Harvard law professor and famed defense attorney Alan Dershowitz in 2023. — MV Times

For decades, the West Tisbury Farmers Market has been a popular and mostly quiet place to get corn, a dozen eggs or fresh tomatoes. 

But this week, it was thrust into the international spotlight as prominent defense attorney and seasonal Vineyard resident Alan Dershowitz — who has defended the likes of OJ Simpson and Jeffrey Epstein — threatened to bring a lawsuit after a vendor, the Good Pierogis, refused to sell him pierogis, a popular Eastern European dumpling. 

Dershowitz, who has had multiple Island interactions that have made national news, claims that his rights were possibly violated because of his political beliefs following his defense of President Donald J. Trump during the 2020 impeachment proceedings before the U.S. Senate, and due to his support for Israel — what he said could be a violation of his rights for discrimination against a religion. Dershowitz is a self-described, proud Zionist, which was boldly emblazoned on his tee shirt he wore to the farmers market the week before.

In an interview with the Times, Dershowitz said that he is looking for a peaceful resolution with the vendor and farmers market which would mean the pierogi seller would agree to sell him pierogis once again, and that the market will write into its bylaws that they should not refuse to sell to individuals based on religious, racial, creed, or political views.

“If this is not settled, I will take legal action against the vendor,” Dershowitz told the Times, adding that he would return to the farmers market on Saturday to again attempt to buy pierogis.

Some vendors and customers at the market have stood behind the owners of Good Pierogis, stating that it was the owner’s right to decline a customer they do not want to do business with and that they should be supported for taking a bold stance in support of their views.

“I want my children to see that when you have bad behavior, there are consequences,” said Alice Russo, who was shopping at the pierogi stand at the same time that Dershowitz was there. “And when you do what is right, it’s important that the community has your back.” 

But the committee that oversees the market has said that they will review their bylaws.

“The West Tisbury Farmers Market is committed to supporting local agriculture and business — and that means not only supporting our vendors, but our patrons as well,” a statement from the Market states. “We are reviewing our own internal bylaws to make sure everyone at the market is always being respected and their rights protected.”

Market manager Ethan Buchanan-Valenti said that they are reviewing the law before speaking further.

As to the details of what happened, Dershowitz told The Times that he was going to the market Wednesday morning as he has for decades to buy corn from Morning Glory Farm. He got there early and purchased a dozen ears, and as he was waiting for a fresh-squeezed orange juice when he stopped by Good Pierogis. According to witnesses and Dershowitz, he asked to buy half a dozen of the pierogis but the vendor said that they don’t know if they should sell to him because they didn’t like his work. 

According to witnesses and Dershowitz, he then took out his phone to record the interaction and told others in line that he was refused service based on his political opinion. According to witnesses, Dershowitz referred to the vendor as a bigot and that others in line should not purchase the product as a result. Dershowitz, in his comments to The Times, said that he was not making a disturbance but was informing shoppers that he was refused service.

But others disagreed. Police received a call from market organizers about a possible disturbance, that one of the vendors’ business was being disrupted by Dershowitz. By then the West Tisbury Police Department had been called to the scene. As captured on video by a witness at the market, Reserve Officer Nate Vieira approached the pierogi vendor’s stall and asked for Dershowitz to step away. Still within a short distance of the stand, the officer and Dershowitz had a brief discussion on what was constitutionally right and wrong. 

Dershowitz told the officer that the vendor couldn’t refuse to sell to him because he was a Trump supporter, which Dershowitz added that he was not. He said that it was similar to not selling to a Jewish person, an individual of any sexuality or people of color. “It’s illegal. I’m a professor of constitutional law, and I know the law of Massachusetts very well,” he said.

The officer explained to Dershowitz that three vendors at the market had called to complain and that four individuals had said that he was causing a disturbance. If he returned to the vendor, the officer said that he would ask Dershowitz to leave the market. Eventually, Dershowitz agreed.

Dershowitz, in an interview with The Times, said that he has spoken with the organizers of the market and that he is writing a petition to require all vendors to sell to all members regardless of race, politics, sexual orientation, gender, or creed. 

Since Wednesday’s incident, Dershowitz said some of his friends would bring him pierogies and that they would have a pierogi party and a taste test to see which ones were better — homemade or ones from the market. 

