web analytics
March 29, 2015 / 9 Nisan, 5775
At a Glance
InDepth
Sponsored Post


Two Court Decisions Of Note

Two federal court decisions of major significance to our community were handed down on Monday. In one case, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment does not bar localities from beginning legislative sessions (such as city council meetings) with plainly religious prayer, even when clergy members presenting the prayers are invariably Christian and the prayers invoked are Christian in nature.

In the second case, a Manhattan federal district judge dismissed a complaint filed by Palestinians (including several American citizens) residing in the West bank against Ateret Cohanim, the One Israel Fund (to be distinguished from the New Israel Fund), and three other organizations that support Israeli settlers – the Hebron Fund, the Central Fund of Israel and the Christian Friends of Israeli Communities. All were sued under federal terrorism statutes over their providing financial support to settlers and settlements (which the plaintiffs claimed were terrorist groups).

In the 5-4 ruling in the first case, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in his majority opinion:

Ceremonial prayer is but a recognition that, since this Nation was founded and until the present day, many Americans deem that their own existence must be understood by precepts far beyond the authority of government…. Legislative prayer has become part of our heritage and tradition, part of our expressive idiom, similar to the Pledge of Allegiance, inaugural prayer, or the recitation of “God save the United States and this honorable Court” at the opening of this Court’s sessions….

As to the lack of participation by non-Christian clergy, Justice Kennedy noted there was no claim that any effort was made to exclude anyone. Rather, he said, there was simply no outreach to non-Christians.

Of particular interest to us is the friend-of- the-court brief submitted by the noted constitutional lawyer Nathan Lewin in support of allowing the opening prayers. The brief cited a 1963 responsum of Rav Moshe Feinstein regarding Christian prayer, as well as the opinion expressed by the Lubavitcher Rebbe when the Supreme Court invalidated the New York State Regents prayer in 1962.

Significantly, in his concurring opinion, Justice Samuel Alito cited and relied on Mr. Lewin’s presentation.

As Mr. Lewin notes in the brief, “Contrary to common misconception, Jewish Law does not condemn Christian prayer.” Indeed, when filing the brief he had said, “The Supreme Court must be informed this time that America’s Jewish community is not unanimous in objecting to Christian prayer or in the suppression of pleas for Divine blessings at governmental sessions.”

We couldn’t agree more.

In the second case, Mr. Lewin represented the above-named organizations that had been sued because of their support for settlements. It is a somewhat involved story, but essentially consists of the following:

The federal Anti-terrorism Act provides that “[a]ny national of the United States injured…by reason of an act of international terrorism…may sue…in any appropriate district court of the United States and shall recover threefold the damages he or she sustains.” The Alien Tort Statute provides that “[t]he district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States.” Other laws prohibit giving financial support to terrorists.

In the context of these laws, the plaintiffs charged that “The Settlers” are Israeli citizens who live in the settlements and perpetrated attacks on Palestinian residents in the territories which are intended to “coerce, intimidate and influence the Israeli government and public and thereby ultimately bring the ultimate expulsion of the Palestinian residents from Occupied Palestine.”

The defendant organizations are identified as “purported charities” that collect donations totaling “millions of dollars” that they wire “directly to the Settlers and the Illegal Settlements.” The funds are used to “build and maintain the Illegal Settlements, illegally take land in Occupied Palestine, to support the attacks by the Settlers on Palestinians living in Occupied Palestine, and to support the terrorist acts of the Settlers against Palestinians and other persons in Occupied Palestine.”

About the Author:


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

No Responses to “Two Court Decisions Of Note”

Comments are closed.

Current Top Story
Father Gabriel Naddaf with soldiers
It’s Hard to be a Christian Arab in Israel
Latest Indepth Stories
Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) standing next to President Barack Obama during a walking tour of damage caused by Hurricane Sandy in Staten Island Nov. 15, 2013.

Schumer though never known to be short on words, has simply not stood up to Obama’s most recent rant

Father Gabriel Naddaf with soldiers

My beliefs & actions have led to numerous death threats against me; my excommunication by my church

Islamic Relief Worldwide Logo

In November 2014, Islamic Relief Worldwide was classified as a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates.

Safran-032715

Too rarely appreciated for its symbolic weight; it can represent freedom and independence.

Erica Pelman is a spiritually-driven woman. She is founder and director of “In Shifra’s Arms” (ISA), an organization that offers aid to pregnant Jewish women of all religious backgrounds practically, financially and emotionally. Its arms are open to any pregnant woman in need whether single, divorced, separated, or from a financially-strapped family. “Presently, we are […]

Many so-called “humanitarian NGOs” frequently abuse Israel by applying false moral equivalencies

Israeli history now has its version of “Dewey Defeats Truman” with headlines from 2 anti-Bibi papers

In God’s plan why was it necessary that Moses be raised by Pharaoh, away from his own family&people?

In their zechus may we all come to appreciate that life is a fleeting gift and resolve to spend every precious moment of it as if it were the last.

In any event, Mr. Netanyahu after the election sought to soften his statement on Palestinian statehood and apologized for what he conceded were remarks that “offended some Israeli citizens and offended members of the Israeli Arab community.”

A worthy idea any way you look at it.

There is something quite distinctive about the biblical approach to time.

The Waqf kept control of the Temple Mount due to Dayan’s “magnanimity in victory” after 6 Day war

The event promotes “1 state” solution (end of Israel as a Jewish State), BDS, lawfare against Israel

More Articles from Editorial Board

In their zechus may we all come to appreciate that life is a fleeting gift and resolve to spend every precious moment of it as if it were the last.

A worthy idea any way you look at it.

If nothing really changes in the hearts and minds of the Palestinians, is Israel obligated to provide them and its other adversaries launching pads for attacks?

The United States placed enormous pressure on Israel to relinquish its gains, which Prime Minister Ben-Gurion did with great reluctance.

The real issue is that in many respects the president has sought to recalibrate American values and our system of government.

Former Connecticut senator Joe Lieberman, writing in the Washington Post on Sunday, provided one of the clearest and most compelling analyses we’ve seen of the importance of the prime minister’s speech.

Gone are the days when an anchorman sitting in a New York studio could, after sharing 22 minutes of carefully selected and edited news items, trumpet in stentorian tones, “And that’s the way it is.” No it wasn’t. It never was.

President Obama has frequently cautioned that Americans should take great care to avoid fomenting anti-Muslim passions in our reaction to the murderous activities regularly being perpetrated by terrorists in the name of Islam. One wonders why, though, he seems to have no concern with the potential for anti-Semitic fallout from his full-court press against Israeli […]

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/editorial/two-court-decisions-of-note/2014/05/07/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: