Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumThe Government Shouldn't Be Forced to Put "Jerusalem, Israel" in U.S. Passports
April 21, 2014
Menachem Zivotofsky was born in October 2002 to Americans parents living in Israel. That same year, Congress passed the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, which required the U.S. government to put "Jerusalem, Israel" as the place of birth in the passports of Jerusalem-born U.S. citizens, if they requested it. But the State Department refused to enforce the law, in keeping with the governments longstanding neutrality on Jerusalemthat its neither part of Israel nor Palestine.
Over a decade later, the attempt by the Zivotofsky family to get Jerusalem, Israel as his birthplace on his passport, as opposed to simply "Jerusalem," is making its way to the Supreme Court. On Monday, the Supreme Court said that it would hear the case of Zivotofsky v. Kerry, and answer the question of whether the State Department has to enforce the statute and list "Jerusalem, Israel" in Menachem Zivotofsky's passport.
As the case has wound its way through the courts, including an earlier decision at the Supreme Court allowing the case to move forward, it has become a cause celebre amongst right-wing lawyers and some Jewish organizations. Nathan Lewin, an attorney known for representing Jewish causes, took up the case. In one brief, major Jewish organizations including the Anti-Defamation League, Bnai Brith, and AIPAC argued for Zivotofsky's position. Conservative legal luminary Ted Olson represented a group of congressmen who filed a brief in the case. In the lead-up to the 2012 election, right-wing commentators tried to use the case to argue that the State Departments refusal to recognize Jerusalem on the passport represented President Obamas anti-Israel attitude. Now that the case will go before the Supreme Court, we can expect more such haranguing.
However, this case has nothing to do with the actual capital of Israel and everything to do with the constitutional power of the president. Jewish organizations, even those who feel passionately that Jerusalem should be the undivided capital of Israel, ought to steer clear of the case. Even Lewin, Zivotofsky's lawyer, conceded that this case is much more limited in a Jewish context and much broader in the separation of powers context.
in full: http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117468/zivotofsky-v-kerry-jerusalem-passport-case-heads-supreme-court
H.R. 1646 (107th): Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2003
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/107/hr1646/text
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)do not recognise Jerusalem as being the capitol of Israel.
No country has sovereignty over Jerusalem.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)first place? We are expected to believe they were not aware of the consequences?
Who was this bill to benefit?
The actions that took place in 2003 regarding this bill is another example of why the US
is not considered an honest broker on this conflict..I do hope more work will be done
by journalists on the paper trail of this policy.