Court Grants Injunction to Jewish Students at UCLA Impeded by Gaza Protests

In Frankel v. Regents of the University of California, (CD CA, Aug. 13, 2024), a California federal district court issued a preliminary injunction in a suit brought by Jewish students at UCLA who were blocked from accessing portions of the campus by pro-Palestinian encampments protesting Israel's retaliation in Gaza. The court said in part:

In the year 2024, in the United States of America, in the State of California, in the City of Los Angeles, Jewish students were excluded from portions of the UCLA campus because they refused to denounce their faith. This fact is so unimaginable and so abhorrent to our constitutional guarantee of religious freedom that it bears repeating, Jewish students were excluded from portions of the UCLA campus because they refused to denounce their faith. UCLA does not dispute this. Instead, UCLA claims that it has no responsibility to protect the religious freedom of its Jewish students because the exclusion was engineered by third-party protesters. But under constitutional principles, UCLA may not allow services to some students when UCLA knows that other students are excluded on religious grounds, regardless of who engineered the exclusion....

Under the Court’s injunction, UCLA retains flexibility to administer the university. Specifically, the injunction does not mandate any specific policies and procedures UCLA must put in place, nor does it dictate any specific acts UCLA must take in response to campus protests. Rather, the injunction requires only that, if any part of UCLA’s ordinarily available programs, activities, and campus areas become unavailable to certain Jewish students, UCLA must stop providing those ordinarily available programs, activities, and campus areas to any students. How best to make any unavailable programs, activities, and campus areas available again is left to UCLA’s discretion.

Becket issued a press release announcing the decision.

House Brands Palestinian Slogan as Antisemitic

Yesterday the U.S. House of Representatives by a vote of 377-44 adopted House Resolution 883 (full text) stating that the slogan, "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free'" is antisemitic. After 29 "Whereas" clauses, the Resolution reads:

That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that—

(1) the slogan, “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”, is outrightly antisemitic and must be strongly condemned; 

(2) this slogan is divisive and does a disservice to Israelis, Palestinians, and all those in the region who seek peace;

(3) this slogan rejects calls for peace, stability, and safety in the region;

(4) this slogan perpetuates hatred against the State of Israel and the Jewish people; and

(5) anyone who calls for the eradication of Israel and the Jewish people are antisemitic and must always be condemned.

D.C.Circuit: Conspiracy Suit Against U.S. Supporters of Israeli Settlers Is Not "Political Question"

In an important decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has held that a suit against high profile Americans by 18 Palestinians and a Palestinian village council over defendants' support for the Jewish settler movement in the West Bank and Gaza may move forward. In Al-Timimi v. Adelson, (DC Cir., Feb. 19, 2019), the court summarized its holding:

The plaintiffs, both Palestinian nationals and Palestinian Americans, claim the defendants, pro-Israeli American individuals and entities, are conspiring to expel all non-Jews from territory whose sovereignty is in dispute. They sued in federal district court, pressing four claims: (1) civil conspiracy, (2) genocide and other war crimes, (3) aiding and abetting genocide and other war crimes and (4) trespass. Concluding that all four claims raise nonjusticiable political questions, the district court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We now reverse....

The suit claims that defendants-- 8 high net-worth individuals (including Sheldon Adelson and John Hagee), 13 tax exempt organizations (including the Jewish Naional Fund), 2 banks, 8 construction and support firms and former U.S. National Security Advisor Elliott Abrams conspired to funnel millions of dollars to Israeli settlements which funded "a militia of Israeli settlers [trained] to kill Palestinians and confiscate their property."

In a 21-page opinion, the court concluded:

[T]he plaintiffs’ claims present only one jurisdiction-stripping political question: who has sovereignty over the disputed territory. But a claim whose resolution also includes resolution of a political question can be dismissed on that basis only if the political question is “inextricable.” ... We believe this political question is extricable."

Reuters reports on the decision.

Certiorari Denied In Suit Against Palestinian Authority for Shooting of Jewish Worshipers In West Bank

The U.S. Supreme Court today denied review in Livnat v. Palestinian Authority, (Docket No. 17-508, certiorari denied 10/15/2018). (Order List). In the case the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals held (full text of decision) that the the 5th Amendment's due process clause precludes U.S. courts from asserting jurisdiction in a suit by the families of Jewish worshipers who were shot in the West Bank territories of Israel by Palestinian Authority armed guards at the holy site of Joseph’s Tomb.

No Ramadan Divorces In Palestinian Territories

According to a report today from Al Jazeera, Mahmud Habash, the chief judge of Palestinian Islamic courts in the West Bank and Gaza, has ordered judges to grant no divorces during Ramadan.  Only religious courts have jurisdiction over divorces in the Palestinian Authority.  Habash said that based on experience from previous years, some litigants make "quick and ill-considered decisions" after they have not eaten or smoked.

Suit In Israeli Court Charges Administration of Temple Mount Violates Religious Discrimination Ban

Arutz Sheva and JNS reported yesterday on an interesting lawsuit filed this week in Israel in Jerusalem's District Court.  Jewish activist and attorney Baruch Ben-Yosef has sued the Palestinian Authority, Jordan and the Islamic Movement group in Israel, essentially claiming that they are violating Israel's equivalent of a public accommodation law by limiting Jewish access to the Temple Mount.

The suit alleges violation of an Israeli law enacted in 2000 that prohibits operators of public sites from barring admission on the basis of religion, race, nationality, gender or political affiliation. The suit charges defendants with discriminatory practices against Jews on the Temple Mount. Jewish access is limited to certain times, and Jewish prayer on the Mount is banned. The suit charges that inciting of violence on the Temple Mount is aimed at decreasing Jewish visitors.  The suit also challenges Jordan's claim of sovereignty over the Temple Mount in light of Israel's control over the site taken in the 1967 Six Day War. The Temple Mount is currently administered by the  Islamic Waqf that is controlled by Jordan.  However security is handled by Israeli police.

Bilateral Commission of Holy See and State of Palestine Draft Comprehensive Agreement

In 2000, the Vatican reached a preliminary agreement (full text) with the Palestinian Liberation Organization on freedom of religion and the status of Christian holy places.  Yesterday the Bilateral Commission of the Holy See and the State of Palestine issued a joint statement (full text) saying that the text of a Comprehensive Agreement has now been concluded and it will be submitted to the respective authorities for approval before a date for signing in the near future is set.  While the general news media are emphasizing that the agreement's references to the "state of Palestine" are seen as lending weight to Palestinian efforts for recognition as a sovereign nation (New York Times),  different emphasis was displayed in coverage by Catholic News Agency which says that the Vatican has been referring to the "State of Palestine" at least since January 2013.  CNA sets out more detailed information on the substance of the Comprehensive Agreement:

The Vatican-Palestinian agreement recognizes freedom of religion in Palestine, and outlines the rights and obligations of the Church, its agencies, and its personnel in the territory....

The treaty, Msgr. Camilleri [leader of the Vatican delegation to the bilateral commission] said, “backs a resolution of the Palestinian issue and of the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians within the Two-State Solution and the resolution of the international community.”

But the bulk of the agreement regards freedom of religion and conscience, as well as the Church's freedom of action, its staff and jurisdiction, legal status, places of worship, social and charitable activity, and use of communications media.

Msgr. Camilleri added that a final chapter of the agreement regards issues of a fiscal and proprietary nature.

Pope Visits Holy Land; Presses On Peace Efforts

Pope Francis is on a 3-day visit to the Holy Land, originally described by the Vatican as follows:

The Holy Father will travel to the Holy Land from Saturday, 24 May to Monday, 26 May, to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the historic embrace between Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras in Jerusalem on 5 January 1964.

The trip takes the Pope to Jordan, the Palestinian territories and Israel. the Full text of all the Papal addresses during the trip and all Vatican media reports on it are on a special Holy Land Pilgrimage website.

AP reports today that the Pope became heavily involved in encouraging Middle East peace efforts by inviting Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli President Shimon Peres to a summit in the Vatican next month to discuss the peace process. Both presidents have accepted. According to AP:

Peres has been a fervent support of Mideast peace efforts, and the independent-minded Israeli president, whose job is largely ceremonial, risks upsetting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with the move.