DOCSLIB.ORG

Shurat Hadin−Israel Law Center Due 06/11/2019 with Certificate of Service for Paper Briefs [4794823] [19−1378] (JMM)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Shurat Hadin−Israel Law Center Due 06/11/2019 with Certificate of Service for Paper Briefs [4794823] [19−1378] (JMM) Selected docket entries for case 19−1378 Generated: 06/07/2019 14:10:44 Filed Document Description Page Docket Text 06/06/2019 BRIEF FILED − AMICUS BRIEF filed by Shurat Amicus, Shurat Hadin−Israel Law 2 Hadin−Israel Law Center w/service 06/06/2019 , Length: Cntr brief 5,041 words 10 COPIES OF PAPER BRIEFS (WITHOUT THE CovLtrAmBrFiled 43 APPELLATE PDF FOOTER) FROM Shurat Hadin−Israel Law Center due 06/11/2019 WITH certificate of service for paper briefs [4794823] [19−1378] (JMM) 1 of 44 Appeal No. 19-1378 ________________________________________________________________ IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ________________________________________________________________ ARKANSAS TIMES, LP, Plaintiff-Appellant. v. MARK WALDRIP, et al., in their official capacities as Trustees of the University of Arkansas Board of Trustees, Defendants-Appellees. ________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas No. 4:18-cv-914-BSM ________________________________________________________________ BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE SHURAT HADIN-ISRAEL LAW CENTER IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES ________________________________________________________________ Robert J. Tolchin, Esq. THE BERKMAN LAW OFFICE, LLC Counsel of Record for Amicus Curiae Shurat HaDin – Israel Law Center 111 Livingston Street, Suite 1928 Brooklyn, New York 11201 718-855-3627 Dated: June 6, 2019 2 of 44 Appellate Case: 19-1378 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/06/2019 Entry ID: 4794823 Table of Contents TABLE OF AUTHORTIES..................................................................................ii CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT.....................................................1 STATEMENT OF INTEREST.............................................................................2 STATEMENT UNDER RULE 29(a)(4)(E)..........................................................5 ARGUMENT........................................................................................................6 I. INTRODUCTION......................................................................................6 II. BDS SEEKS THE DESTRUCTION OF THE JEWISH STATE.........................................................................................7 III. DISCRIMINATORY SPEECH IS NOT CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED AND THE STATE MAY CONDITION ITS CONTRACTS UPON ADHERENCE TO LAWFUL CONDITIONS..........................................................................................15 1. It Is Constitutionally Permissible to Condition State and Federal Contracts to Ensure Compliance with Certain Requirements..................................................................................15 2. The State Has a Compelling Interest in Discouraging Invidious Discrimination Based on Nationality, Religion and National Origin........................................................................18 IV. THE CHALLENGED STATE LAW DOES NOT INFRINGE UPON PROTECTED FIRST AMENDMENT SPEECH....................................................................................................23 CONCLUSION...................................................................................................29 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE..................................................................30 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE............................................................................31 3 of 44 Appellate Case: 19-1378 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/06/2019 Entry ID: 4794823 Table of Authorities Cases Briggs & Stratton Corp. v. Baldrige, 728 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1984)......................................................................19 Cutter v. Wilkinson, 544 U.S. 709 (2005)...................................................................................16 EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, 135 S. Ct. 2028 (2015)...............................................................................18 Grove City College v. Bell, 465 U.S. 555 (1984).............................................................................15, 23 International Longshoremen’s Ass’n v. Allied International, Inc., 456 U.S. 212 (1982)...................................................................................26 Lyng v. Int’l Union, United Automobile, Aerospace, & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, 485 U.S. 360 (1988)...................................................................................16 NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886 (1982).......................................................................27, 28, 29 Regan v. Taxation with Representation of Washington, 461 U.S. 540 (1983)...............................................................................6, 17 Roberts v. U.S. Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609 (1984).............................................................................18, 23 Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights, Inc. (FAIR), 547 U.S. 47 (2006)..............................................................................passim Runyon v. McCrary, 427 U.S. 160 (1976)..............................................................................6, 18 -ii - 4 of 44 Appellate Case: 19-1378 Page: 3 Date Filed: 06/06/2019 Entry ID: 4794823 Rust v. Sullivan, 500 U.S. 173 (1991)...............................................................................6, 17 Silber v. Airbnb, Inc., (1:18-cv-01884) (D. Del.)............................................................................3 Sinai v. New England Tel. & Tel. Co., 3 F.3d 471 (1st Cir. 1993)..........................................................................21 United States v. American Library Association, Inc., 539 U.S. 194 (2003).............................................................................16, 17 United States v. Sindel, 53 F.3d 874 (8th Cir. 1995)........................................................................17 Constitutional Provisions U.S. Const. Amend. I....................................................................................passim U.S. Const. Amend. XIV.....................................................................................28 Statutes 42 U.S.C. § 2000D...............................................................................................18 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1)....................................................................................18 42 U.S.C. § 3601....................................................................................................3 50 U.S.C. §4607.................................................................................................. 19 Ark. Code Ann. § 25-1-501....................................................................................7 Ark. Code §§ 25-1-501(1)-(3)..............................................................................22 Ark. Code § 25-1-503............................................................................................6 Ark. Code § 25-1-503(a)(1)...................................................................................7 -iii - 5 of 44 Appellate Case: 19-1378 Page: 4 Date Filed: 06/06/2019 Entry ID: 4794823 Rules Fed. R. App. P. 26.1...............................................................................................1 Fed. R. App. P. 29(a)(4)(A)....................................................................................1 Fed. R. App. P. 29(a)(4)(E)....................................................................................5 Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(5).......................................................................................30 Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(6).......................................................................................30 Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(7)(B)..................................................................................30 Fed. R. App. P. 32(f)............................................................................................30 Eighth Circuit Local Rule 26.1A...........................................................................1 Eighth Circuit Local Rule 28A (c)......................................................................30 Other Authorities BBC, Profile: Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-30099510.......................11 BDS Movement, The Jewish Voice at the Heart of the Boycott Israel Movement, https://bdsmovement.net/news/jewish-voice-heart-boycott-israel- movement..................................................................................................11 BDS, Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel, https://bdsmovement.net/pacbi.................................................................17 Congressional Research Service, Arab League Boycott of Israel, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RS22424.pdf................................................ 9 The Durban Debacle: An Insider’s View of the UN World Conference Against Racism, -iv - 6 of 44 Appellate Case: 19-1378 Page: 5 Date Filed: 06/06/2019 Entry ID: 4794823 https://dl.tufts.edu/pdfviewer/r207v073p/tx31qt958...........................................10 Gil Feiler, From Boycott to Economic Cooperation: The Political Economy of the Arab Boycott of Israel Routledge (1998)........................................................................................ 8 Greendorfer, Marc A., The Inapplicability of First Amendment Protections to BDS Movement Boycotts, Cardozo L. Rev. De Novo 112, 124-25 (2016).........................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • March 16, 2020 PRE-TRIAL CHAMBER I Before
    ICC-01/18-79 16-03-2020 1/32 NM PT Original: English Case: ICC-01/18 Date: March 16, 2020 PRE-TRIAL CHAMBER I Before: Judge Péter Kovács, Presiding Judge Judge Marc Perrin de Brichambaut Judge Reine Adélaïde Sophie Alapini-Gansou SITUATION IN THE STATE OF PALESTINE Public Written Observation of Shurat HaDin on the Issue of Affected Communities Source: SHURAT HADIN – Israel Law Center Israel, 10 HaTa'as Street Ramat Gan, 52512. Phone: 972-3-7514175 Fax: 972-3-7514174 Email: [email protected] 1/32 Case: ICC-01/18 ICC-01/18-79 16-03-2020 2/32 NM PT Document to be notified in accordance with regulation 31 of the Regulations of the Court to The Office of the Prosecutor Counsel for the Defence Fatou Bensouda James Stewart Legal Representatives of the Victims Legal Representatives of the Applicants Unrepresented Victims Unrepresented Applicants (Participation/Reparation) The Office of Public Counsel for The Office of Public Counsel for the Victims Defence Paolina Messida Xavier-Jean Keita States’ Representatives Amicus Curiae The competent authorities of 'palestine' All Amici Curiae The competent authorities of The State of Israel REGISTRY Registrar Counsel Support Section Peter Lewis Detention Section Victims and Witnesses Unit Victims Participation and Reparations Other Section Philip Ambach Case: ICC-01/18 2/32 ICC-01/18-79 16-03-2020 3/32 NM PT 1. Consistent with the Pre-Trial Chamber's order of Feb 20, 20201, granting leave to submit observations, and in accordance with Rule 103 to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, Shurat HaDin – Israel Law Center (SHD) respectfully submits its written observation in respect of the issue of jurisdiction in the case regarding “The State of Palestine”.
    [Show full text]
  • Shurat Hadin Israel Law Center 2012 Annual Report
    Shurat HaDin Israel Law Center 2012 Annual Report Table of Contents A MESSAGE FROM THE DIRECTOR ............................................................................................3 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................3 ACHIEVEMENTS AND ACTIVITIES IN 2012 ..............................................................................4 LAWSUIT ON BEHALF OF FAMILIES OF SLAIN STUDENTS AGAINST BANK OF CHINA .......................4 LAWSUIT AGAINST SECRETARY HILLARY CLINTON, STATE DEPT. OVER CLAIMED TERROR GROUP FUNDING .............................................................................................................................................5 $338M JUDGMENT AGAINST SYRIA OVER KIDNAPPING OF AMERICANS BY KURDISH TERRORISTS .5 MAJOR DECISION IN A LAWSUIT AGAINST LEBANESE BANK ON BEHALF OF HEZBOLLAH TERROR VICTIMS ...............................................................................................................................................6 SUICIDE BOMBING VICTIM SUES HOTEL TO GET MONEY FROM IRANIAN PRESIDENT......................6 COURT AWARDS FAMILY OF AMERICAN TERROR VICTIM $332 MILLION AGAINST SYRIA..............6 US SUPREME COURT DISMISSES TORTURE CASE AGAINST THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY ON TECHNICALITY ....................................................................................................................................7 ISRAEL LAW CENTER CALLS ON ATTORNEY GENERAL TO PROSECUTE ʹFLYTILLAʹ
    [Show full text]
  • Extrajudicial Killing with Near Impunity: Excessive Force by Israeli Law Enforcement Against Palestinians
    \\jciprod01\productn\B\BIN\35-1\BIN104.txt unknown Seq: 1 7-FEB-17 13:24 EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLING WITH NEAR IMPUNITY: EXCESSIVE FORCE BY ISRAELI LAW ENFORCEMENT AGAINST PALESTINIANS Emily Schaeffer Omer-Man* I. INTRODUCTION ............................................ 116 R II. RECENT ALLEGED EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLINGS IN ISRAEL- PALESTINE ................................................ 119 R III. A PATTERN OF EXCESSIVE FORCE AGAINST PALESTINIANS ............................................. 135 R A. Arenas of Excessive Violence against Palestinians ...... 136 R B. The Disparity in Law Enforcement Responses to Palestinians versus Jews ............................... 140 R * The author holds a JD from the University of California, Berkeley School of Law (Boalt), and is an American-Israeli human rights attorney at the Michael Sfard Law Office in Tel Aviv, where she currently serves as senior counsel and acting director. She has been a member of the legal team of Israeli human rights NGO, Yesh Din, for over a decade, and for the last eight years has served as Legal Director of the organization’s Accountability of Security Personnel project. In that capacity, she has represented over 500 Palestinian victims of alleged crimes committed against them or their property by Israeli police, soldiers, and other security personnel. The author is also a legal advisor to Israeli NGOs Breaking the Silence and Peace Now, among others, and represents individuals and communities in bringing human rights claims before the Israeli courts, specializing in International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law and their application to the territories occupied by Israel in 1967. The author wishes to express her gratitude to Shelley Cavalieri, Miri Sharon and Michael Schaeffer Omer-Man for their excellent comments and feedback on previous drafts of this Article, as well as to the remarkable editors of the Boston University International Law Journal for their collaboration on this project and their dedication to bringing this important issue to light.
    [Show full text]
  • Cohen V. Facebook
    Case 1:16-cv-04453-NGG-LB Document 1-1 Filed 08/10/16 Page 1 of 113 PageID #: 70 EXHIBIT A Case 1:16-cv-04453-NGG-LB Document 1-1 Filed 08/10/16 Page 2 of 113 PageID #: 71 ~ SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS --------------------------------------------------------------------- Index No: Pa~1, / l 5 RICHARD LAKIN; and additional plaintiffs listed on Rider A, Date Purchased: 10/~(~C~/ 15 Plaintiffs designate Kings County as the Plaintiffs, place of trial. The basis of vcnue is CPLR 503(a), -against- SUMMONS FA=CEBOOK, Q Plaintiffs residcs at: Defendant. c/o Shurat HaDin — Israel Law Center, 10 ---------------------------------------------- X flata'as Street, Ramat Gan, Israel TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANTS: YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to answer the complaint in this action and to serve a copy of your answer, on the plaintiff s Attorneys within 20 days afi.er the service of this summons, exclusive ot'the day of service (or within 30 days aftcr scrvice is complctc if this summons is not personally delivered to you within the State ofNew York) and to file a copy of your answer with the Clerk of the above-named Court; and in case of your failure to appear or answer, judgment will be taken against you by default for the relief demanded in the complaint. Dated: Brooklyn, New York Octobcr 26, 2015 Yours, THE BERKMAN LAW OFFICE, LLC 0~ ~ ~ Atull~,r~.Jor he~+f zti/r ~ S`~ a by: 7 +~ '/ ° O' Q _.J Robert J. 111 Livingston Street, Suite 1928 Brooklyn, New York 11201 (718) 855-3627 ZECIA L 1 STS \~ NITSANA DARSHAN-LEITNER & CO Nitsana Darshan-Leitner .
    [Show full text]
  • Shurat Hadin Files War Crimes Complaints Against Top Plo Officials in International Criminal Court
    3/5/2019 Shurat HaDin Warning: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, function 'my_custom_excerpt ' not found or invalid function name in /var/www/html/wp-includes/class-wp-hook.php on line 286 PRESS RELEASES SHURAT HADIN FILES WAR CRIMES COMPLAINTS AGAINST TOP PLO OFFICIALS IN INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT For Immediate Release http://shurathadin.dev.digicode.ua/press_releases/shurat-hadin-files-war-crimes-complaints-against-top-plo-officials-in-international-criminal-court/ 1/3 3/5/2019 Shurat HaDin ISRAELI CIVIL RIGHTS CENTER FILES WAR CRIMES COMPLAINTS AGAINST TOP PLO OFFICIALS IN INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT SHURAT HADIN ALLEGES WIDESPREAD TORTURE IN PALESTINIAN AUTHRORITY AREAS, INDISCRIMINATE ATTACKS ON ISRAELI CITIES BY JORDANIAN CITIZENS (Tel Aviv) An Israeli civil rights center in Tel Aviv, Shurat HaDin-Israel Law Center, has filed three war crimes complaints against Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) officials in the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague. The three complaints, against PLO leaders Jibril Rajoub, Majid Faraj and Rami Hamdallah, follow the Israeli groups previous ground-breaking ICC complaints against Hamas leader Khaled Mashal (filed in September)[1] and against PLO Chairman Mahmoud Abbas (filed in November)[2] for war crimes and human rights violations. Shurat HaDin accuses the three Palestinian civilian officials of terrorism, torture and civil rights violations which are all international law offenses and actionable under the Rome Treaty of the ICC. Today’s filings are the first war crimes complaints filed against senior Palestinian officials since PLO leader Mahmoud Abbas signed the Rome Treaty late last week. Jibril Rajoub is Deputy Secretary of the Fatah Central Committee and is second to Abbas within Fatah, a terrorist faction within the PLO.
