A group of 77 Democrats in the US House sent a letter dated Thursday to Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin demanding that the Biden administration provide an assessment of Israel’s “compliance with all relevant US policies and laws,” suggesting that the Middle East’s lone democracy and Washington’s closest ally in the region is violating international humanitarian law in Gaza.

“We strongly support Israel’s right to self-defense and condemn the brutal terrorist attack by Hamas on Oct. 7, in which Hamas killed over 1,200 people and took 235 people [sic] hostage,” the lawmakers wrote, using an incorrect figure for the hostages as 251 individuals were kidnapped during the onslaught. “We continue to call on Hamas to release all hostages and support the Biden administration’s efforts to broker a bilateral ceasefire that includes the release of hostages.”

The lawmakers also said they support efforts by the Biden administration to “reach a security agreement between Israel and Lebanon,” which would end fighting between Israel and the Hezbollah terrorist group and allow for civilians from both countries to return to their homes. The letter went on to condemn the “unprecedented Iranian attacks against Israel” in both April and October of this year.

However, the members of Congress also issued blistering criticism of Israel, sharing concern over the “level of civilian casualties and humanitarian suffering in Gaza.” They accused Israel of purposefully deteriorating conditions in Gaza by implementing “arbitrary restrictions on humanitarian aid and insufficient delivery,” asserting that Israel’s conduct has resulted in a “dire famine” ravaging the Gaza Strip.

“Therefore we request that your administration provide a full assessment of the status of Israel’s compliance with all relevant US policies and laws,” the lawmakers wrote.

Though critics have raised alarm bells over a potential famine in Gaza since last year, a United Nations committee in June said it was unable to prove the occurrence of famine in Gaza. 

Israeli Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon said in October that Israel had delivered over 1 million tons of aid, including 700,000 tons of food, to Gaza since it launched its military operation a year ago.

Nonetheless, the representatives lambasted Israel for allegedly ignoring a “30-day deadline” by the US government to “reverse the downward humanitarian trajectory” in the war-torn enclave.

In October, the Biden administration issued Israel a letter, demanding that the Jewish state increase the flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza or risk cuts in US military aid. In the letter, Blinken and Austin openly called into doubt Israel’s commitment to providing humanitarian aid to Palestinian civilians and questioned whether the Jewish state has used weapons in accordance with international law. The letter also called for temporary pauses in IDF military operations to enable aid deliveries.

Experts have hit back at the allegation that Israel has purposefully withheld aid from Gaza civilians, claiming that the Biden administration has provided “no evidence” of its claims. Following threats by the US, the Israeli government also greenlit an increase in Gaza aid. However, the Jewish state insists that Hamas, the Palestinian terrorist group that runs Gaza, has hijacked aid trucks and prevented distribution of humanitarian goods to the civilian population. In early December, the United Nations announced a pause of aid shipments into Gaza, citing danger posed by violent gangs ransacking trucks. 

“We believe further administrative action must be taken to ensure Israel upholds the assurances it provided in March 2024 to facilitate, and not directly or indirectly obstruct, US humanitarian assistance,” the US lawmakers concluded in Thursday’s letter.

Among the letter’s signatories were strident opponents of Israel, such as Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), Mark Pocan (D-WI), Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), and Barbara Lee (D-CA).

Democrats in Congress have grown increasingly critical of Israel in the year following Hamas’s invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Although Democrats have repeatedly reiterated that Israel has a right to “defend itself,” many have raised concerns over the Jewish state’s conduct in the war in Gaza, reportedly exerting private pressure on US President Joe Biden to adopt a more adversarial stance against Israel and display more public sympathy for the Palestinians.

The letter, which was signed by roughly 40 percent of Democratic House lawmakers, could represent a growing fracture between American liberals and the Jewish state. In November, 17 Democrats voted to implement an arms embargo on Israel, effectively mainstreaming and destigmatizing a once-fringe policy position.

The post Dozens of US Democratic House Members Call on Biden Admin to Assess Israeli ‘Compliance’ With US Laws, Policies first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

The Concordia Student Union (CSU) is facing legal scrutiny after attempting to revoke the club status of StartUp Nation, a pro-Israel student organization at the Montreal university, following a Dec. 3 event featuring Yoseph Haddad.

StartUp Nation’s legal representatives have filed a demand letter and a provisional interlocutory injunction contesting the CSU’s actions, which they describe as “irregular, illegal and contrary to proper rules of order and procedure.”

Haddad, an Arab-Israeli journalist, pro-Israel activist and former IDF soldier, was scheduled to appear at a tabling event in the Hall Building Mezzanine on Concordia’s campus on Dec. 3.