The reaction to the incident has been mixed on the Island. The Ag Society released a statement that the incident is troubling. “The Ag Society values the Farmer’s Market and its positive impact supporting local agriculture,” the statement reads. “It is disappointing when any visitor or vendor at the Farmer’s Market or any other function on Ag Society property experiences a situation which detracts from the Ag Society’s mission to support a resilient and sustainable agricultural community on Martha’s Vineyard.”

At least one other vendor at the market has defended Good Pierogis.

“I wholeheartedly stand behind Good Pierogi and their decision not to sell to Alan Dershowitz,” reads a statement from illia, who sells their farmed produce at the market. illia did not share their last name. “We have a right to hold people accountable in the ways that we can. Whether or not other vendors choose to sell to people who do harm to others with their power and labor is up to them. I often think about the power we could realize collectively as farmers and makers if we came together with intention. We make food that nourishes people and enables them to do, good or bad and everything in between. This is a unique power that we often relinquish with a lack of collective organization, community agreements and shared vision. Another unfortunate result of this individualism, I would be remiss to say, is that much of the food we produce is made accessible to wealthy tourists alone. It doesn’t have to be this way.” illia added that they do not believe this is going to affect other vendors. “Tourists are not going to boycott the farmers market,” they said.

Dershowitz has had a storied history with Martha’s Vineyard, especially since he defended Trump during impeachment hearings. He was famously confronted by Larry David at the Chilmark Store porch in 2021. And it’s not the first time that he has threatened to sue. He also threatened a lawsuit against the Chilmark Library.

When it comes to the law, the “Right to Refuse” has wide-reaching implications for vendors, business owners, and service workers alike. According to local attorneys, businesses do have a constitutional right to refuse services to a customer, as long as the reasons are non-discriminatory. Dershowitz is partly claiming politics as a reason for discrimination in this instance, which the law has historically disagreed with, experts said.

Politics are not one of the current foundational reasons for the ability to refuse service, as evidenced in a few Supreme Court decisions. Most notably, through a 2023 Supreme Court case that ruled in favor of an Evangelical Christian website designer who refused to create products for anyone who identified as LGBTQIA+. 

The court claimed the Evangelical Christian business owner had the “Right of Refusal” based on her First Amendment rights. And that her politics were, quite literally, her business. She was allowed to do what she wanted with those beliefs. Dershowitz, while legally allowed to speak up about his views, politics, and leanings, does not necessarily have a legal precedent for action against a vendor who refuses service to him on the basis of his politics, according to local attorneys. 

“There’s no law that says a vendor has to sell to a particular person,” Jack Fruchtman, a professor of law and political science, said. “I just can’t imagine what the grounds of this lawsuit could be.”

Dershowitz also said that his religious rights could have been infringed on because of his stance as an ardent Zionist. In a video on his YouTube channel posted Wednesday, Dershowitz said that his Zionism is part of his Judaism, so could be considered not selling to him over his religious belief or ethnicity.

The widest-reaching definition of Zionism, academically at least, is that it is a modern political movement that believes the state of Israel has the right to exist — not a religious belief. From sources like the University of Michigan to the Anti-Defamation League, Zionism is described as political. And local lawyers agree. All the legal representatives who the Times spoke to state that because of their understanding that Zionism’s definition is political, the legality in terms of the right of refusal leaned towards the vendor in question. 

“The protected (or what the Supreme Court has identified as ‘suspect’) classes or categories are race, religion, and sex,” Fruchtman said. “Political views are protected by the First Amendment. Both the vendor and Alan Dershowitz have a right to express their political views and if the vendor declines to sell Dershowitz something on the basis of political beliefs, [they have] a right to do so.”

51 replies on “Dershowitz takes on West Tisbury Farmers Market”

  1. I dislike Trump immensely but what happened at the Farmers Market is just wrong. We can’t have vendors individually deciding who to sell to as long as the customer is civil and willing to
    Pay. The market is suppose to be a civil place where any well behaved customer should not be harassed this way. Next someone with a Yankee hat will be refused service.

      1. Ummm…that was a racist policy to not sell to black people. Try reading The Green Book.

        If you sell to the public, you sell to everyone.

        Can we agree that it’s beneficial to our society that everyone deserves a legal defense? Even if they’re horrible?

  2. What if a vendor refused to sell to someone based on the color of their skin or (as is possible in this case) their religious beliefs? This is promotion of the very discrimination this vendor believes they are fighting. You don’t have to like Alan Dershowitz, but you should respect the fact these are your rights he is standing up for, not just his. This vendor should be dropped from the Farmer’s market.
    Less importantly, since the Times felt it necessary to point out two of Mr. Dershowitz’s clients, perhaps they should have included a few from the very long list of more socially acceptable defendants he has helped. I’m sure this was not done to cast him in any certain light for this article though.

    2. Per the article: “According to local attorneys, businesses do have a constitutional right to refuse services to a customer, as long as the reasons are non-discriminatory. Dershowitz is partly claiming politics as a reason for discrimination in this instance, which the law has historically disagreed with, experts said.”

    3. This appears to be a moral and political disputation, not a case involving religion, race or gender, etc. identity, which have standardly been legally verboten as causes for discrimination. Dershowitz’s contention that his Zionist beliefs are intrinsic to his Judaism and render him a victim of defeasible religious bigotry here, rather than an object of political and moral disgust, is beyond a risible stretch, both logically and morally.

  3. When a baker in Colorado would not design a same sex marriage logo on cake, many here were apoplectic but now are ok with Dershowitz being refused.

    1. Correct.
      Constitutionally right or wrong, there seems to more support here for the LGBTQ community than there is for Mr. Dershowitz.
      Kinda makes you smile, doesn’t it ?

    2. Andy– There is a separation of powers in this country–The SCOTUS often rules in ways I don’t like. I am sure they rule in ways you don’t like also. But , it is what it is– The supreme court ruled in favor of the baker—Ok — I disagreed, but that was the ruling- I had to get over it– But that ruling applies to more than just that one bakery–it applies to people selling pierogies as well as cakes. The owner of Masterpiece cakeshop viewed the people requesting the cake as “immoral”. The supreme court basically ruled that if an establishment viewed a potential client as being immoral, they had the right to refuse service. In my opinion, Mr. Dershowitz is much more immoral than the couple requesting a cake. We can disagree, but for the time being, we are a country that abides by the rule of law, as ultimately decided by the SCOTUS . I got over the cake thing– you can get over the pierogi thing—

      1. Incorrect, Keller. The Supremes did not “rule in favor of the baker”–just that the baker did not have to decorate a special cake. The decision was that “artistic expression” (cake decorating) could not be forced upon an artist (cake decorator) if it conflicted with their moral/religious beliefs. In fact, the bakery was obligated to sell the cakes they have for sale in their bakery to all gay people and not discriminate. It was the decoration that could not be forced on the decorator. In this way, Dershowitz would have had to go up to the pierogi vendor at the WTFM and politely ask for 6 pierogi decorated with Stars of David, which the vendor could have refused if he were a radicalized Islamist and anything Jewish was anathema to his religion. But the vendor would still be obigated to sell the undecorated pierogis that were for sale at his stand and not discriminate against anyone else’s religion. If Dershowitz had asked for Jewish stars on his pototoes– which he did not, the Supremes would have decided in favor of the vendor not having to decorate their potatoes in this way. People seem really confused about this and then say something wrong, as you just did.

      2. My name is not Andy. The Colorado case which you need to read carefully was not about selling a cake. The owner would sell anyone a cake–anyone. The Buyer wanted a decoration on the cake which was same sex and the Vendor said no. The Dershowitz case is about selling or not selling based upon political views which appears to be upheld. Two different cases altogether. ”Getting over it” when applied to this issue is a non sequitur. I am not the least bit concerned about either issue.

        1. Andy– please appreciate that I have compromised with Sam, and have agreed to capitalize the nickname “Andy”. To me, that is a show of respect to both you and Sam. Perhaps you could write to YOUR president and inform him that the last name of the governor of California is not “Newscome”. Or the first name of a well known journalist who works for the STILL failing ( after 12 years) NYtimes , is Maggie , not “Maggot”. And quite frankly, if you are “not the least bit concerned about either issue” why are you commenting about it ? And since I can only post one comment per day on some days. I will address the people who criticize islanders for their lack of “tolerance” concerning this issue — Despite the right wing vitriol, we do not tolerate murders, pedophiles and crooks– We do however, tolerate and in fact support people of color, and we support various religious beliefs and peoples’ preferred sexual orientation, among other things. It seems most people here even support my constitutional right to wear a colander on my head for my drivers license photo because it is the holy headgear of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. For those who don’t know about his noodliness —https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster Peace, Love and Pasta to all — Ramen — Go eat peas —

  5. Petty, small minded people who discriminate due to political beliefs are no better than the racists they claim to abhor. Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should. Grow up already.