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES COURT of APPEALS for the SIXTH CIRCUIT 100 EAST FIFTH STREET, ROOM 540 Deborah S
    Case: 15-1331 Document: 36-1 Filed: 02/25/2016 Page: 1 (1 of 27) UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT 100 EAST FIFTH STREET, ROOM 540 Deborah S. Hunt POTTER STEWART U.S. COURTHOUSE Tel. (513) 564-7000 Clerk CINCINNATI, OHIO 45202-3988 www.ca6.uscourts.gov Filed: February 25, 2016 Mr. Michael E. Deutsch 1180 N. Milwaukee Avenue Chicago, IL 60642 Ms. Katherine Gallagher Center for Constitutional Rights 666 Broadway, 7th Floor New York, NY 10012 Mr. Mark J. Jebson Immigration & Naturalization Service 333 Mt. Elliot Street, 2nd Floor Detroit, MI 48226-0000 Mr. Jonathan Tukel Office of the U.S. Attorney 211 W. Fort Street, Suite 2001 Detroit, MI 48226 Case No. 15-1331, USA v. Rasmieh Odeh Re: Originating Case No. : 2:13-cr-20772-1 Dear Counsel, The court today announced its decision in the above-styled case. Enclosed is a copy of the court's opinion together with the judgment which has been entered in conformity with Rule 36, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. Yours very truly, Deborah S. Hunt, Clerk Case: 15-1331 Document: 36-1 Filed: 02/25/2016 Page: 2 (2 of 27) Cathryn Lovely Deputy Clerk cc: Mr. David J. Weaver Enclosures Mandate to issue. Case: 15-1331 Document: 36-2 Filed: 02/25/2016 Page: 1 (3 of 27) RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 16a0051p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT _________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ┐ Plaintiff-Appellee, │ │ │ v. │ No.
    [Show full text]
  • Rasmea Odeh: the Case of an Indomitable Woman
    Rasmea Odeh: The Case of an Indomitable Woman Downloaded from http://online.ucpress.edu/jps/article-pdf/46/4/62/142082/jps_2017_46_4_62.pdf by Oregon State University, [email protected] on 08 March 2021 NEHAD KHADER In this profile of Rasmea Odeh, JPS examines the case of a Palestinian woman who has been incarcerated in both Israel and the United States. After a decade of confinement in Israel, Odeh was freed in a prisoner exchange in 1979. Following deportation from the occupied Palestinian territories, she became a noted social justice and women’s rights organizer, first in Lebanon and Jordan, and later in the U.S., where she built the now over 800-strong Arab Women’s Committee of Chicago. In April 2017, Odeh accepted a plea bargain that would lead to her deportation from the United States after a years-long legal battle to overturn a devastating conviction on charges of immigration fraud. Observers, legal experts, and supporters consider the case to “reek of political payback,” in the words of longtime Palestine solidarity activist, author, and academic Angela Davis. Odeh’s generosity of spirit, biting wit, and easy smile did not desert her throughout the years that she fought her case. To know Odeh is to be reminded that the work of organizing for social justice is about the collective rather than the individual, and that engagement, relationship building, and trust are the foundations of such work. A strong woman is caring and tough, practical and spiritual, revolutionary and flexible. You are all of these. You are all powerful and you hold up half of the sky.
