Wednesday, May 4, 2011

Supreme Court to Hear Jerusalem Birth Certificate Case


Is it to “politically sensitive” to record any other city in the world?  Is it too politically sensitive to record London, or Paris, or Tokyo, or Belfast?  


So, why is it too “politically sensitive” to acknowledge that Jerusalem is in Israel, or that any other city is in Israel?  

Why is it that the United States has diplomatic relations with Israel, but won’t recognize it on a birth certificate?  Why does the State Department have the audacity to deny what is fact?

Isn’t the State Department, by refusing to mention a city of birth for US citizens born in Israel, saying that Israel isn’t actually a nation?  Aren’t they denying the sovereignty of Israel?

I am completely disgusted with the United States State Department and their cowardly stance on Israel.

G-d Bless the Zivotofsky family.  May they succeed and bring the US to its senses!



US Supreme Court to Hear Case If Jerusalem Birth Can be Recorded
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear an appeal by an American couple that their eight-year old son Menachem’s birthplace be recorded as Jerusalem,  Israel. The court only accepts approximately 100 cases a year.

Unlike the judicial system in Israel, the American Supreme Court does not act as a court of appeal except in cases that involve a question of whether the law has been interpreted properly.

The State Department has refused a request by Ari and Naomi Sideman Zivotofsky, whose appeal was rejected by a federal court on the grounds that their complaint involved a “political question" that is not to be decided judicially.

Congress passed a law in 2002, one month before Menachem was born, ordering the State Department to record Jerusalem, Israel on birth certificates if such a request is made. The State Department has stood by its claim that the issue is a matter of policy as such, is under the jurisdiction of  the Executive Branch.

The federal court ruled, "That the United States expresses no official view on the thorny issue of whether Jerusalem is part of Israel has been  a central and calibrated feature of every president's foreign policy since Harry S. Truman.

"Because the judiciary has no authority to order the Executive Branch to change the nation's foreign policy in this matter, this case is unquestionably under the political question doctrine."

The Supreme Court judges told the Zivotofskys and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to reply whether the Foreign Relations Authorization Act “impermissibly infringes upon the President's power to  recognize foreign sovereigns."

The United States has maintained a policy of listing only the country “Israel” and not the city, no matter which one, as a birthplace for Americans. The case of Jerusalem is particularly sensitive. After the Six-Day War in 1967, the United States and all other countries pulled their embassies out of the city in order not to indicate to Arabs a recognition of Israeli sovereignty.

1 comment:

  1. The US "maintaining a policy" is an appalling stance for the US & displays a disgusting cowardice.
    We need to stand up for our allies.
    No, I am not a Jew nor was I born in Israel. I wish I were both. They are God's chosen.
    Renny, US citizen & USN Vietnam vet


Please do not use comments to personally attack other posters.