Pod Save America Hosts Call on Democrats to Cut All Israel Military Aid, No Longer Accept AIPAC Funding
Jews, Israelis Targeted in Austria Amid Surge in Antisemitic Incidents; Local Jewish Community Calls for Action
‘All of Our Strength’: Over 1,000 Pro-Israel Activists Gather in DC for Solidarity Conference
‘Devastated’: Wesley LePatner, Killed in Manhattan Mass Shooting, Was a Jewish Communal, Philanthropic Leader
Sen. Angus King Vows to No Longer Vote for Israel Military Aid Until Gaza Conditions Improve
Europe Won’t Pressure Israel to ‘Commit Suicide’ Amid Gaza Backlash, Palestinian State Push, Says Israeli FM
Israel’s National Soccer Coach Attacked in Athens Before Soccer Fans Chant ‘F–K Israel, Free Palestine’ at Match
New York Judge Sentences Neo-Nazi to 5 Years for Livestreaming Bomb Threats Against Jewish Hospitals
US Pressures Lebanon to Issue Cabinet Decision to Disarm Hezbollah Before Talks Continue
UK Plans to Recognize Palestinian State in September Unless Israel Meets Conditions, Starmer Says
Federal Courts Receive Green Light to decide on ‘Jerusalem, Israel’ Passport Issue
Error: Contact form not found.
by JNS.org
A U.S. passport. Credit: PD.
An 8-1 U.S. Supreme Court judgment Monday stipulated that federal courts can determine the constitutionality of Jerusalem-born Americans listing “Israel” as their birthplace on U.S. passports, overturning a lower court ruling that precluded the judicial branch’s control over such decisions.
After the State Department refused to issue Jerusalem-born Menachem Zivotofsky a passport stating he is from Israel, citing a 2002 U.S. law, Zivotofsky’s parents sued the government. Zivotofsky’s passport lists only “Jerusalem” as his birthplace.
Federal courts “are fully capable of determining” whether the 2002 law “may be given effect, or instead must be struck down in light of authority conferred on the executive by the [U.S.] Constitution,” said Chief Justice John Roberts in the Supreme Court’s majority opinion Monday.
The Supreme Court, however, did not make a final decision on 2002 law’s actual constitutionality, instead sending the case back down to lower courts for rehearing on that matter.