  6. With the left, it’s THEIR way or the highway.. For people who believe that they occupy the moral high ground, they are very judgemental, intolerant, and punitive toward others..

  7. I would suggest we all boycott the farmers market until all the vendors are tolerant of all people. One thing that Allan is right on is this island is not friendly to any conservative or Republican View in fact most conservatives on the island are in the closet just like Gay people once were.

    1. Seriously?
      Take a ride up Circuit Ave or through the parking lot of either Stop-n-Shops, or even Cronig’s in the off season (though there really is no off season anymore) You’ll see far more trump leaning bumper stickers then Harris bumper stickers. Heck, I could name 25 hard line trump supporters right off the top of my head, and not a one of them is “in the closet” about it.

  8. This incident is being dissected to the point of absurdity. Customers are there to buy Vineyard-produced goods. Vendors sign up to sell their goods, not to pass judgement on those who they personally perceive to have exhibited political and/or religiously based bad behavior. While I support a person’s right to chose who they wish to do business with, or who to rent to, etc., it seemed obvious that this vendor was more intent on taking the opportunity to make a political statement than on selling her pierogis. A farmer’s market is not the forum for such debate. This vendor has undoubtedly and unknowingly sold her pierogis to many people who have exhibited far more extreme behavior that doesn’t happen to align with her beliefs.
    As a result of this incident, who wins? Nobody, really. Sure, some people who agree with her may even go out of their way to buy her pierogis in support. But I believe she no doubt alientated many of her regular and potential customers. They both damaged themselves with their ludicrous posture of stubborness. This whole debacle could have been avoided if both the vendor and Dershowitz had exercised reasonable adult behavior from the start. It’s a Farmer’s Market for God’s sake, not a venue for instigating bad will.

  9. Weaponized Victimhood is a thing. It’s been peddled by Karen’s, Lawyers, alphabet people and ordinary wankers for decades. I am past the point of tolerating any if it. Send Mr Douchewitz my way if he wants to buy something. As long as he understands I hold the right to refuse him service without any obligation to even offer my reasons.

  10. Let’s all play our tiny violins for Mr. Dersh who is so desperate to win friends and pleasantries from island vendors, that he resorts to threatening a law suit. He should be mindful that the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of a baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple because of his sincerely held religious beliefs. The baker, also a vendor, was not guilty of discriminating based on personally held religious beliefs. Furthermore, Mr. D, by way of twisted logic, helped the person occupying our White House avoid impeachment during his last term. Had he been impeached he wouldn’t be in Our White House now and he wouldn’t be shifting the US from constitutionally guaranteed separation of church and state, to a Christian National country. Said person treats political, personal and religious beliefs as equal and uses the law to support his views in all three cases. If the person occupying Our White House can do this so can a vendor at the Farmer’s Market.

  11. The vendor should seek an order of protection against Mr. Dershowitz to protect himself from further interactions and denigrating remarks

  12. In wiping out anything seen as DEI or ” woke” our own government is doing this to American citizens daily. Why am I not surprised so many can’t see the vendor is doing the same. Did the vendor give a reason?

  13. Thank You Professor Dershowitz for calling out this overt discrimination. I’ll be curious to see if the “Hate Has No Home” movement on the vineyard joins you next week in protest at the next Farmers Market.

  14. This incident raises some serious moral questions from several perspectives, but especially from those of a moral philosophical and religious character. To wit, should a vendor in the US be legally required to sell to Hitler, Putin or Netanyahu, et al?

  15. Although not yet mentioned here, on behalf of moral clarity and logical/semantic disambiguation, consider comparatively the case of a vendor refusing to sell a product to a particular person whose political beliefs, policies and/or actions the seller finds objectionable, on the one hand, with the case of a physician or other health care professional who refuses to perform a life-saving, or even health-benefitting, medical procedure for putatively religious reasons. Is there any doubt which carries greater moral weight and consequence. Dershowitz’s protestations seem factitious and vacuous by comparison, no?