    [Show full text]
  • Shurat Hadin Israel Law Center 2013 Annual Report
    Shurat HaDin Israel Law Center 2013 Annual Report Table of Contents A Message from the Director…………………………………………….……….……..... 3 Bankrupting Terrorism………………………………………...………..………………….4 Fighting BDS and lawfare………………………………………………………………….6 Achievements and Activities in 2013…………………………….………………………..7 Winning a monumental court victory in the terror financing case against the Bank of China (BOC) on behalf of 150 terror victims in the New York State Appellate Division…………...… 7 Scoring an historic precedent for Hezbollah victims against Lebanese banks that provide the terrorist organizations with financial services……………………………………….………….…..7 BDS Movement Suffers Mega Defeat in TIAA-CREF Divestment Battle……………………...…8 Initiating a pre-emptive campaign to protect IDF from being charged with war crimes in the International Criminal Court (ICC)………………………………………………………..…………8 Filing a class action racism complaint against Australian professor Jake Lynch for his support of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement, whose goal is to delegitimize Israel and cast it as a pariah state..........................................................................................................9 Filing the first lawsuit in Canada on behalf of a Toronto based terror victim against Iran using the new anti-terror legislation……………………………………………………………..……….…9 Litigation against the Palestinian Authority and PLO pending in the Israeli courts is going into high gear…………………………………………………………………………..………..…….10 Pursuing Iranian assets in Chicago to satisfy victims' judgment………...………………...……10
    [Show full text]
  • Israel Law Center Sues the Warwick Hotel for Hosting Iranian Despot Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
    3/5/2019 Shurat HaDin Warning: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, function 'my_custom_excerpt ' not found or invalid function name in /var/www/html/wp-includes/class-wp-hook.php on line 286 PRESS RELEASES SHURAT HADIN – ISRAEL LAW CENTER SUES THE WARWICK HOTEL FOR HOSTING IRANIAN DESPOT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD http://shurathadin.dev.digicode.ua/press_releases/shurat-hadin-israel-law-center-sues-the-warwick-hotel-for-hosting-iranian-despot-mahmoud-ahmadinejad/ 1/2 3/5/2019 Shurat HaDin Shurat HaDin – Israel Law Center, served Manhattan’s luxurious Warwick Hotel with a lawsuit yesterday for agreeing to host Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad during his visit to the United Nations General Assembly on the week of September 24th. The motion being filed in Manhattan’s federal court demands The Warwick hand over any money they receive from Iran or alternatively, exclude Ahmadinejad from his hotel room and hand the keys over to their client Stuart Hersh, an American citizen who was severely injured in a 1997 Hamas suicide bombing in Jerusalem. In 2003, a federal court found Iran liable for the attack and ordered them to pay Hersh $12 million, plus interest. Hersh alleged that Iran had provided material support and resources to the terrorist group. To date, that judgment remains unpaid. This current enforcement proceeding seeks to satisfy a portion of the judgment. “It is insult enough that Ahmadinejad will receive U.S. security personnel during his stay in Manhattan, subsidized by American tax dollars. But that outrage is eclipsed by the idea that this craven outlaw will reside in the lap of luxury at a five-star hotel while his victims still suffer from his underwriting of violent, illegal acts.
    [Show full text]
  • ​Shurat Hadin's 3Rd Quarter Report 2020 Dear , It Was Twenty Years Ago
    Shurat HaDin’s 3rd Quarter Report 2020 ​ Dear , It was twenty years ago this month that our “peace partners,” the Palestinians, disastrously launched their terrorist war - the Second Intifada against us. As young attorneys back in October 2000, we watched in fear and frustration as the Israeli security services and IDF desperately struggled to find a way to stop the waves of suicide bombings and drive-by shootings that left more than 1,000 Israelis dead and over 5,000 injured. The terror attacks were no grassroots uprising, as the Palestinian’s claimed, but rather Yasser Arafat’s coldly calculated plan to violently force concessions and compromises out of Israel. Our efforts to respond to Arafat, to set a national example and to legally fight back against the violence and murders proved to be an effective strategy. We showed the world Jewish community that we did not have to be paralyzed in fear any longer. Shurat HaDin helped to pioneer a new area of law - terror victim litigation, which sought to utilize the legal system to empower the families who tragically lost loved ones. Amazingly, our innovative model was taken up and replicated by lawyers and victims in other conflicts around the world. Twenty years later and the fight to legally defend Israel and the victims of terror must continue. Unfortunately, our extremist enemies and the outlaw regimes like Iran, Syria and North Korea have never paused with their threats to our existence. For the BDS activists, the International Criminal Court and the antisemitic haters, it is always business as usual.
    [Show full text]
  • UAWC) and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP
    Links between Union of Agricultural Work Committees (UAWC) and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) Updated 4 August 2020 The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) - A Terrorist Organisation 1. The PFLP has been recognised as an active terrorist organisation by various governments. a. The US Department of State Bureau of Counter Terrorism lists the PFLP as a Foreign Terrorist Organisations, and designated it as such on 10 August 1997. (U1) b. The European Union updated its list of persons, groups and entities subject to Articles 2, 3 and 4 of Common Position 2001/931/CFSP on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism on 12 July 2016. It confirmed that those listed in its annex have been involved in terrorist acts and that they should continue to be subject to restrictive measures. The PFLP was included in this list. (U2) c. Canada has also published a list of terrorist entities which includes the PFLP. The description of the PFLP on the Canadian Government website states that “The goals of the PFLP are the destruction of the State of Israel and the establishment of a communist government in Palestine.” (U3) d. Israel designated the PFLP as a terrorist organisation on 30 January 1986. (U60, U60A) 2. The PFLP has been responsible for atrocities including: a. An attack on the Shnerb family, killing 17 year old Rina Shnerb and injuring her father and brother on 23 August 2019 at Ein Bubin Spring in the West Bank.(U22, U23) b. an attack on those praying at a synagogue in West Jerusalem on 18 November 2014, in which five Jewish worshippers and a Druze policeman were murdered and six other worshippers were injured, with axes, knives, and a gun; (U4A, U4B) c.
    [Show full text]
  • Explore Shurat Hadin's Work and Impact in 2014
    Shurat HaDin Israel Law Center ANNUAL REPORT 2014 A Message from Our President Dear Friends, This past year will be remembered as one of the Jewish State’s most challenging. Indeed, we found ourselves facing perilous attacks from every quarter. The terrorists in Gaza launched thousands of rockets into our civilian centers and tried to carry out murderous operations via their terror tunnels, the Palestinian leadership continues to incite brutal violence across the country on an almost daily basis and the anti-Semitic extremists worldwide relentlessly continue their BDS campaigns to delegitimize and isolate Israel diplomatically. Most troubling, the Iranian effort to secure a nuclear weapon continues unimpeded. The escalating threat to our survival requires an active and vigilant response from us all. Now more than ever the need to go on the legal offensive against Israel’s enemies is readily apparent and desperately required. As an NGO operating in the private sector, Shurat HaDin is positioned to undertake actions that the Israeli government is unable to formally engage in. We are not constrained by political pressures, diplomatic relations, nor international treaties. As such, we are able to act unapologetically against the enemies of the Jewish State without concern for foreign retaliations. Our activist attorneys are uniquely qualified and have the experience to lead these struggles which can frequently be best fought utilizing legal actions. In the past year we have continued to employ innovative and forward thinking legal campaigns as a means of preventive strategies to head off many potential threats before they can occur. We are proud of our progress in 2014, and we are grateful to the many generous supporters who continue to assist us in our work.
    [Show full text]