The Department of Justice (DOJ) says it has opened an investigation into a New York City coffee shop after it blasted Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., in a social media post, saying it should not have served him, and he should never come back due to his support of Israel. 

Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon said the DOJ has opened an investigation into the Poetica Coffee Shop in Brooklyn.

Dhillon says the department is aware of the “denial of service taunts” directed at Goldman and says federal law prohibits public accommodations, including coffee shops, from discriminating against patrons based on race, religion, or national origin. Dhillon says the alleged denial of service could violate federal anti-discrimination law and says enforcement action is possible.

In a now-deleted Facebook post, Poetica Coffee said it issued a refund to Goldman after learning that he had stopped by the location with his young daughter. The shop added that it would have simply turned Goldman away if staff had recognized him at the time.

SMOOTHIE KING FIRES EMPLOYEES WHO REFUSED TO SERVE CUSTOMERS OVER TRUMP SWEATSHIRT

“Hey Congressman Dan Goldman, we see that you stopped by our shop today for a coffee. Do you see how it doesn’t taste like genocide juice? Or are you still having a hard time telling the difference?” the post stated, referring to Goldman’s support for Israel and accusations that the Jewish state has committed genocide against Palestinians during the war in Gaza.

“See, here at Poetica, we don’t serve racists, fascists, homophobes, genocide enablers, or anyone in between,” the post continued. “Too bad we didn’t recognize you right away, or we would have turned you away. We issued you a refund—we don’t need your money (it’s probably coming from AIPAC anyways). Enjoy your loss on Tuesday. Don’t ever come to Poetica.”

In a statement on social media, Goldman said he was disappointed by the shop’s remarks.

“I’m sorry to see this post,” he said. “The barista could not have been nicer to my 7-year-old daughter and me—allowing her to use the bathroom even though we had not purchased anything. I made sure to buy a coffee in return for her kindness. I hope you at least make sure she gets the tip that she deserved.”

In response, the shop said it was the barista’s idea to refund Goldman’s purchase. The poster added that they will be voting against Goldman, who faces a Democratic primary challenge from former city Comptroller Brad Lander.

DEMOCRATIC REP FEARS PARTY TURNING ANTISEMITIC PROTESTERS INTO ‘MARTYRS’ IN BATTLE AGAINST TRUMP DEPORTATIONS

Fox News Digital has reached out to Goldman and the coffee shop, as well as the offices of New York State Attorney General Letitia James and Mayor Zohran Mamdani, and the city’s Department of Consumer and Worker Protection.

“No comment. We stand against genocide,” a staffer told the New York Post.

The shop’s social media post was quickly criticized online.

Mark Treyger, the CEO of the Jewish Community Relations Council of New York, said the incident warrants a review under city and state human rights laws.

MAMDANI IN THE HOT SEAT AFTER FIRST VETO DERAILS BIPARTISAN EFFORT TO COMBAT ANTISEMITISM: ‘DISAPPOINTED’

“Turning a cup of coffee into a Jewish identity litmus test is an affront to the law, our values, and every New Yorker who rejects discrimination,” he wrote on X. “If an identifiable Jewish customer walks into a coffee shop wearing a kippah or Magen David, are they expected to first disclose their views on Middle East policy before being served?”

The incident appears to contradict the opening statement on Poetica Coffee’s website by its owner, Parviz Mukhamadkulov, an Uzbek immigrant who opened his first location in 2020.

“In practice, it looks like a café where the door doesn’t close on anyone, where tea gets poured before anyone asks who you are,” the website states. “The guest is sacred because the act of welcoming is how a community keeps itself intact.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The shop also claims on its site that “whoever walks through the door is treated with unconditional dignity.”

“Not as a customer. Not as a transaction. As someone who arrived and deserves to be welcomed,” the site reads.

Walt Disney Co. is rallying public support for ABC as it faces an early Federal Communications Commission review of its TV station licenses and the guest booking policy of its daytime talk show “The View.”

ABC began running spots Monday asking viewers to comment on the FCC’s recent actions that Disney sees as an effort to stifle speech seen as critical of President Trump. The president has repeatedly threatened to pull broadcast licenses of TV outlets that feature journalists and hosts he dislikes.

In April, the FCC called for an early review of the licenses for Disney’s eight broadcast TV stations, a day after Trump demanded that ABC fire late-night host Jimmy Kimmel over a joke about First Lady Melania Trump. FCC Chair Brendan Carr has repeatedly threatened to use the levers of power he has to punish TV and radio stations that irritate Trump.

The licenses for the TV stations, including KABC in Los Angeles, were originally scheduled for renewal between 2028 and 2031. Calling for an early review is highly unusual, but the agency said it’s related to an inquiry into Disney’s diversity, equity and inclusion policies and whether they violated federal anti-discrimination rules.

The FCC has not declined to renew a TV license since the early 1980s. With court challenges, such a process can take years to enact.

Carr also has taken aim at ABC’s daytime talk show “The View.” He publicly questioned whether the program should have the status of news programs, which are exempt from having to give equal time to the opponents of political candidates who appear as guests.

