict in the Gaza Strip began on Oct. 7, 2023. About 75,000 Palestinians have been killed by Israel in Gaza since then.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads