Washington – Supreme Court to Decide Where Jewish Boy Was Born on Passport Hearing

    20

    Washington – The Supreme Court is hearing arguments in a Jerusalem-born boy’s challenge to State Department policy that prevents him from having his passport show he was born in Israel.

    Join our WhatsApp group

    Subscribe to our Daily Roundup Email


    Middle Eastern politics and the battle between Congress and the president over foreign policy are at play in the case being argued at the high court Monday.

    The Obama administration, like its Republican and Democratic predecessors, says it doesn’t want to stir up anger in the Arab world by appearing to take a position on the ultimate fate of Jerusalem. Longstanding U.S. policy says the status of the city that is important to Jews, Muslims and Christians should be resolved in negotiations.

    But lawyers for 9-year-old Menachem Zivotofsky argue that the foreign policy concerns are trivial. Thirty-nine lawmakers from both parties are siding with the boy and his parents, defending a provision in a 2002 law that allows Israel to be listed as the birthplace for Americans born in Jerusalem.

    President George W. Bush signed the much larger law, but said the provision on Jerusalem interfered with his power over foreign affairs, including the authority to recognize foreign states. Bush issued a signing statement at the time in which he said that “U.S. policy regarding Jerusalem has not changed.”

    Israel has proclaimed the once-divided city as its capital; the U.S. and most nations do not recognize Jerusalem as the capital.

    Had Menachem been born in Tel Aviv, the State Department would have issued a passport listing his place of birth as Israel. The regular practice for recording the birth of a U.S. citizen abroad is to list the country where it occurred.

    But the department’s guide tells consular officials, “For a person born in Jerusalem, write Jerusalem as the place of birth in the passport.”

    In late 2002, Naomi Zivotofsky, Menachem’s mother, showed up at the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv to get her baby a U.S. passport, one that listed Israel as his birthplace. After State Department officials refused her request, the family sued.

    The Zivotofskys and their supporters at the Supreme Court point out that other federal agencies, including the Defense and Justice Departments, refer in official documents to “Jerusalem, Israel.” The legal briefs also note that the hospital where Menachem was born is in west Jerusalem, over which there is no dispute about Israeli sovereignty, except by parties that oppose the nation’s existence at all.

    The family also says that the State Department has made an exception for U.S citizens born in Taiwan. Their passports may list their place of birth as Taiwan, rather than China.

    Federal courts have so far said they have no authority to consider the matter, which they have labeled a political dispute that is best resolved by the other two branches of government without court involvement.

    The Supreme Court has asked for argument on that issue, as well as on the substance of the family’s plea that the law regarding passports be enforced.


    Listen to the VINnews podcast on:

    iTunes | Spotify | Google Podcasts | Stitcher | Podbean | Amazon

    Follow VINnews for Breaking News Updates


    Connect with VINnews

    Join our WhatsApp group


    20 Comments
    Most Voted
    Newest Oldest
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments
    DRE53
    DRE53
    12 years ago

    This only brings sinyas yisroel. Why should our court system be busy deciding on such shtusim. It’s never good for jews to be in the headlines and certainly not a case like this one.

    Mikerose
    Mikerose
    12 years ago

    Way too complicated for me -can any1 explain in simple english

    12 years ago

    Nat Lewin is arguing this case while he is also trying to get these same judges to overturn the 8th Circuit decision to deny a new trial for SMR.

    jkier74
    jkier74
    12 years ago

    The people so far do not understand the issue. The law of the land that no president or congress cannot ignore, which was signed by President Bush requires that it state Jerusalem, Israel, if so desired by the parents. In spite of this law, the political establishment has chosen to ignore our laws and refuse to state Israel on the birth certificate. This is patently wrong. No one is above the law and even for political reasons, they can’t violate US laws. This is the issue that the Supreme Court will be deciding.

    allmark
    allmark
    12 years ago

    This is a perfectly appropriate issue for the Supreme Court to rule on and has nothing to do with forcing the State Department to make any foreign policy decision.

    This is a dispute between the Executive branch and Congress. Congress passed a law requiring the State Department to add “Israel” to a passport if desired. The State Department has refused. Since the Executive and Legislative branches are equal according, only the Supreme court can decide which side prevails. This is exactly why the Court was created.

    Anon Ibid Opcit
    Anon Ibid Opcit
    12 years ago

    No surprise here. The Roberts Court is notable for ignoring precedent in more of its cases than any previous Court. It is the most consistently activist in history.

    Butterfly
    Butterfly
    12 years ago

    Maybe they should take a trip there. Now that would be an eye-opener!!

    sandymoos
    sandymoos
    12 years ago

    Everyone knows that Jerusalem is in ISRAEL.