OPINION - Shields and Brooks 5/18/2018

"Shields and Brooks on Jerusalem embassy conflict, Mueller investigation takeaways" PBS NewsHour 5/18/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks join Judy Woodruff to discuss the week’s news, including a forthcoming rule from the Trump administration on family planning, the opening of the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem and the deadly protests along the Israel-Gaza border, plus what we know about the Russia investigation, one year on.

JUDY WOODRUFF (NewsHour):  Now back to political developments, both here in the United States and beyond, with the analysis of Shields and Brooks.  That is syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks.

Welcome, gentlemen.  We haven’t all three been together in a little while.  It’s great to see you.

Let’s start, Mark, with the story we led off as a segment earlier, and that is the administration moving to close down, essentially, or close funding for clinics that either provide abortion services or refer women to clinics that do.

It’s the early phases of this, but it’s something the Trump administration seems determined to do.

MARK SHIELDS, syndicated columnist:  Determined, Judy, to make a political issue out of.

I think that Donald Trump, if I’m not recalling — recalling correctly, as a candidate, made the issuing of executive orders by Barack Obama something noxious, pernicious and to be avoided.

That was when Obama did issue executive orders, obviously.  We had Republicans controlling both houses of Congress.  Donald Trump has both houses of Congress in his party.  He tried and Republicans did unsuccessfully in their attempts to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, to defund completely Planned Parenthood, and to achieve these objectives.

Now he’s moving — all of these occurrences, I hate to sound cynical, happened to occur in an election year, not simply with President Obama, but it did with President Clinton, with President Obama, with President Trump.  It did with President Bush.  And it began with President Reagan.

The one person who had clean political hands in this was Richard Nixon, who in 1971, invoked Title X, and to provide health care and to provide family planning advice to poor women who couldn’t afford it.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  So it’s become a political football.  Is that what we’re talking about here?

DAVID BROOKS, New York Times:  Yes, I’m not sure I totally agree with that.

It has an election year — it has obvious political benefits for each party’s base, but for Ronald Reagan, I’m pretty sure it was probably a sincere belief that taxpayers shouldn’t be paying for abortions.  For Bill Clinton, it was probably a completely sincere belief that this is a program should be longstanding.

I’m not sure where Donald Trump actually stands in his heart of hearts on this issue.  I do know he has made a deal with social conservatives that you’re going to have put up with a lot of lies and payoffs to adult film actresses, but I’m going to give you — on policy, you will get — and he’s been very consistent on giving social conservatives policy victories.

This is something they have wanted for a long time.  And Donald Trump is handing it to them.  And so a lot of social conservatives who are willing to swallow his personal failures are going to feel vindicated that this was a deal worth making.

I don’t particularly agree with that, but I think social conservatives will say, yes, if we’re going to get wins like this, which are for, in their case, for the good of the country and for the good of humanity, they’re willing to swallow a lot from Donald Trump.

MARK SHIELDS:  I’m not questioning the sincerity of all involved.

I do — their motives — but I think there is a strong political element to it.  And it has to be noted of Planned Parenthood, while it provides cancer screening, all sorts of health care, it does provide also 330,000 abortions a year.  So it’s a major element in the — in abortion-providing.

DAVID BROOKS:  Yes.  The tradeoff here is that Planned Parenthood, which does a lot of all sorts of health stuff, also does the abortions.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  An array of services.

DAVID BROOKS:  And so you get — say you’re a social conservative.

You get what you want on the abortion.  It’s going to be harder to get an abortion and some of them will get less funding.  But in places where they have done this — and we have now seen what happens when you do this — when you take people away from Planned Parenthood, you also — you do see a sharp rise in pregnancies, because contraception isn’t prescribed as much.

You see some health — deleterious health benefits down the side.  So, on the plus side, people who really find abortion morally abhorrent don’t have to pay for it.  On the minus side, there are negative health effects.
-----
JUDY WOODRUFF:  An anniversary this week.  We have only got a couple of minutes left.

But, David, Robert Mueller started his Russia investigation a year ago this week.  Where are we after a year of that?  Of course, it’s all been behind closed doors.  We have seen indictments.  We have seen some pleas.  Where does it stand?

DAVID BROOKS:  Well, we have had a year of speculation about what is about to happen.

What we have learned is that it’s a pretty broad-ranging investigation.  There’s a lot of dirty businesses, a lot of guilty pleas already, a lot of people brought under indictment.  So it’s a real investigation, investigating what looks like real crimes.

As for the collusion charge, we know there were many more meetings between the Trump people and the Russians than we thought before.  There was a meeting in Trump Tower.  And so there’s clearly more smoke there than we knew before a year ago.

What we don’t have is actual evidence of real collusion, and particularly by an awareness of the President himself.  That may be still out there, but that part, we still don’t have.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  And we know he may be pursuing other charges as well.

DAVID BROOKS:  Right.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  Mark, how do you see it?

MARK SHIELDS:  What we do know, Judy, is that the Senate Intelligence Committee is composed of grownups and led by Senator Burr and Senator Warner, and they deserve credit.

The House Intelligence Committee is led by just outrageous adolescents who are about as deep as a birdbath.

At the same time, I think what we learned is that the defense of Donald Trump, led by himself and Rudy Giuliani, is to savage and torment, denigrate, vilify and libel Bob Mueller.

Bob Mueller happens to be an American who turned down an eight-figure income to be a major corporate lawyer, instead became a public servant.  He’s a man who volunteered and carries the wounds of battle from having been a Marine platoon leader in Vietnam.  He is a public servant.

He has not said a word.  He has not given an interview.  He has not leaked to anybody.  And he stands vilified by Trump and Giuliani and their cohorts and their outriders.

It is indefensible.  And they are trying to exact the same damage upon the Justice Department of the country, the FBI and this country that Joe McCarthy did on the State Department, which has never fully recovered from his libelous attacks.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  Twenty seconds.

DAVID BROOKS:  Yes, I don’t disagree with that.

I would just say, I observe politically, I do think if Trump fired Mueller tomorrow, the Republican Party would back him.

MARK SHIELDS:  Do you really?

DAVID BROOKS:  Because I think FOX News has created a predicate.  They have done thousands of surveys and investigations about Mueller as a political operative.

TRUMP AGENDA - Jerusalem Embassy, Scuttling Peace Process

"Carnage and celebration mark U.S. Embassy opening in Jerusalem" PBS NewsHour 5/14/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  As the United States opened its new embassy in Jerusalem, Israeli security forces shot dead dozens of Palestinian protesters in Gaza, and reportedly wounded more than 2,000 others.  Blanket denunciations are sweeping across the Arab and Muslim world, blasting both the embassy move and the killings.  Special correspondent Jane Ferguson joins Judy Woodruff for more.

"How the world is reacting to Gaza border bloodshed" PBS NewsHour 5/15/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  It was a day for burying the dead in Gaza, with nearly 60 funerals in 24 hours, while the wounded continue to overwhelm hospital staff and supplies.  Monday became the deadliest day since the 2014 war as Americans opened the new U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem.  And there was more violence along the border on Tuesday, where at least two Palestinians were killed by Israeli gunfire.  Nick Schifrin reports.

"Harsh living conditions in Gaza fuel little-to-lose mentality" PBS NewsHour 5/15/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Palestinians have been protesting for weeks for the right to leave Gaza; in the last two days, tens of thousands have joined in.  Under an 11-year blockade by Israel and Egypt, life there has become a painful struggle.  Unemployment stands at 40 percent, with few prospects for the young, and most Gazans cannot afford a generator during lengthy power cuts.  Special correspondent Jane Ferguson reports.

"Would alleviating Gaza humanitarian concerns ease violence?" PBS NewsHour 5/15/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  U.S. officials are blaming Hamas for the deadly violence on the Gaza border.  Daniel Shapiro, former U.S. ambassador to Israel, says the group has long squandered its resources in trying to attack Israel, leading to "horrific" humanitarian concerns in Gaza.  Shapiro joins Nick Schifrin to discuss whether the clashes could fray alliances, and the decision to move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem.

TRUMP DIPLOMACY - Killing Middle East Peace

"The long-term global consequences of Trump’s Jerusalem move" PBS NewsHour 12/12/2017

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  When President Trump declared Jerusalem the capital of Israel and promised to move the U.S. embassy, the immediate response was relatively muted.  What are the long-term, strategic consequences?  Nick Schifrin talks to former U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker and Paul Salem of the Middle East Institute.

"UN Security Council to vote on resolution voiding Trump's Jerusalem announcement: report" by Brandon Conradis, The Hill 12/17/2017

The United Nations (U.N.) Security Council on Monday will vote on a draft resolution that would nullify President Trump's decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, according to Reuters.

The resolution, which was drafted by Egypt, doesn't specifically name Trump or the U.S. in its text, the news agency reported on Sunday.

But the one-page draft, which diplomats told Reuters's enjoys broad support among the council, comes less than two weeks after Trump announced the U.S. would formally recognize the contested city as Israel's official capital.

In order to pass, the resolution would need the votes of nine of the 15 members of the council.  It also cannot be vetoed by the U.S., France, Britain, Russia or China.

The U.S. Mission to the U.N. did not respond to Reuters's request for comment.

According to the news agency, the draft text "affirms that any decisions and actions which purport to have altered, the character, status or demographic composition of the Holy City of Jerusalem have no legal effect, are null and void and must be rescinded in compliance with relevant resolutions of the Security Council."

Arab leaders have criticized Trump's move, warning the decision could spark further unrest in the region.

Palestinians have long called for the eastern part of Jerusalem to serve as the capital of a future Palestinian state.  Israel annexed that part of the city in 1967.

OPINION - Shields and Brooks 12/8/2017

"Shields and Brooks on Franken’s resignation, Trump’s Jerusalem move" PBS NewsHour 12/8/2017

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks join Judy Woodruff the discuss the week’s news, including the last days of the Alabama Senate race, the resignation of Sen. Al Franken over sexual misconduct allegations, and the politics behind President Trump’s decision to move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem.

Judy Woodruff (NewsHour):  And now that leads us to the analysis of Shields and Brooks.  That’s syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks.

Welcome, gentlemen.

So, we just heard from Robert Costa, David, about the Alabama race.  It is on everybody’s lips, as he said, not only in Alabama, but in much of Washington.

But how — what do we make of it right now?  There is so much attention on these women’s accusations, but, as Robert said, it’s gotten much bigger than that down there.

David Brooks, New York Times:  Yes, but what I hear is a lot of Republicans looking at the Roy Moore case and it seems to have just flipped a switch, a lot of Republicans disgusted by Trump, not liking Trump, conservatives, and then, suddenly, Roy Moore, you enter a whole new realm of depravity, to be honest.

How are people not nauseated with a guy hitting on 14-year-old girls, and then, suddenly, that guy becomes a U.S.Senator, and people are not minding this?

And so how many Republicans have I talked to who have said, I guess I’m not a Republican anymore?  And these are lifelong Republicans.  Evangelicals saying, hey, I’m a Christian, but I’m not an evangelical.  If that is what being an evangelical is, that I don’t have to care about character, that’s not what I believe.

And so, to me, the big test of this is that, sure, if he wins, the Republicans will have one more vote for a couple of years, but they will have a generation who find the Republican Party something they can’t relate to.  And they will find the pro-life movement as something that’s a movement of epic hypocrisy.

So they may get a short-term gain if he wins, but I think there will be a long-term generational setback for the Republican Party, for evangelical Christianity, for the pro-life movement, for all of the things that Donald Trump and Roy Moore purport to be for.

Judy Woodruff:  Serious consequences if he wins?

Mark Shields, syndicated columnist:  Serious consequences, Judy, either way.

If you’re an Alabaman who loves your state, who cares about your state, wants your children to grow up there and come back, and your grandchildren not to move away, you’re thinking about the fact that you have already had your overtly religious governor, Republican, resign with an adulterous relationship with a woman staff member.

You have had the speaker of the House indicted, convicted on 12 counts of corruption and felony convictions.  And you know that your state’s been a punching bag.  It’s been a one-line joke.  If it weren’t for Mississippi, Alabama would be 50th in everything.

And so you want pride in your state.  You want a sense of self-respect.  And Roy Moore is not going to help in any way.  It’s going to reinforce that negative stereotype.

I think Robert Costa is second to none as a reporter, but I think one of the problems with the polling, which has, quite frankly, shown the race very, very close is this- If you’re a churchgoing Alabaman who is a Republican, you face economic and maybe social pressure if you admit you’re voting for Doug Jones, the Democrat.

