Maariv could make the case that the note isn't part of the Western Wall itself, so the student who took it wasn't desecrating a holy place. The newspaper's lawyers might further argue that a public figure like Obama cannot have reasonably expected privacy at the wall, since he knew it was a public area, and that there was a chance his note would be read and disseminated. (A spokesman for Maariv says that the Obama campaign submitted the note to the newspaper, in which case the senator would indeed have forfeited all legal protection to privacy.)
Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Friday, August 01, 2008
Was Israeli Law Broken When Obama's Note Was Taken From Western Wall?
An article in yesterday's Slate magazine analyzes whether any laws were broken when a seminary student in Israel took Barack Obama's prayer note from the Western Wall and turned it over to Maariv, an Israeli newspaper. (See prior posting.) The writer concludes that the action violated several aspects of Talmudic law. On the civil law side, one lawyer has called for an investigation of whether the action violated laws protecting sacred sites and guaranteeing personal privacy. Slate comments: