Justices hear case of American born in Jerusalem

[Scurrilous]

<snip>

"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.

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 boy, Menachem Zivotofsky, and his parents, Naomi and Ari, flew in from Israel to attend Monday's Supreme Court arguments.

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 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."

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/11/07/2490527/justices-hear-case-of-american.html#ixzz1d2aDKJjO

[ProgressiveProfessor]

1. Part of Jerusalem are recognized as part of Israel by everyone but the most extreme

This is a non-issue and the executive branch should comply with the law.

[Violet_Crumble]

5. Why should the executive comply with everything Congress passes?

Isn't there something built into the US system where the executive have every right to do exactly what yr objecting to? According to the article, it does:

'But Solicitor General Donald Verrilli Jr., arguing for the administration, said the Constitution gives the president exclusive authority in this area because it would hurt U.S. interests on the world stage if the country spoke with more than one voice.'

It's nothing more than a political stunt by parents who should be ashamed of themselves for using their child as a tool to peddle their political agenda...

[Scurrilous]

2. Justices wary of bid by American born in Jerusalem

<snip>

"he Supreme Court on Monday waded warily into Middle Eastern politics and a dispute between Congress and the president in the case of a 9-year-old Jerusalem-born American who wants his passport to say he was born in Israel.

The justices appeared unlikely to rule for Menachem Zivotofsky, whose family sued the government after State Department officials refused to list Israel as his place of birth in his American passport."

<snip>

"The justices seemed reluctant to question the administration's position that the law was an improper congressional attempt to speak for the country on foreign policy.

Justice Elena Kagan said the congressional action read more like a foreign policy statement than a passport law.

"It's a passport statute that seems to have nothing to do with immigration functions that passport statutes usually serve," Kagan said.

Chief Justice John Roberts said that it seemed that the family was asking the court to substitute its foreign policy judgment for the president's, as if to say "we know foreign policy better; we don't think it's going to be a big deal."

http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/justices-wary-of-bid-1219186.html

[azurnoir]

3. well the birth certficate could read

West Jerusalem Israel where little Menachem was born and seeing as how West Jerusalem will remain a part of Israel as it always has been there should be no problem

[Donald Ian Rankin]

4. Would someone from East Jerusalem be allowed a passport reading "Jerusalem, Palestine"?

Zivotofsky was born in the part of Jerusalem that is in Israel, so I can understand his grievance, but for the US to commit itself to the sovereignty of one half of Jerusalem but not the other might well do more harm than good.

[shira]

6. So much for the green line being an internationally recognized border.

And why is this all so powerful Israel Lobby so impotent and incompetent that it can't even convince its "poodle" the USA that W.Jerusalem is a legitimate part of Israel?

:shrug: