Editing Public Menorah Lighting (section)

== The Legal Battle Over Public Menorahs ==
The struggle began in the year 5742 (1982) in Teaneck, Bergen County, New Jersey, when the Jewish community tried to prevent the lighting of a public menorah in front of the county courthouse building. The Rebbe wrote a letter to the community committee noting the positive influence of public menorahs, an influence that even the American government recognized and viewed favorably. However, despite reading the letter, the Jewish community committee continued to oppose the lighting. The Rebbe sent them a letter stating that he was "confused and shocked" by their opposition, but ultimately they succeeded in preventing the menorah lighting in Teaneck. To bypass the opposition, the Shliach Rabbi Yisroel Brod lit fourteen menorahs in towns surrounding Teaneck.

After Chanukah, the community committee wrote a letter to the Rebbe detailing their reasons for opposing public menorahs. Among other things, they claimed that ostentatious displays of Judaism could lead to antisemitism. The Rebbe responded with a lengthy five-page letter, in which he replied in detail to their claims - he explained how harmful the opposition of Jews to matters of Judaism was, and the damage the community could cause to other Jewish communities. The Rebbe emphasized the importance of public menorahs, saying: "The experiment has proven that a menorah placed in a public location during the eight days of Chanukah served as a source of inspiration for many, many Jews and aroused within them a spirit of identification with their Jewish people and with the Jewish way of life... I personally know dozens of such Jews who returned, and I have good reason to believe that in recent years, hundreds and even thousands of Jews experienced the lighting of their inner Jewish spark thanks to the public lighting of a menorah in their cities, in the nation's capital, etc., as publicized in the media."

The struggle spread that same year to additional locations. The Rebbe's Shliach in Pittsburgh, Rabbi Yisroel Rosenfeld, who had received the city's permission to place a public menorah, faced opposition from an organization fighting for the separation of religion and state. In the district court, the Shliach lost the case, and the issue was elevated to the Supreme Court. Chabad was represented by attorney Nathan Lewin. Eventually, Lewin managed to convince the court with the argument that the menorah is not a religious display but a cultural one, and its placement does not contradict the law of separation of church and state.

Thanks to this victory, a menorah was placed in Pittsburgh for Chanukah 5743 (1982); but the following year, one of the lawyers who had opposed the menorah became the mayor and prevented its placement, arguing that the court ruling permitted the menorah's placement but did not obligate him to place it.

Another struggle began in Chanukah 5744 (1983) in Cincinnati, Ohio, when Rabbi Sholom Dov Ber Kalmanson requested to place a central menorah in the city and encountered fierce opposition from the Reform community, which is considered a Reform stronghold in the United States. Through the efforts of the Jewish Federation in his city, controlled by the Reform movement, the city informed him that he did not have a permit to place the menorah in the city square.

Rabbi Kalmanson decided to fight the city through legal means. In a conversation with attorney Nathan Lewin, Rabbi Kalmanson had a legal inspiration, and he suggested to the lawyer to take a completely different approach: to argue that lighting the menorah is a certain type of expression of opinion, and when a certain citizen wants to express his opinion by placing a menorah - the city is forbidden to restrict him and prevent him from expressing his opinion, as this would violate the law of "freedom of speech." The lawyer was shocked by the idea and was hesitant to use this argument, but eventually did so - and the opposing lawyers, who were sure his arguments would be based on the Supreme Court's decision regarding the separation of church and state, were surprised when Mr. Lewin began talking about "freedom of speech." They were afraid to be portrayed as not allowing freedom of speech. That year, Rabbi Kalmanson won and placed the menorah.

During the 1980s, the Rebbe's Shluchim achieved many victories in legal battles, with the Rebbe being involved in the details of the events. Over the years, public lightings became a consensus, and opposition waned.

In Cincinnati, a Reform stronghold, opponents continued to fight the public menorah year after year with various arguments. In 5764 (2003), Rabbi Kalmanson finally won, and the court permitted him to place the menorah every year, and his opponents were required to pay large sums. Since then, legal proceedings against the menorah have ceased.

Additionally, the legal battles reached the media and generated significant attention. This meant that in addition to publicity from the lightings themselves, the struggle contributed to publicizing the miracle of Chanukah on a much larger scale.