Replies

If I was a U.S. citizen born in East Berlin in the 1950s, I wonder how the U.S. State Department would list my place of birth if I went and got a passport for the first time today?

The section of the law the petitioner and SCOTUS found unconstitutional stated the State Department will print Jerusalem, Israel as the place of birth for a US citizen if the US citizen requested it. Without a request from the US citizen, the State Department printed the place of birth as Jerusalem. It's an attack on an individual's liberty and free speech.

SEC. 214. UNITED STATES POLICY WITH RESPECT TO JERUSALEM AS THE CAPITAL OF ISRAEL.

(d) Record of Place of Birth as Israel for Passport Purposes.--For purposes of the registration of birth, certification of nationality, or issuance of a passport of a United States citizen born in the city of Jerusalem, the Secretary shall, upon the request of the citizen or the citizen's legal guardian, record the place of birth as Israel.

How can this be an attack on "free speech" if there are only two options given?

This might be the ultimate "be careful what you wish for" scenario if you really want to make an argument based on free speech. This would not be a good outcome, for an obvious reason: Under that scenario, the U.S. State Department would have no authority to refuse a request when someone comes forward and demands that they have "Jerusalem, Palestine" listed on their passport.