Feds: Antisemite tried burning down a Jewish nursing home but was foiled because he's a moron

ummm....

Minors? Juveniles? Just put their names and the charges out there for general consumption? Pretty sure that's mostly still against the law.

Mixed match on that, and mixed grade on Governor Murphy.

Good for him for speaking out against anti-Semitism. Bad for him for not establishing that it is anti-semitism, or (being perceived as) not speaking as forcefully about the behavior problem there.
He's closed state & county parks, taken a fairly firm stance on non-essentials, has done mostly 'okay' in my (remote observer) opinion, and talks tough about secular "knuckleheads" in places like Ewing and Rumson - but...
...is seen by many (rightly or wrongly) as staying mum about multiple publicized incidents in recent weeks in that area of gatherings of people in the Orthodox community for religious/family events contrary to all social-distancing etc... orders and guidance.
...and it's not just Lakewood locals. Police there issue citations to people at these gatherings and keep finding people from NYC coming in from out-of-state for them.
...and it has gone beyond what any reasonable outside observer would call a "chafing at restrictions when there doesn't seem to be a difference". Lakewood is hot spot - has over 1/4 of the cases in that county (Ocean County) and more cases than any of 8 other NJ counties! Yes, a large town, but adjusting for population size - over 11 cases per 1000 population. Plot that on a heat map and you'd need eye protection. Just being on a commuter corridor doesn't explain all of that - other commuter corridor towns don't have that high a rate.
...Some members of a large group there are being conspicuously, significantly, and repeatedly uncooperative. ...and some more members of the same group of the same group come in from NYC, the worst Covid spot in the nation, to be uncooperative
,,,the town is a Covid hot spot.
---
It's reasonable to wonder if this behavior is contributing to an advanced problem and reasonable to expect the Gov to speak up as strongly as he has in other situations. Damn right people are going to speak up! (rightly or wrongly).

Scorn? Yep. To say the least. Maybe we could get a socially-acceptable consensus standard of scorn, and this group could be treated exactly the same as the evangelicals and megachurches that won't close, and that Catholic wedding on Staten Island three or four weeks ago (remember when that was the worst of our troubles? good times...) Those people were scorned and deservedly so.

Now, that article doesn't do him any favors in changing minds on either side (or in the middle, either). All it reports was that he met "Jewish community leaders" who had "expressed concern to him", and that he condemned those using the pandemic to heap scorn on the community
Doesn't say if he reminded the uninformed (or forgetful) about any religious practices and cultural mindset and oh, yeah - history - that creates a sense of imperative to these family gatherings that's difficult to put aside.
Doesn't say if he politely, respectfully, and sensitively reminded those "Jewish community leaders" why all those restrictions and guidelines are in place and how they might be making it worse for their neighbors and themselves.
Doesn't say if he said anything to condemn the individuals while (rightly) defending the group.

..and in his defense, it's not as if he really has time right now to go into some of the cranky suburban recent history of friction along cultural lines in that area of the state between that "group" and people who don't have a sense of irony & history to think about when their great-grandparents were the "new & different" ones changing city neighborhoods from what they were before, or their grandparents & parents moving out of the City and transforming small towns & farmlands into commuter suburbs. The "established" people didn't like their families back then, either.

...and, oh yeah - Murphy didn't do himself proud on Tucker Carlson last night. Asked to defend the general restrictions against arguments of rights violations, he actually went with a worrying about science, not the Bill of Rights argument and "above my pay grade" response. Idiot. It does not take a legal scholar or much time at all to present a simple defense (especially in the time constraints of a tv interview) of the restrictions fitting well within the Bill of Rights and the law.