“The View” was granted an exemption from the rarely enforced rule in 2002. ABC’s Houston station KTRK filed a petition with the FCC in May asking for a declaration that the program can maintain that status.

“The Commission’s actions threaten to upend decades of settled law and practice and chill critical protected speech, both with respect to The View and more broadly,” KTRK-TV said in the filing.

ABC has maintained that “The View” books politicians based on newsworthiness and not partisanship. The program featured Vice President JD Vance last week, where he received a cordial welcome.

ABC is airing spots warning viewers that the FCC wants to control what viewers see on “The View.” The message opens with the voice of legendary broadcaster Barbara Walters giving her introduction to the program she founded — “I had this idea for a show — different women, with different points of view.”

Walters is followed by an announcer who says, “‘The View’ has welcomed your favorite guests and covered the issues you care about for nearly 30 years. Now the FCC wants to control who is allowed to appear on the show.”

The spot says “the FCC is questioning our support to the community.” A QR code shows up on the screen that takes viewers directly to the FCC’s electronic comment filing system where they can submit their comments, which is regularly part of the agency’s review process.

Disney also is airing spots calling for support of its local TV stations, including L.A.’s KABC. The spots are customized for each ABC station market, emphasizing a commitment to local news coverage.

Disney did not comment on the campaign. But a network insider not authorized to speak publicly about it said “ABC believes it is important for the public to know what is happening, what’s at stake, and how to engage directly in the process if they want to make their voices heard.”

Disney’s aggressive defense of its stations and “The View” is a stark contrast to its decision to settle a lawsuit filed by Trump over inaccurate statements ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos made about a sexual assault civil suit that the president lost in court.

ABC agreed to pay Trump $15 million in December 2024 to end the legal fight — sparking an outcry among free speech advocates, who believed the network would have won the case.

ABC also caved in September, when Kimmel’s program was briefly pulled from the air after two major TV station groups refused to air it following the host’s comments about the killing of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk.

Disney received major blowback from the Hollywood community, where Kimmel is extremely popular. Data also show that the company experienced cancellations of its Hulu and Disney+ streaming services in protest of the move.

Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas on Monday dissented from the Supreme Court’s refusal to take up a case that they said forces police officers to create a separate set of rules for racial minorities.

“It is dangerous to allow an individual to be treated differently based on statistics, studies, or expert testimony that purports to show that members of the racial or ethnic group to which he belongs are more likely to act in a certain way than are members of other groups,” Alito wrote on behalf of himself and Thomas. “Here, the special treatment helped the individual; in other situations it will not.”

The case, U.S. v. Donte J. Carter, involved a Black man whose firearm and theft convictions were vacated after the D.C. Court of Appeals held that police seized him before they had reasonable suspicion. Officers later recovered a .40-caliber pistol from Carter’s pants and the government said the gun had been stolen from an FBI agent’s vehicle.

According to the D.C. court, “black Americans like [Carter] are ‘especially distrustful of law enforcement’” and therefore “‘less likely’ than other people ‘to terminate a police encounter’ due to skepticism that any attempt to exercise their constitutional rights will be respected.” 

SUPREME COURT REJECTS BOSTON PARENTS’ APPEAL CLAIMING RACIAL BIAS IN AN ADMISSIONS POLICY

The D.C. court reasoned that Carter’s race was relevant to whether a reasonable person in his position would have felt free to end the police encounter. It ruled that the encounter effectively became a seizure, and that such an action was unlawful because police officers hadn’t established reasonable suspicion before subjecting him to it.

Alito and Thomas argued that the D.C. ruling effectively forces law enforcement to treat people differently based on their race, something precedent established by the Supreme Court prohibits.

“Under the test, officers will need to quickly assess a person’s race, and if officers and courts must craft special rules for black persons, what about dark-skinned Latinos, other Latinos, and members of other minority groups?” Alito continued. “We have said that our ’Constitution is color-blind.’ It ‘almost never’ allows government actors to treat persons differently based on their race.”

SUPREME COURT RULES ON KEY VOTING RIGHTS ACT RULE AS REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS WAGE REDISTRICTING WAR

To support his claims, Alito cited Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and Louisiana v. Callais and Shaw v. Reno. 

“And we have rejected the proposition that the Constitution permits an individual to be treated differently based on a ‘perception that members of the same racial group — regardless of their age, education, economic status, or the community in which they live — think alike,’” Alito wrote, citing Shaw v. Reno.

This appears to be a direct challenge to the D.C. Court of Appeals, which lawyers representing the United States argued forced police officers to assume that all black people have the same attitudes toward police officers and would therefore feel uncomfortable exercising constitutional rights in their presence.

TRUMP’S FIRING POWER FACES TWIN SUPREME COURT TESTS, BUT ONE AGENCY MAY GET SPECIAL TREATMENT

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Carter, the individual Alito noted was helped by the case, initially lied to officers by answering in the negative when approached and asked if he was carrying a weapon.

The police then asked Carter to pull his pants up, at which point they noticed an L-shaped bulge which was later identified as a .40-caliber pistol that had been stolen from a federal agent’s vehicle.