But, at the same time, if you’re a churchgoing, serious Alabaman and you’re going to vote for Roy Moore, you face moral criticism.  So, I don’t — the candor level in polling is pretty difficult.

Right now, from everything I have been able to find out, I would say that Roy Moore will lose on Tuesday.

Judy Woodruff:  Really?

Mark Shields:  I really do.

Now, it’s 96 hours to go.  The President is going down tonight, but I think that Roy — Doug Jones will spring an upset.  And I think it will be a political earthquake.

Judy Woodruff:  But, meantime, in Washington, and, David, which you were just talking about, you have got the Republicans torn asunder, if you will, by what’s happened to Roy Moore.

But Democrats came together this week, and basically drummed Al Franken out of the Senate, a bunch of — led by Republican — I mean, by Democratic women senators.

David Brooks:  Yes.

Judy Woodruff:  So, do we now have some sort of moral separation between the two parties?  How do you read this?

David Brooks:  Well, it’s indisputable that the Democrats have kicked Al Franken, pushed him out of the Senate for things which are much less egregious than anything Roy Moore is accused of, or anything Donald Trump is accused of.

So, there’s that fact.  I would associate myself a little bit with a column Ruth Marcus, our friend Ruth Marcus, wrote today, which said, it feels — for the Al Franken case, it should be judged on the basis of Al Franken and what Al Franken did or didn’t do.

And it feels like we don’t totally know.  And it feels like he was pushed out of the Senate not just because of what Al Franken did, but because for the political opportunism of the Democratic Party to say, hey, we’re not the Republicans.

And so it felt like a lot of the pressure against Franken was not about Franken.  It was just for political expedience, so we could have the contrast with Roy Moore.  And whatever Al Franken did and didn’t do — and I bear, I carry no water for him — it seemed a little unfair that his case had to be so much influenced by political expediency and Roy Moore.

Judy Woodruff:  Unfair, Mark?

Mark Shields:  Well, we’re in uncharted waters here.

Yes, I think capital punishment is not the answer for everything from winking at an office Christmas party or to what Harvey Weinstein did.

And, by the way, Judy, I just have to digress for a second and say, if you want to see newspapering at its best, this past Thursday’s New York Times, with Megan Twohey, and Jodi Kantor, and Susan Dominus, and Jim Rutenberg, and four pages, and this is what — this is really the crime involved.

This is a consortium of applying economic, social, personal, emotional and physical pressure, and threats to anybody, a witness, a woman who wanted to confess, or anything of the sort.  And so…

Judy Woodruff:  This was around supporting Harvey Weinstein.

David Brooks:  Yes, Harvey…

Mark Shields:  It was about Harvey Weinstein.  That’s right, exactly.

And everybody — it was like Donald Trump.  Everybody who got near him is stained, sullied and diminished by it.  But this was a terror — really, a terror organization.

This is not Al Franken.  This is what Al Franken did.  But there’s no question that the serial nature of it, the picture, the photographic evidence, was damning.

Judy Woodruff:  Putting his hands on a woman’s chest, yes.

Mark Shields:  The hands, and the fact, Judy, quite honestly, that women led the march.

I mean, it wasn’t just Kirsten Gillibrand, but the other women in the Senate.  That was it.

When John Conyers fell, one of the founders of the Congressional Black Caucus, there was a question of double standard.  There is no question that Democrats are trying to make this — draw a line between themselves.

If, in fact, Roy Moore wins or loses on Tuesday, if he wins, then he becomes the face, along with Donald Trump, of the Republican Party going into 2018, which is not good for the Republicans.

If he loses, then there’s only one person who hasn’t paid some price for this charge, and that’s Donald Trump.  So, either way, Republicans are facing a very bleak Wednesday.

David Brooks:  Yes.

And, you know, the Republicans, all the honorable Republicans, thought, oh, this guy Trump will win.  We will give him a little.  We will sort of tolerate him, but I can still go ahead and have my honorable career.

But the point I tried to make in the column today is, he — Trump always asks something more.  First, he asks you to tolerate his tweets, then his sexual harassment.  Now you have to tolerate Roy Moore.

The next question is going to be, oh, I’m going to fire Bob Mueller.  You got to tolerate that.