On Dec. 1, StartUp Nation posted an Instagram reel announcing his appearance and the event’s location. After anti-Israel organizations denounced the appearance online, the CSU cancelled the reservation two days before the event, citing the club’s failure to disclose Haddad’s participation as an external guest.

Despite the CSU’s cancellation, StartUp Nation proceeded with the event in a public area separate from the reserved space, in the same building. “We did not use their space; we didn’t break any rules,” said Michael Eshayek, co-president of StartUp Nation, who pointed out that the CSU does not have jurisdiction over all of Concordia campus.

Haddad’s appearance was quickly met with protests from anti-Israel groups. Eshayek said one protester directed inflammatory remarks at a participant, saying, “I hope your mom will die.” Another video shows a protester wearing a keffiyeh pointing at Haddad and making a throat-slitting gesture.

Other videos shared online show Haddad attempting to engage with Concordia’s dean of students, Kate Broad, who declined to speak with him and left the scene. “You don’t have the respect to speak to me?” Haddad said in the video, addressing Broad, who turned her back on him.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by The StartUp Nation Montreal (@thestartupnation.ca)

The CSU later claimed StartUp Nation had violated policies. “On Dec. 3, a CSU club violated both Student Union and university policy by withholding essential information in their booking application regarding external guests,” the CSU said in a statement.

The CJN emailed the CSU for further comment on the cancellation of the tabling event and their motion to revoke the club status of Startup Nation, but did not receive a reply.

Legal implications

A demand letter dated Dec. 10, issued by Michael Hollander, a lawyer representing StartUp Nation, accuses the CSU of violating its own policies and failing to follow a fair decision-making process. The letter highlights the CSU’s “Policy on Clubs” and Robert’s Rules of Order, which require organizations to provide fair hearings before making substantive decisions. The letter describes the motion to revoke StartUp Nation’s status as “ultra vires”—beyond the CSU’s authority—and therefore invalid.

“The motion passed on Dec. 4, 2024, was irregular, illegal and in direct violation of my client’s rights,” the letter states. It further criticizes the CSU for citing Concordia University’s policy that governs external guest approvals and is enforceable only by the university, not the student union.

In the letter, Hollander demanded the CSU confirm within 24 hours that StartUp Nation’s club status remains intact, warning of further legal action if this is not done.

Watch a few moments from my visit to Concordia University in Montreal, which is occupied by anti-Israel terror supporters! pic.twitter.com/UcHsyafniL

— יוסף חדאד – Yoseph Haddad (@YosephHaddad) December 5, 2024

StartUp Nation also filed a legal application for a provisional interlocutory injunction in Quebec Superior Court on Dec. 11, seeking to annul the CSU’s motion. The court filing claims the CSU’s actions breached basic principles of fairness by failing to provide StartUp Nation with an opportunity to respond to complaints.

“These procedural irregularities rendered the motion not only invalid but also a breach of fundamental fairness and equity,” the filing states. The legal team argues these violations undermine the integrity of the decision and calls for adherence to proper procedural norms.

On Dec. 12, StartUp Nation posted on Instagram announcing the CSU had complied with the court order, blocking their attempt to ban the pro-Israel organization from campus. In a video taken during a CSU meeting, Dana Ballantyne, the external affairs and mobilization coordinator for the CSU, read a statement proposing a motion to strike the revocation of StartUp Nation’s club status until a council meeting on Jan. 22, 2025. Ballantyne cited claims that prior motion procedures had been invalid.

‘A double standard’

Critics have accused the CSU and Concordia University of applying double standards to pro-Israel events. “When pro-Hamas students block classes or chant ‘intifada,’ they’re allowed to stay,” Eshayek said. “But when we peacefully protest or hold an event, we’re told to leave.”

Jewish faculty and students at Concordia, who chose to maintain anonymity, have described the revocation of StartUp Nation’s status as part of a larger pattern of marginalizing pro-Israel voices on campus. Similar incidents occurred at McGill University this month, where anti-Israel activists opposed a conference featuring Mosab Hassan Yousef, the son of a Hamas leader turned critic, and Elisheva Ysabella Hazan, the founder of a Jewish empowerment movement. Although McGill cancelled the in-person event, it proceeded virtually.

The CSU has a history of controversies involving Jewish and pro-Israel groups. A November 2023 class-action lawsuit against Concordia and the CSU alleges that a hostile environment has been fostered for Jewish students, citing incidents of antisemitism and growing animosity towards pro-Israel students.

