Supreme Court Backs Off of DACA: What’s Next for Dreamers?

The Supreme Court has rejected President Trump’s attempt to appeal a decision on DACA, meaning that the status of Dreamers will, for now, remain stable. It now falls to Congress to decide what happens with Dreamers, but without the looming deadline of a Supreme Court decision, the pressure is largely off, which means that Dreamers can continue to renew their visas under DACA while their ultimate fate remains unknown. More at Time.

The unhappy irony is that Congress may never pass a permanent solution without the threat of a time limit. The legal fight is likely to drag into 2019. The Senate this month tried and failed to pass a measure to help Dreamers amid opposition from restrictionists on the right and the anti-Trump “resistance.” Both would rather use the issue to clobber each other politically, and now they will do that through the midterms.

Now without March 5 written in stone, if it ever really was, some of Trump’s leverage is gone. So too is the gradual loss in status for DACA beneficiaries whose protections were set to lapse between September and March, the fact that created such urgency among activists supportive of the program — along with the prospects of sympathetic Dreamers being deported or detained.

Since Democrats have no incentive now to agree to such a deal, they are likely to wait for the elections, and then, if electorally empowered, push to pass a standalone DACA bill. While Washington hunkers down for a long, self-serving stall, thousands of people who rightly call themselves American will suffer.

What’s the Future for Case 4000?

Case 4000 (an investigation into potential quid quo pro arrangements between the PM and his aides with Bezeq, an Israeli communications company) looks different since the shocking revelation that a lead investigator and a judge were coordinating on sentencing. Attorneys are clamoring for the release of suspects, a judge has been disgraced, and new developments continue to emerge.

A central witness in two of the corruption cases against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, one of his former highly trusted aides, is now expected to give evidence in a third.

Ari Harow, Netanyahu’s chief of staff for a year from mid-2014, last year turned state’s witness and agreed to provide information about so-called Cases 1000 and 2000 in return for a lighter punishment for separate charges against him relating to an alleged conflict of interest over a business he held.

The legal teams representing the suspects detained in the Bezeq Affair (also known as Case 4000) charged Monday that the court procedure to extend their clients’ remand was “hopelessly tainted,” demanding their immediate release…

“It seems that a review of the correspondence speaks for itself. It does not require any interpretation,” legal team representing Bezeq shareholder Shaul Elovitch and his wife and son, Iris and Or, wrote in their request, adding, “This is unprecedented conduct in its severity, the clear meaning of which is that all the detainees in the case are detained in a blatantly illegal manner.”

Coordination – in which defense lawyers get to weigh in on arguments by the state outside of the public process – can be grounds for overturning an extended detention order.

However, in this case, Judge Ala Masrawa, who has replaced Pozansky-Katz in handling the case, found on Monday that the public interest of keeping the suspects in custody – to fully enable the police investigation into Case 4000 – trumped any harm to the suspects’ rights.

Will Canada Join America in Recognizing Jerusalem? Will the World?

Canada’s opposition party has announced the party’s plan to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel if elected in 2019. While Trudeau’s government has maintained that the Canadian embassy will stay in Tel Aviv, Canada abstained from the UN vote against the moving of America’s embassy to Jerusalem. Is this a sign that America’s embassy move will inspire other countries to move theirs as well?  Netanyahu seems to think so. More at Jerusalem Post.

The Conservative proposal would put Canada at odds with most of the world, including the U.K., France, Germany and 125 other countries who opposed the U.S. move to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital during a vote at the United Nations General Assembly in December…

Canada, under the Trudeau government, abstained from voting.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said US President Donald Trump is “worthy of all praise” for his planned move of the US embassy to Jerusalem in May, and predicted that other countries would soon follow suit.

“We are in touch with other countries, and it’s only a matter of time before other countries join the US in moving their embassies to Jerusalem,” said Netanyahu at the weekly Likud faction meeting.

European Union and Arab League countries insist that Jerusalem must be the joint capital of Israel and a future Palestinian state, as the U.S. prepares to move its embassy there in a step angering the Arab world.

Speaking after talks Monday between EU and Arab League foreign ministers, EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said that the “special status and character of the city must be preserved.”

Unions vs Free Speech: Which Will Triumph in the Janus Case?

The Supreme Court will soon issue a decision in the Janus case, which has pitted the rights of unions against free speech. According to the plaintiff, public sector union activities constitute political action, and no worker should be coerced to participate in political action against his or her own beliefs. The defendants believe that mandatory union fees keep unions alive and that without them a crucial bridge to the middle class will be torched. What will happen if Unions lose the fight? More at Vox.

