Posted: 12:04 pm EDT
[twitter-follow screen_name=’Diplopundit’ ]
Excerpt from the SCOTUS 6-3 decision from ZIVOTOFSKY, BY HIS PARENTS AND GUARDIANS, ZIVOTOFSKY ET UX. v. KERRY, SECRETARY OF STATE (pdf):
Petitioner Zivotofsky was born to United States citizens living in Jerusalem. Pursuant to §214(d) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2003, his mother asked American Embassy officials to list his place of birth as “Israel” on, inter alia, his passport. Section 214(d) states for “purposes of the registration of birth, certification of nationality, or issuance of a passport of a United States citizen born in the city of Jerusalem, the Secretary shall, upon the request of the citizen or the citizen’s legal guardian, record the place of birth as Israel.” The Embassy officials refused to list Zivotofsky’s place of birth as “Israel” on his passport, citing the Executive Branch’s longstanding position that the United States does not recognize any country as having sovereignty over Jerusalem. Zivotofsky’s parents brought suit on his behalf in federal court, seeking to enforce §214(d). Ultimately, the D. C. Circuit held the statute unconstitutional, con- cluding that it contradicts the Executive Branch’s exclusive power to recognize foreign sovereigns.
Quick background of this long-standing practice: Place of birth was first added to the U.S. passport designed in 1917. An October 4, 1963 staff study by the Passport Office on “Place of Birth” information in the United States Passport reflects “the passport used during World War I was the first in which including the place of birth of the passport holder was mandatory as part of the identification of the bearer, probably was a wartime travel control measure. The item was included in all subsequent revisions of the passport format, down to and including the present issuances.”
For United States passport purposes, the Department of State has defined the term “bearer’s origin” to be the bearer’s place of birth as it is presently recognized. That entry is included to assist in identifying the individual, not the individual’s nationality. The passport very clearly states that the bearer is a United States national or citizen.
7 FAM 1360: Birthplace in Jerusalem (pdf):
For a person born in Jerusalem, write JERUSALEM as the place of birth in the passport. Do not write Israel, Jordan or West Bank for a person born within the current municipal borders of Jerusalem. For applicants born before May 14, 1948 in a place that was within the municipal borders of Jerusalem, enter JERUSALEM as their place of birth. For persons born before May 14, 1948 in a location that was outside Jerusalem’s municipal limits and later was annexed by the city, enter either PALESTINE or the name of the location (area/city) as it was known prior to annexation. For persons born after May 14, 1948 in a location that was outside Jerusalem’s municipal limits and later was annexed by the city, it is acceptable to enter the name of the location (area/city) as it was known prior to annexation.
— Noah Feldman (@NoahRFeldman) June 8, 2015
Supreme Court throws out ‘born in Jerusalem’ passport law, amid concern over effect on region: http://t.co/ZKacVuMlEp
— The Associated Press (@AP) June 8, 2015
— CNN Breaking News (@cnnbrk) June 8, 2015
One decision today in Zivotofsky. 6-3 per Kennedy: President has the exclusive power to grant formal recognition to a foreign sovereign.
— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 8, 2015
The Zivotofsky v. Kerry opinion (affirms POTUS Power / “born in Jerusalem” passport law struck down): http://t.co/mAstWPOpX9
— Andy Wright (@AndyMcCanse) June 8, 2015