    1. The physician is covered by the Hippocratic oath and must perform the procedure or surgery. He is not obliged to perform an unnecessary abortion except to save the life of the mother. Lumping together Hitler Putin and Bibi is puerile.

  16. First the Chilmark Librarian, now the Farmer’s Market. Taking on those up-island corporations for the little guy, I see. Real estate is selling at an all time high, Mr. Dershowitz. Think about making a profit.

    1. I like that idea……… I’d also like a button that would allow me to block someone entirely out of personal preference.

  19. Imagine being a grown man and threatening legal action over pierogies.. Small business owners have the right to deny service to whomever they choose.

  20. Ag Society has always been a happy place-300 islanders turned out to build our barn, they probably all had different beliefs, races and jobs. They all had a common love for the society ; their happy place. I was a trustee for over 50 years and I feel this germ should be stopped before it spreads. People have many places to protest all over the place. BUT NOT AT THE AG HALL. Islanders work too hard to create and maintain the MARTHA’S VINEYARD AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY including the Farmers Market. It’s not a political arena. PERIOD .Please help keep it that way…..the Pierogi vendor owes Dershowitz an apology or take their Pierogi’s and go home . They should NOT represent the MVAS.

  21. Esteemed attorney Alan Dershowitz was back at the Farmers Market today handing out these letters which read, “Don’t buy pierogi’s tainted with the poison of anti-Semitism
    As I correctly suspected, the bigot who refused to sell me pierogi…” , then goes on to rant and rave about anti-Semitism at least 5 times throughout, urging shoppers not to patronize such an “anti-semite”.
    When is this lunatic going to be permanently banned from the market?

    1. Kozak, WTFM has a history of not allowing tainted food products. People who try to sell poisoned products are indeed permanently banned. There are all kinds of poisons that are unhealthy to spread within a community. Most people don’t want any of it at the market.

  22. I would’ve probably given him his pirogies but maybe not if he accused me of being an antisemite…. It sounds like he flew off the handle real quick and came up with his own explanation of why he wasn’t being served. I’d like to hear from the pierogi people’s perspective! His freedom of speech wasn’t being impeded upon. He accused the pierogi person of being an antisemite that has given support to antisemitic organizations! They should counter sue him! ? I don’t see how this is discrimination based on this article.

  23. I understand wanting to keep the farmers market friendly and a political. The problem is the man defended Trump, Epstein and OJ. I know it’s his job but for some it’s hard to look away from that.

    1. Agreed. Dershowitz CHOSE to defend two predators/pedophiles and a domestic violence/murderer. He made his choices, he needs to realize that others have the right to make choices.

  24. “Threatened to sue.” Why even report that? Anyone can threaten to sue. It should not be reported until an actual lawsuit is filed.
    I lost all respect for Dershowitz when he threatened the Chilmark librarian. Now it’s the Farmers Market. I hope the Ag Soc doesn’t capitulate to this attention-seeking, trouble-making bully. I had no beef with Dershowitz defending his clients–that’s integral to the justice system. But Trump was not his client when Dershowitz first chose to side with him. He made a choice, and so did the vendor. It’s still a free country…for now.

  25. This is because he is a jerk and perhaps a narcissist always seeking media attention and he will continually go back to get it. Thank you Michael Blake, well said.

  26. The article misstated the dispute behind 2023 Supreme Court ruling that upheld a web designer’s rights when it wrote, “Most notably, through a 2023 Supreme Court case that ruled in favor of an Evangelical Christian website designer who refused to create products for anyone who identified as LGBTQIA+.” That is NOT what the case was about. It was not about “refusing service” based on identity, it was about WHICH MESSAGES she could decline to create. Both she and Jack Smith (the Colorado baker) made clear they would willingly serve customers of ALL orientations and backgrounds–as long as they were not required to affirm messages against their convictions. The distinction is important both legally and morally, and the article’s deliberate misrepresentation of it does not serve readers.

  27. Interesting…how come so many people over there on Martha’s Vineyard are bending over their phones commenting on this trivial confrontation? Over here on the South Coast are busy enjoying the glories of our sunny days.

Comments are closed.