Connect with us

World News

Israel court overturns order banning Jewish prayer at Al-Aqsa Mosque – JURIST

Published

on

The Jerusalem Court of First Instance on Sunday annulled a police order that prohibited three Jews from praying in the compound of the Al-Aqsa mosque in contravention of a long-standing understanding between Israel and Jordan. Earlier this week, Israeli police barred three Jews from entering the mosque compound for 15 days as they prostrated themselves and recited the Shema, a Jewish prayer, on the grounds of maintaining public order. The three then appealed the ban to the Magistrates Court. The Temple Mount, the holiest site in Judaism, is also a holy place for Muslims as it is the site of the Al-Aqsa Mosque. Israel, as a result of a decades-old agreement signed in 1967, allows Jews and other non-Muslims to visit the mosque. However, only Muslims are allowed to pray in the courtyards and corridors of the mosque. The Waqf, a joint Jordanian-Palestinian Islamic trust, manages the administration of the mosque, and the Israeli police are authorized to prevent non-Jews from praying in the mosque. However, there is no precise statute that prohibits Jews or non-Muslims from practicing or praying there. In lifting the 15-day ban, Judge Zion Saharai noted that he did not intend to interfere with law enforcement policy, noting that: “I think it cannot be said that bowing down and saying Kriyat Shema can be suspected of being behaviors that violate public order. It is difficult to accept a situation where saying Shema Yisrael on the Temple Mount could be considered a criminal act and could bring about a violation of the peace. Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett’s Government Secretariat issued a statement and noted that there is no incentive to alter this. status quo of banning Jewish prayer and practices on the Temple Mount. The statement further noted: The magistrate court’s decision relates only to the issue of minors’ behavior that came before it, and does not represent a broader decision regarding freedom of worship on the Temple Mount. With respect to this specific criminal case, the state has informed the government that it will appeal the decision in district court. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas criticized the court’s ruling in a statement, calling it a serious attack on the historical status quo and a blatant defiance of international law. The court’s ruling was also criticized by the Islamic organization Hamas and Jordanian Foreign Ministry spokesman Haitham Abu Alfoul, who called the ruling illegal and unconstitutional under international law. Police authorities challenged the court’s decision to annul the order.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

World News

Indian court keeps journalist in police custody over tweet – JURIST

Published

on

The Delhi Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court on Tuesday ordered journalist and Alt News co-founder Mohammed Zubair to be held in police custody for four days. Zubair was arrested on Monday for the offenses of hurting religious sentiments and inciting enmity under Sections 153 and 295 of the Indian Penal Code. In 2018, Zubair posted a tweet showing a hotel whose name he changed from “Honeymoon Hotel” to “Hanuman Hotel”. Hanuman is a Hindu god. Delhi police arrested him based on a complaint about that tweet, which alleged that Zubair tweeted a “questionable image for the purpose of deliberately insulting the god of a particular religion.” accused for posting the tweet in question will be retrieved at the behest of the accused Mohammed Zubair from his residence in Bangalore, that the accused has not cooperated and (with) the disclosure statement recorded, four days PC (police custody) preventive detention of the accused will be concedes as the accused will be taken to Bangalore. Zubair’s arrest has been condemned by international organizations and national news organizations, including United Nations chief Antonio Guterres, Amnesty International, the Press Club of India and other media outlets.

Continue Reading

World News

US Supreme Court Grants Review of Federal Bankruptcy Case – JURIST

Published

on

On Monday, the US Supreme Court agreed to hear MOAC Mall Holdings v. Transform Holdco, a case examining appellate court jurisdiction over sales orders in federal bankruptcy proceedings. The case revolves around the sale and transfer of a lease for a store in a shopping center. In 1991, Sears obtained a lease for a store in the Mall of America in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The lease only cost Sears $10 a year and was supposed to last 100 years. Sears, however, went bankrupt in 2018. As part of federal bankruptcy proceedings, Sears sold its assets and the Mall of America lease was transferred to Transform Holdco LLC, a corporation formed by Sears’ new owners. Mall of America sought to prevent the transfer because they claim that Transform Holdco LLC does not intend to occupy the leased facilities but to sublet them to other companies. Transform Holdco LLC argues that the long-term lease constitutes a substantial portion of the value Sears was sold for in the bankruptcy proceeding. The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit transferred the lease as it was deemed “integral” to a court-approved bankruptcy sale. Mall of America filed a petition with the US Supreme Court, arguing that a remedy is available that would not affect the validity of the sale. Therefore, according to Mall of America, the appellate court should be allowed to intervene. Transform Holdco LLC responds that no such remedy exists, and that the Second Circuit’s ruling should stand. The US Supreme Court must now determine whether federal bankruptcy law limits appeals on sales orders deemed “comprehensive,” even when a remedy is available that will not affect the validity of the sale. The court is set to hear oral arguments in the case next term.

Continue Reading

World News

US appeals court to rehear challenge to Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine executive order – JURIST

Published

on

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued an order on Monday stating that the court will rehear Feds for Medical Freedom v. Biden, a challenge to President Joe Biden’s 2019 executive order that required federal employees to get vaccinated against COVID-19 or face termination. In late May and early June, America First Legal Foundation, America’s Frontline Doctors, Airline Employees For Freedom Health, and an additional group of vaccine plaintiffs filed four amicus briefs in favor of a new full hearing. The plaintiffs in Rodden v. Fauci also filed a class action lawsuit made up of federal employees who contracted COVID-19, developed COVID-19 antibodies, “but remain subject to the federal employee vaccination mandate.” The Rodden plaintiffs argue that Biden and the “agencies he directs have no power to direct the personal medical decisions of federal employees,” and therefore this executive order is like an illegal government mandate. In addition, the group asserts that the panel’s refusal to review executive employment decisions is unlawful and thus protects “the exercise of unlawful governmental power.” In January 2022, a Texas judge blocked Biden’s executive order. Other state judges have also blocked enforcement of the COVID-19 vaccine mandate. In December 2021, a Georgia judge blocked the COVID-19 vaccination mandate for government contractors after the Texas Governor ordered a statewide ban on all COVID-19 vaccination mandates in October 2021 .

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022