The CJN emailed the Concordia administration for comment on CSU’s recent decisions, asking how the administration balances student union autonomy with the university’s commitment to free speech and inclusivity, but did not receive a reply by press time.

Meanwhile, Haddad has criticized the situation in interviews and on social media, describing it as “an example of the growing intolerance toward pro-Israel voices on university campuses.”

The post Concordia Student Union faces legal action after trying to revoke StartUp Nation’s club status appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.

The sight of Muslim men kneeling on the ground in prayer on city streets, often during pro-Palestinian demonstrations and sometimes blocking traffic, all while being shielded by Montreal police (SPVM) officers, has reached its limit, according to Quebec Premier François Legault.

“I see people on their knees in the street praying,” he said. “I don’t think it’s something we want to have here.”

Asked if he would legislate against it, he replied, “It’s what we’re looking at,” and has mused about using section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms—the notwithstanding clause—to do so.

At a Dec. 6 scrum capping a parliamentary session rife with debates, scandals and revelations about religious school funding, intrusion of religion in Quebec public schools, the launch of 17 school investigations and students praying in Laval high school classrooms, Legault told reporters that he and his government intend to “send a very clear message to the Islamists… We’re going to fight, and we’re never going to accept that people try not to respect Quebec’s fundamental values” of secularism and gender equality.

The topic is an especially sensitive one in Montreal. The administration of Mayor Valérie Plante has included Islamophobia in condemnations of antisemitism, regardless of context; Plante has also referred to a firebombed synagogue as a mosque, and elected officials have repeated Plante’s familiar refrain that Montreal is “a city of peace.” Her point person for public security, Alain Vaillancourt, did not respond to queries from The CJN.

The CJN asked Montreal police how many infractions, if any, have been issued to individuals or groups obstructing traffic to engage in street prayer during the nearly 400 demonstrations over the last 14 months. There has been no official or public confirmation of how many traffic-blocking prayer incidents have occurred. (The CJN has tallied seven.)

The SPVM is facing mounting criticism over a conspicuously lax approach to raucous protests, including permitting demonstrators to violate a Quebec court injunction outside a synagogue on Nov. 5 and asking Jews and other citizens to vacate the public domain to avoid incitement of protesters. “There is no law or bylaw prohibiting public prayer on the island of Montreal,” they said, adding that police “adapt operations according to the context of each situation, taking into consideration the safety of all.”

Rabbi Reuben Poupko of Montreal’s Beth Israel Beth Aaron Congregation told The CJN, “When it comes to conflict in Montreal between law and order and peace, police often choose peace, and that leaves our community feeling exposed.”

Montreal Police Brotherhood president Yves Francoeur could not say how many incidents have occurred, confirming to French-language radio that activities blocking traffic are subject to the Highway Safety Code. “We have the power to ask them to stop, to move, to free up the road. If they persist, we have the right to arrest them,” he said. He reiterated that the union was among the first organizations to support Bill 21, Quebec’s secularism law, noting street prayer “doesn’t have its place in Montreal; it doesn’t have its place in Quebec.”

Liberal MNA André Morin is the Official Opposition’s critic for immigration, integration, secularism and justice, and suggested Legault is trying to deflect and distract Quebecers from a “difficult session” and the CAQ government’s record $11-billion deficit.

“He hasn’t yet adequately explained exactly what the problem is that he’s trying to fix,” he told The CJN. “Religion is not illegal in Quebec and is protected by the Canadian and Quebec Charters. For a premier to say we need to forbid prayer in public spaces is a big statement and a big step.”

Morin says there’s already a wide range of legislation applying to street prayer, including the Quebec Highway Code and municipal bylaws. “But we have to be careful. Yes, there is an Islamist movement in Quebec, a political ideology, but not all Muslims are part of that.”

The Jewish Community Council of Montreal did not respond to The CJN’s request for comment, but the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) posted on social media, “It is not acceptable to see our public spaces privatized by groups of radical militants praying for the martyrs of Islamic terrorist groups and the death of Zionists. We salute Premier François Legault for his leadership.” CIJA said it will work with partners and the government “to arrive at legislation that will put an end to this assault on our common Quebec values.”

Legault sounded adamant. “When we want to pray, we go to a church, to a mosque, but not to public places,” he said, his salvo coming three days after a pro-Palestine group called for a rally in support of “One Solution, Intifada Revolution” at Montreal’s famed Notre Dame Basilica on the day marking Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception.

That Dec. 8 rally, attended by several dozen demonstrators, saw a few dozen men kneeling and praying in unison without incident, while others walked around with flags, some masked. A few people stood across from them in front of the church in opposition to the protest. At least one was reportedly asked to move by Montreal police, but The CJN could not confirm that.