And at every step along the way, the Republicans just say we’re not standing up to you, you own a little more of our soul.

And, finally, he owns all of the soul.  And that’s the case whether you’re working around Harvey Weinstein or you’re working around Donald Trump.  You make a deal with the devil, he takes over everything.  And that’s what’s happening in the Republican Party.  They don’t know where to draw the line.

TRUMP AGENDA - Killing the 'Two State' Solution

In the 'Never Ending War' between Israel and Palestine, Jerusalem is one of the keys to peace, and Trump just killed the possibility of peace.

MY SOLUTION:  Make Jerusalem an independent City State like the Vatican.  Run by a city government made up of heads of ALL religions that have holy sites in the city, and independent law enforcement that does NOT include Israelis, Palestinians, nor Americans, and with it's own security force (again, like the Vatican).  The City State of Jerusalem would NOT be part of Palestine nor Israel.

VATICAN DEFENSE AND SECURITY:  "As the Vatican City is an enclave within Italy, its military defense is provided by the Italian armed forces.  However, there is no formal defense treaty with Italy, as the Vatican City is a neutral state.  Vatican City has no armed forces of its own, although the Swiss Guard is a military corps of the Holy See responsible for the personal security of the Pope, and resident in the state." --Wikipedia

"How moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem could threaten peace prospects" PBS NewsHour 12/5/2017

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  President Trump signaled Tuesday that he is on the verge of a major announcement, calling Middle East leaders to tell them he's considering moving the U.S. embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem -- a move to that could cause unrest.  Judy Woodruff gets reaction from David Makovsky of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and Shibley Telhami of the University of Maryland.

"How Israelis and Palestinians see Trump’s Jerusalem move" PBS NewsHour 12/6/2017

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  While Israeli leaders praised President Trump’s decision to officially recognize Jerusalem as their capital, many Palestinians are upset by the announcement.  For both perspectives, Judy Woodruff gets reaction from Danny Danon Israel’s Ambassador to the U.N., and Husam Zomlot of the Palestinian National Authority.

"Warning of dire consequences, key allies blast Trump’s Jerusalem announcement" PBS NewsHour 12/6/2017

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  While Arab and Muslim leaders are warning of disaster, Israeli leaders are hailing President Trump's major policy shift on Israel.  In a long anticipated move, the President officially recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and announced his intent to move the embassy from Tel Aviv, drawing condemnation from world leaders.  John Yang reports.

"In Jerusalem, Palestinian perception that Trump favors Israel boils over into protest clashes" PBS NewsHour 12/8/2017

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The anger on the streets of Jerusalem was clear on Friday as Palestinians confronted Israeli security forces.  Already frustrated by decades of struggle for a country of their own, protesters’ anger boiled over against President Trump's recognition of the city as the true capital of Israel.  Special correspondent Jane Ferguson reports.

TRUMP AGENDA - Israel

IMHO:  I have a philosophy that 'friends don't let friends drive drunk' taken from MADD and applied to the Israel-Palestinian issue.  Israel's policy and actions in regard to Palestine will NOT end the world's longest war.  Israel is 'drunk' on religious doctrine, and if the USA is truly a friend we should not be enablers to their drunkenness.

This issue can ONLY be ended when the PEOPLE of both Israel and Palestine tell their respective governments to STOP.

"Will Trump's affinity for Israel translate into new policy?" PBS NewsHour 2/14/2017

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  President Trump talked during his campaign of moving the American Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, seeming to favor Israel in his policy stances.  But more recent comments suggest the administration could be more in line with long-standing American policy based on the two-state solution.  What's ahead for Mideast policy?  Special correspondent Martin Seemungal reports from Jerusalem.

MARTIN SEEMUNGAL, special correspondent:  Jerusalem's Old City is defined by divisions, four quarters, Armenian, Christian, Muslim, and Jewish, a legacy of conquests and occupations dating back thousands of years.

Israeli soldiers captured East Jerusalem and the Old City from Jordan in the Six-Day War of 1967.  Today, Israeli soldiers still control the streets of the Old City and the thousands of Palestinians who live here.  It is a tense, often volatile place.

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP:  I love Israel.  I love Israel.

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

MARTIN SEEMUNGAL:  Enter Donald Trump:

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP:  We will move the American Embassy.

MARTIN SEEMUNGAL:  Promising to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem during his campaign.

Jerusalem's mayor, Nir Barkat, welcomes the news with open enthusiasm.

His vice mayor, Yitzhak Pindrus, says it is long overdue.

YITZHAK PINDRUS, Vice Mayor of Jerusalem:  Jerusalem is the capital, capital of Israel, the capital of the Jewish nation.  It was that for thousands of years.  It's not something that's going to change.  And I'm comfortable with that, and I would be very happy if the embassy will move here.

MARTIN SEEMUNGAL:  No nation on Earth officially recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.  To understand why, you have to go back beyond the '67 war.

The United Nations' 1947 partition created Jewish and Arab states, putting Jerusalem under international control.  Israel captured a large part of Jerusalem in 1948, and divided Israeli West Jerusalem from a Palestinian East Jerusalem with a Green Line.

Despite declaring West Jerusalem as its capital, no country moved embassies there.  This is the old Green Line that split Jerusalem in two.  Israel annexed the eastern side of the city in the 1980s, illegally, according to international law.  And ever since, it's been trying to erase that sense of division.  But the reality remains West Jerusalem is predominately Jewish, East Jerusalem is predominantly Muslim.

Palestinians want East Jerusalem as the capital of a Palestinian state.  And Donald Trump's promise to move the embassy to Jerusalem has angered Palestinians.

Hanan Ashrawi is a senior member of the Palestinian Liberation Organization.

HANAN ASHRAWI, Palestinian Liberation Organization:  This is an irresponsible and dangerous move.  Don't even think about it, because you will be inflaming feelings.  You will be turning this into a religious conflict.  You will be starting a whole new cycle of violence.  The U.S. will be seen as complicit.

THE NEVER-ENDING WAR - Jeruslaem Synagogue Attack

"Jerusalem synagogue murders stoke already high tensions – Part 1" PBS NewsHour 11/18/2014

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  In the deadliest attack in Jerusalem since 2008, two Palestinian men burst into a synagogue, shooting and hacking victims with meat cleavers.  Four people were murdered in the attack and a police officer later died after being wounded.  Judy Woodruff reports on the aftermath.

"Is incitement to blame for growing Middle East violence? – Part 2" PBS NewsHour 11/18/2014

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Judy Woodruff talks to Dennis Ross of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and Shibley Telhami of the University of Maryland about what's behind the recent escalation of violence in Jerusalem.

SUPREME COURT - Jerusalem or Isreal as 'Place of Birth' on Passports?

For those who are not failure with passports, your 'place of birth' is normally the country/nation you were born in.

"Supreme Court To Consider Case On Passports Of Jerusalem-Born Citizens" by Nina Totenberg, NPR 11/3/2014

The U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments Monday for a second time in a case that combines Middle East policy with the dueling foreign policy roles of the President and Congress.  It's a political hot potato that asks what U.S. passports should say about the birthplace of American citizens born in Jerusalem.

Ever since the founding of Israel in 1948, the U.S. has taken the position that no country has sovereignty over Jerusalem until its status is negotiated in a Middle East peace deal.  Israel's supporters in Congress, however, have tried to force a different policy, passing legislation that would move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and require the State Department to allow U.S. citizens born in Jerusalem to list Israel as their place of birth on their passports.

The Bush administration and the Obama administration both refused to do so, contending that the passport mandate unconstitutionally infringes on the President's foreign policy powers.

Enter Menachem Zivotofsky, born in Jerusalem 12 years ago to American parents who emigrated to Israel and now maintain dual citizenship.  The Zivotofskys want their son's place of birth on his passport to say Israel — not just Jerusalem.  So they sued to force the State Department to let them do that.

Three years ago, when the case first went to the Supreme Court, the justices did not issue a definitive ruling, instead opting to send the case back to the lower court for further action.  But now, the case is back.  And a look back at the 2011 argument gives some clues about the justices' thinking.

The Zivotofskys' lawyer, Nathan Lewin, opened the argument back then by telling the Court that under the Constitution, foreign policy is a power shared by the president and Congress, but that Congress has the final say once it passes a statute, as it did here.  Lewin, however, faced a blast of skeptical questions.

"You say foreign relations is a shared power.  So, if it is a shared power, why does Congress trump the executive?"  Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg asked.

Justice Anthony Kennedy called Lewin's view a "narrow and crabbed interpretation of the President's foreign affairs power."  Justice Sonia Sotomayor said it would hobble the President.

"It seems to me you're not arguing for a co-equal congressional power, you're arguing for a superior congressional power.  You're saying whatever Congress says, the president has to comply with," Justice Antonin Scalia observed.

Chief Justice John Roberts noted that listing Israel as the place of birth for someone born in Jerusalem could, according to the president, present serious foreign policy problems.  But Lewin rejected that premise.

"Congress has decided that saying Israel alone does not present a foreign policy issue," he said.

Roberts shot back:  "An American citizen born in Northern Ireland doesn't have this option just because he thinks that's part of Ireland."

Arguing for the president's exclusive authority in this area, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli told the justices that Congress cannot supersede the President's power.

But Justice Stephen Breyer questioned that proposition, declaring, "There are very few cases I can ever think of where the court has said the President can act contrary to a statute."

Verrilli replied that as far back as President Washington, this has been one of those areas of presidential authority.  The court, he argued, should give great deference to the president's judgment on a matter with such serious foreign policy implications.  A passport, he observed, is not a communication by the passport holder; it's an official document communicating the position of the United States.

Pressed by Justice Elena Kagan, Verrilli said the source for the president's power is the provision of the Constitution giving the chief executive the power to receive and recognize foreign diplomats, a power used since the founding to recognize foreign governments.

Justice Scalia didn't think much of that provision as authority to rest a case on, musing, "I mean, if you've got to cast about for something, I suppose, I don't know what else you'd land upon."

"It is there," Verrilli insisted.

It is there, Scalia acknowledges, "but it doesn't say a whole lot."

MIDDLE EAST - Jerusalem Clashes Harald New Intifada?

"Jerusalem holy site becomes ground zero for fresh fighting – Part 1" PBS NewsHour 10/30/2014

JUDY WOODRUFF (NewsHour):  It’s one of the holiest sites for each of the world’s three major religions.  Known to Jews and Christians as the Temple Mount, it’s also home to the Al-Aqsa Mosque, one of the most sacred in Islam.  Now it has become ground zero for another round of fighting between Palestinians and Israeli security forces.

After weeks of recurring clashes, new street battles between Palestinians and Israeli police broke out in Jerusalem.  They were triggered when Israeli police cornered and killed a Palestinian man.  He was suspected of seriously wounding a far-right Jewish activist, Yehuda Glick, who had demanded greater access to the place Jews call the Temple Mount and Muslims know as Al-Aqsa.

Amidst the trouble, the Israelis closed the site for the first time since 2000.  That brought condemnation from Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.  Through an aide, he charged the closure was tantamount to a declaration of war.

NABIL ABU RUDEINEH, Spokesman for Mahmoud Abbas (through interpreter):  We condemn and refuse the Israeli escalation in Jerusalem and over the holy shrines.  We will take all legal measures to hold Israel accountable and to stop these repeated attacks, because the continuation of Israeli aggression and dangerous escalation will cause more violence.  The Israeli government is responsible.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  Hours later, Israel announced it will reopen the site to worshipers.  But Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu blamed Abbas for starting the trouble with a recent call to ban Jews from the compound.

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, Prime Minister, Israel (through interpreter):  I still have not heard from the international community so much as one word of condemnation for this incitement.  The international community needs to stop its hypocrisy and take action against the inciters.

I have ordered significant reinforcements, including reinforcement of resources, so that we can maintain both security in Jerusalem and the status quo in the holy places.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  All of this comes as tensions are still running high over the summer war in Gaza between Israel and Hamas militants.  Israel has also announced plans for more settlement-building in East Jerusalem, a move that’s inflamed Palestinians and been denounced by U.S. officials.

Will Israel ever learn?  Apparently not.


"Are we seeing signs of a third intifada? – Part 2" PBS NewsHour 10/30/2014

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  As Israeli-Palestinian tensions bubble up over access to the holy site known as the Temple Mount, is the Middle East political conflict at risk of becoming a full-on religious conflict?  Judy Woodruff gets background on the conflict from Hussein Ibish of the American Task Force in Palestine and David Makovsky of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.