America’s workers aren’t going down without a fight. Public support for unions is rising, and nearly half of non-union workers say that they would join a union if given the opportunity. From the explosive growth of home care workers joining unions to the Fight for $15 movement to raise the minimum wage, workers across the country are demanding a voice on the job. Pro-worker lawmakers in cities and states are also responding — granting more workers bargaining rights; ensuring public sector workers know about the benefits of union membership; and increasing minimum wage requirements in their communities.

Mandatory fees require dissenting nonmembers to support beliefs they reject. But the right of free speech, as the court long has recognized, includes the freedom not to speak. To force someone to pay for the advancement of political positions without his or her consent is incompatible with the First Amendment.

Union officials say losing the revenue from compelled payments would weaken their negotiating power. But they also fear losing, yes, political power.

It’s not hard to see the political ramifications if unions lose in Janus. With fewer resources to spend on their core functions, weakening public-sector unions could also hinder the electoral prospects of the Democratic Party, which frequently relies on organized labor’s networks and resources in its political campaigns. That’s one reason why conservative donors and think tanks helped bankroll the Janus case as it worked its way through the lower courts.

Has the Rabbinate Lost its Monopoly on Kosher Certification?

The Rabbinate’s monopoly on Kosher certification in Israel may soon be a thing of the past. The Tzohar organization has started its own system granting Kashrut certificates to restaurants and food products. But aside from the fact that one certification will be from the Haredi Rabbinate and the other from Religious Zionist Tzohar, is there a substantive difference in the standards or the public perception of the certifications? More at JTA.

They claim the service will be revolutionary for Israeli businesses needing a kashrut certificate, but in fact it won’t differ from the usual kashrut procedure in any substantial way – not even in price.

…So what’s new? Tzohar’s leaders have vowed to conduct themselves with complete transparency; to eschew ties between the supervisor and supervisee (a common criticism of the Rabbinate in recent years); to use technological tools; and to demonstrate understanding of business needs. In addition, Tzohar will be using female kashrut inspectors.

Market research conducted in preparation for the launch of the Tzohar rabbinical service’s alternative kashrut system found that 80% of potential consumers are willing to eat at a restaurant that has an alternative kosher certificate….

According to the survey, the alternative kashrut certificate will also have to grapple with the challenge of trust. While 70% of the respondents trust the certificate, of those only 26% expressed high trust (“very reliable”), while 45% trust it moderately (“fairly reliable”), and the rest (29%) answered “not so much” or “not at all”.

It is not yet dead as a formal institution, and as a spender of public funds, or as a distributor of political largesse. But as a cultural institution, as a beacon of Judaism, as a relevant body – what we see is a mirage. Secular Israelis mostly ignore it, because they do not need it. Religious Zionists got tired of it – as even the not-so-brave Tzohar rabbis just proved. Haredis look down upon it. The only people who still care about the rabbinate are those whose main goal in life is fighting it. For them, the ultimate demise of this institution will be a mixed blessing, as it will rob them of a highly convenient rival.

Has the Time Come for Monica Lewinsky’s #MeToo Moment?

In a stirring essay for Vanity Fair, Monica Lewinsky has re-examined the scandal that came to define her life through the lens of the #MeToo movement. Twenty years after her affair with Bill Clinton, Lewinsky has found her voice. What does she have to say?

As Salman Rushdie observed after the fatwa was issued against him, “Those who do not have power over the story that dominates their lives, power to retell it, rethink it, deconstruct it, joke about it, and change it as times change, truly are powerless, because they cannot think new thoughts.” I have been working toward this realization for years. I have been trying to find that power—a particularly Sisyphean task for a person who has been gaslighted.

While President Bill Clinton was able to take advantage of the redemption society gifts powerful men, Monica Lewinsky has remained trapped inside of the mistakes she made 20 years ago…

In a Vanity Fair essay written for the March issue, Lewinsky traces the #MeToo movement back to her own public trauma…

For Monica Lewinsky, this moment is not just about the future. It’s also about her past, a past for which it seems she is finally being granted redemption.

Thanks to our post- #MeToo insight, we are realizing that power imbalances can lead to relationships that look consensual, but aren’t really. We are realizing that sexual harassment and misconduct can take many forms, and that it may take many years for the true shape of a relationship to emerge.

We are realizing that every #MeToo story is different, and that each one is complicated in its own way. People will accuse Monica Lewinsky of hopping on the hashtag bandwagon, but they’re wrong. She’s just grabbing onto a lifeline that someone should have thrown her a long time ago.

Today’s Hot Issues

Supreme Court Backs Off of DACA: What’s Next for Dreamers? What’s the Future for Case 4000? Will Canada Join America in Recognizing Jerusalem? Will the World? Unions vs Free Speech: Which Will Triumph in the Janus Case? Has the Rabbinate Lost its Monopoly on Kosher Certification? Has the Time Come for Monica Lewinsky’s #MeToo Moment?