On the federal side, the reaction was swift, with Immigration Minister Marc Miller suggesting Legault is picking on Muslims, and Justice Minister Arif Virani cautioning Legault about using the notwithstanding clause to override Canadians’ rights.

There are also questions if such a move can potentially prevent Jews from holding outdoor Shabbat celebrations, block men from gathering to put on tefillin, and ban menorah lightings, already facing restrictions in some Canadian municipalities.

“Most people agree that if the Quebec government comes out with any legislation, it will be targeted towards the context that is most problematic,” for example, street demonstrations and traffic blocking incidents, said Rabbi Poupko, adding Jews faced a similar quandary when the government started talking about Bill 21, which banned the wearing of religious symbols by many public employees. “We all know where this is coming from and the context,” he said. “The target of this legislation is not the Jewish community. We know that we are collateral damage in this.”

Rabbi Poupko says when streets are blocked by protesters praying, it is being used as a political tool. “Everyone understands these impromptu prayer services are not done as pious acts of devotion. It’s an attempt to intimidate, to express a form of Islamist supremacism, and when you weaponize prayer, this is the consequence. The radicals have weaponized prayer to disrupt, to demonstrate power.

“I can’t have a picnic in the street, but that doesn’t mean that the government is trying to starve me. I can go eat at home. And it’s not an infringement on someone’s freedom of expression or freedom of religion not to be allowed to pray in the street.” Banning this activity from public streets is not an act of discrimination or anti–freedom of expression, he says. “It’s pro-traffic.”

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association has expressed alarm about the increased use of the notwithstanding clause by all governments, including Legault’s intentions, and has launched a campaign to alert Canadians to the dangers posed to the Charter by its repeated use and suggested more robust and stringent guardrails for its use.

Quebec’s bishops are concerned about the erasure of people and communities of faith from Quebec’s public spaces. Assembly of Quebec Catholic Bishops president Mgr Martin Laliberté said such a prohibition would be unenforceable and “off the mark in promoting peaceful co-existence in a secular state.”

If a religious group gathers for purposes other than prayer, “Will we then try to ensure that no prayers are recited during a food drive or before a friendly meal? How can we identify a prayer, and above all, why would we try to do so? Praying is not dangerous.”

Indeed, says Liberal critic Morin, “If you’re just praying in the park, is that something the Premier of Quebec will forbid? What François Legault is trying to do is very difficult, but it’s on him to explain.”

Laliberté noted that practices targeted by such a prohibition are not all public actions of religious people, but those of minority religious groups “perceived as different, and, for this reason, threatening to Quebec identity.” He said the rights involved are recognized by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 18: “Freedom to manifest his religion or belief, alone or in community with others, in public or in private, in teaching, practice, worship and observance… it is essential to act with great caution, in order to respect the rights and dignity of all people.”

During the Bill 21 debates, Poupko says many people were willing to “’take the hit’, while others were standing on principle and said we can’t tolerate anyone taking away any rights.” Even if damage wasn’t so grave from Bill 21, he says, “it’s cold comfort for those who want to stand on principle. I really get that.”

But he’s confident any legislation will address behaviour to focus on “prayer that obstructs,” and was quick to add that “Jews don’t obstruct traffic to pray—at most we’ll go to the park for tashlikh for a few minutes, and we’re not talking here about a guy standing in the corner of an airport. Jews praying never obstruct traffic, unless you count the aisle on an El Al flight.” 

The National Council of Canadian Muslims posted: “Imagine living in a country where the government can come after you for clasping your hands and praying for a loved one in a hospital waiting room. This is extremely concerning! The time is fast approaching when Canadians will be forced to grapple with the weakness of our charter rights and look for ways to protect ourselves from liberticidal government overreach. As we await the promised legislation, we will be consulting with communities across the country and preparing to stand up for the rights of all Canadians.”

Imam Adil Charkaoui of Montreal, who publicly called for the death of Zionists and enemies of Gaza a few weeks after the Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas terrorist attack in Israel—but ultimately faced no charges owing to religious exceptions to hate speech in Canada’s Criminal Code—dismissed Legault’s comments. Muslims don’t need anybody’s permission to pray, he stated on social media. It is a right protected by Quebec and Canadian Charters and conferred by Islamic scripture: “The whole earth has been offered to me as a place of prayer and as a means of purification. So anyone in my community at the time of prayer can perform it wherever he is.”

The post Quebec’s premier wants to ban public prayer after protests block traffic and challenge secularism appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.