Court: Passport law on Jerusalem unconstitutional

Associated Press ^ | Jul 23, 2013 3:21 PM EDT | Frederic J. Frommer

[Olog-hai]

A federal appeals court Tuesday declared unconstitutional a law allowing Americans born in Jerusalem to list Israel as their birthplace on their U.S. passports, the latest ruling in a case that stretches back a decade. …

The case was brought by parents of an American boy named Menachem Zivotofsky, who was born in a Jerusalem hospital soon after the law was passed. The parents wanted to list Israel as his birthplace, but the U.S. has refused to recognize any nation's sovereignty over Jerusalem since Israel’s creation in 1948—so the boy’s U.S. passport only says “Jerusalem” as his birthplace.

The Bush administration said Congress may not tell the president what to do regarding this aspect of foreign relations, and the Obama administration has taken the same position. Longstanding U.S. foreign policy that says the status of Jerusalem should be resolved in negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. …

[reg45]

Jerusalem is the capitol of Israel and neither oil stooges nor camel humpers have any say otherwise.

[muir_redwoods]

Jerusalem has been the Capitol of Israel longer than Cairo has been the Capitol of Egypt.

[Gay State Conservative]

So,given that no country’s claim to sovereignty over Jerusalem is recognized,when a US citizen is born there his/her passport reads “place of birth: someplace”

[Gay State Conservative]

Barry Sorrento...place of birth: Mombasa

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

This has been a long time coming. Israel either owns its territory or it does not.

For this reason, it should nationalize not just Jerusalem, but all non-Jewish religious sites in Israel. After doing so, it can be very lenient with leasing; but it will kill dead any idea that foreign powers or religions own a “piece” of Israel, other than an embassy.

Plus it will give Israel the ability to demand good behavior from those given permission to lease religious sites. If the Wahhabis who run the al-Asqa mosque make trouble, they can “lose their lease”, and the mosque would be turned over to the Sufi sect, for example.

This is pretty much how the Saudis keep their Wahhabis in line as well, so it is not a novel idea.

[jeffc]

Eh, I still don't see what part of the Constitution this is against, but if the law also prevents muzzies from getting passports that say "Birthplace: Jerusalem, Palestine (or whatever)", I guess I can live with it.

BUT, I just do not like the idea of lower courts (and I consider the Appeals Court lower) declaring laws unconstitutional. I believe that should be reserved strictly for SCOTUS. Just my opinion.

[Olog-hai]

No, not the same thing at all. Unless you believe in a non-Israeli Jerusalem? It actually facilitates the possibility of Arab Muslims progressing to having a passport listing “Jerusalem, Palestine” as birthplace.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Eh, I still don't see what part of the Constitution this is against,

The Constitution gives the President the sole power to "receive Ambassadors" (Art. II, section 3), which has always been understood to mean that the President is the only one who gets to decide what foreign countries we give diplomatic recognition to. Since 1948, it has been the unbroken policy of every U.S. Administration to recognize Israel, but not to recognize Israel's (or anyone else's) claim to Jerusalem.

The reason is that the United Nations Resolution in 1947 that called for the partition of British Palestine into a Jewish and an Arab state called for Jerusalem to be an "international" city, owned by no country and administered by the U.N. Neither Israel (which seized West Jerusalem in the 1948 war, and the rest of it in 1967), nor Jordan (which seized East Jerusalem in 1948 and lost it in 1967), ever accepted this condition, but President Truman used it as a basis to decline to accept Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem, and no President has ever changed that policy. That's why the U.S. Embassy has always been in Tel Aviv, not Jerusalem.

[Olog-hai]

Now we know why Truman started a slide into failure after ending WWII.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Now we know why Truman started a slide into failure after ending WWII.

To give credit where credit is due, Truman's State Department was fiercely against recognizing the State of Israel at all. Truman overrode nearly all of his advisers in doing so. When he didn't recognize Israel as its capital, he was (a) following a year-old U.N. resolution, and (b) acting at a time when it was still unclear what borders the State of Israel would ultimately wind up with. (The Israelis themselves started with a provisional government based in Tel Aviv.) The fault lies more with subsequent administrations which never acknowledged Jerusalem as Israel's capital even after the armistice divided Jerusalem between Israel and Jordan.