However, Rava raised a dilemma: When the conflict is between oil for a Hanukkah lamp or wine for kiddush of Shabbat day, what is the ruling in that case? Does kiddush of Shabbat day take priority because it is frequent? Or, perhaps the Hanukkah lamp takes precedence due to publicity of the miracle? After he raised the dilemma, he then resolved it on his own and he ruled that, in that case, the Hanukkah lamp takes precedence due to publicity of the miracle.
The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a solution to this dilemma from that which Rava said: One who was holding a burning Hanukkah lamp in his hand and standing, he did nothing in terms of fulfilling the mitzva. {Why is this so?} One who sees it will say that he is not holding the lamp in order to fulfill the mitzva, but he is holding it for his own needs. Since holding the lamp can mislead onlookers, he does not fulfill the mitzva in that manner.
דאי לא אדליק מדליק - אבל מכאן ואילך עבר הזמן אומר הר"י פורת דיש ליזהר ולהדליק בלילה מיד שלא יאחר יותר מדאי ומ"מ אם איחר ידליק מספק ... ולר"י נראה דעתה אין לחוש מתי ידליק דאנו אין לנו היכרא אלא לבני הבית שהרי מדליקין מבפנים:
If one did not light at sunset, he/she may light candles until traffic ceases from the marketplace: But from that point onwards, the time has passed, and you therefore need to be careful to light as soon as it turns to night so that you don't wait too long. However if you are later than this you should still light, as it appears to the Ri that it doesn't matter what time you light since we are only lighting for the people in the house, and we leave our lights inside.
Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, leader of Chabad-Lubavitch movement, 1986
Now, in a land that vigorously protects the right of every man to practice his religion freely, Jews are once again lighting menorahs in public to proclaim the universal message of religious freedom. These public lightings confirm the basic beliefs of America's first settlers, themselves victims of religious persecution. Indeed, freedom to practice religion became inscribed in the laws of the land: “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” This First Amendment to the Constitution guarantees individuals the right to practice their religion without fear, and prevents the government from favoring any particular faith.
County of Allegheny v. American Civil Liberties Union, Greater Pittsburgh Chapter, U.S. Supreme Court Decision (1989)
JUSTICE BLACKMUN concluded in Part VI that the menorah display does not have the prohibited effect of endorsing religion, given its "particular physical setting." Its combined display with a Christmas tree and a sign saluting liberty does not impermissibly endorse both the Christian and Jewish faiths, but simply recognizes that both Christmas and Chanukah are part of the same winter holiday season, which has attained a secular status in our society. The widely accepted view of the Christmas tree as the preeminent secular symbol of the Christmas season emphasizes this point. The tree, moreover, by virtue of its size and central position in the display, is clearly the predominant element, and the placement of the menorah beside it is readily understood as simply a recognition that Christmas is not the only traditional way of celebrating the season. The absence of a more secular alternative to the menorah negates the inference of endorsement. Similarly, the presence of the mayor's sign confirms that, in the particular context, the government's association with a religious symbol does not represent sponsorship of religious beliefs, but simply a recognition of cultural diversity. Given all these considerations, it is not sufficiently likely that a reasonable observer would view the combined display as an endorsement or disapproval of his individual religious choices
Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, Iggerot Moshe Orach Chayim
In our day the lighting of the Hanukkah lamp outside is impossible
Hershel Lutch and Mike Moskowitz, “Placement of the Chanukah Menorah: History, Discussion, and Analysis,” 2005
In recent years, increasing numbers of American Jews have begun to light their menorahs outside, thereby parting with the centuries-old custom of lighting the menorah indoors.
In surveying the applicability of the Talmudic mandate to light outdoors, the authors raise the following halachic concerns: danger during times of religious persecution (bish’at hasakana), the established custom of indoor lightings (status of minhag yisroel) even in times of tranquility, and inclement Diaspora weather. Even in the cases where the halacha would allow for outdoor lightings in the Diaspora, the authors identify two rather tangential concerns: outdoor lightings may transgress the concept of “lo titgodidu,” causing dissention within a Jewish community where the local practice is to light indoors and “mechzei k’yahara,” giving the appearance of excessive piety. Because the Gemorah opines that the menorah should be lit outside except in times of danger and because the custom evolved into lighting exclusively indoors, the rejuvenation of the outdoor menorah signaled a radical revision of the attitude towards the Diaspora.