Ceasefire in Iran spurs Arab mediators and Israeli hostage families to try again over Gaza
An Iranian woman waves a flag while standing at Azadi Square to watch a live concert in western Tehran, Iran, as a ceasefire occurs between Iran and Israel. Photo / Morteza Nikoubazl, AFP
Arab mediators and Israeli hostage families are making a renewed push this week for a deal to end the war in the Gaza Strip.
They are using Israel's successful strikes on Iran, as well as a ceasefire brokered by the United States and Qatar, to make the case that Israeli
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
9 hours ago
- RNZ News
Trump wins as Supreme Court curbs judges, but may yet lose on birthright citizenship
By Andrew Chung , Reuters The US Supreme Court in Washington, DC. Photo: AFP / KAYLA BARTKOWSKI The US Supreme Court's landmark ruling blunting a potent weapon that federal judges have used to block government policies nationwide during legal challenges was in many ways a victory for President Donald Trump, except perhaps on the very policy he is seeking to enforce. An executive order that the Republican president signed on his first day back in office in January would restrict birthright citizenship - a far-reaching plan that three federal judges, questioning its constitutionality, quickly halted nationwide through so-called "universal" injunctions. But the Supreme Court's ruling, while announcing a dramatic shift in how judges have operated for years deploying such relief, left enough room for the challengers to Trump's directive to try to prevent it from taking effect while litigation over its legality plays out. "I do not expect the president's executive order on birthright citizenship will ever go into effect," said Samuel Bray, a Notre Dame Law School professor and a prominent critic of universal injunctions whose work the court's majority cited extensively in the ruling. Trump's executive order directs federal agencies to refuse to recognise the citizenship of children born in the United States who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also called a "green card" holder. The three judges found that the order likely violates citizenship language in the US Constitution's 14th Amendment. The directive remains blocked while lower courts reconsider the scope of their injunctions, and the Supreme Court said it cannot take effect for 30 days, a window that gives the challengers time to seek further protection from those courts. The court's six conservative justices delivered the majority ruling, granting Trump's request to narrow the injunctions issued by the judges in Maryland, Washington and Massachusetts. Its three liberal members dissented. The ruling by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who Trump appointed to the court in 2020, emphasized the need to hem in the power of judges, warning against an "imperial" judiciary. Judges can provide "complete relief" only to the plaintiffs before them, Barrett wrote. That outcome was a major victory for Trump and his allies, who have repeatedly denounced judges who have impeded his agenda. It could make it easier for the administration to implement his policies, including to accelerate deportations of migrants, restrict transgender rights, curtail diversity and inclusion efforts, and downsize the federal government - many of which have tested the limits of executive power. In the birthright citizenship dispute, the ruling left open the potential for individual plaintiffs to seek relief beyond themselves through class action lawsuits targeting a policy that would upend the long-held understanding that the Constitution confers citizenship on virtually anyone born on US soil. Bray said he expects a surge of new class action cases, resulting in "class-protective" injunctions. "Given that the birthright-citizenship executive order is unconstitutional, I expect courts will grant those preliminary injunctions, and they will be affirmed on appeal," Bray said. Some of the challengers have already taken that path. Plaintiffs in the Maryland case, including expectant mothers and immigrant advocacy groups, asked the presiding judge who had issued a universal injunction to treat the case as a class action to protect all children who would be ineligible for birthright citizenship if the executive order takes effect. "I think in terms of the scope of the relief that we'll ultimately get, there is no difference," said William Powell, one of the lawyers for the Maryland plaintiffs. "We're going to be able to get protection through the class action for everyone in the country whose baby could potentially be covered by the executive order, assuming we succeed." The ruling also sidestepped a key question over whether states that bring lawsuits might need an injunction that applies beyond their borders to address their alleged harms, directing lower courts to answer it first. The challenge to Trump's directive also included 22 states, most of them Democratic-governed, who argued that the financial and administrative burdens they would face required a nationwide block on Trump's order. George Mason University constitutional law expert Ilya Somin said the practical consequences of the ruling will depend on various issues not decided so far by the Supreme Court. "As the majority recognises, states may be entitled to much broader relief than individuals or private groups," Somin said. New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin, a Democrat who helped lead the case brought in Massachusetts, disagreed with the ruling but sketched out a path forward on Friday. The ruling, Platkin said in a statement, "recognised that nationwide orders can be appropriate to protect the plaintiffs themselves from harm - which is true, and has always been true, in our case." Platkin committed to "keep challenging President Trump's flagrantly unlawful order, which strips American babies of citizenship for the first time since the Civil War" of 1861-1865. Legal experts said they expect a lot of legal maneuvering in lower courts in the weeks ahead, and the challengers still face an uphill battle. Compared to injunctions in individual cases, class actions are often harder to successfully mount. States, too, still do not know whether they have the requisite legal entitlement to sue. Trump's administration said they do not, but the court left that debate unresolved. Meanwhile, the 30-day clock is ticking. If the challengers are unsuccessful going forward, Trump's order could apply in some parts of the country, but not others. "The ruling is set to go into effect 30 days from now and leaves families in states across the country in deep uncertainty about whether their children will be born as US citizens," said Elora Mukherjee, director of Columbia Law School's immigrants' rights clinic. - Reuters
1News
18 hours ago
- 1News
Australian Greens candidate undergoes surgery after protest arrest
A Greens candidate who challenged Anthony Albanese at the May federal election is in hospital after being arrested at a protest, as police face brutality claims. Five people were arrested while protesting Israel's war in Gaza outside an Australian firm linked to the manufacturing of fighter jets used by the IDF. Hannah Thomas, 35, who was the Greens candidate for Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's seat of Grayndler, was taken to hospital with facial injuries suffered in the process of her arrest. A photo of Thomas in an ambulance shows her eye swollen shut and with blood on her face before she was taken for surgery. Video of the incident shows multiple police dragging one of the protesters as on-lookers repeatedly shouted, "get off her" and "let go of her". ADVERTISEMENT Police said matters escalated after officers issued a move-on direction to a group of 60 protesters who had blocked pedestrian access to SEC Plating in Belmore in Sydney's southwest Friday morning. They said Thomas was arrested for not complying with that direction. NSW Greens MP Sue Higginson labelled the policing "excessive" and "unnecessary" and called for an investigation "to avoid further horrific instances of innocent people being seriously injured". She has written to Police Minister Yasmin Catley, the NSW police commissioner and the state's police watchdog demanding the investigation. "Having witnessed the grievous injuries caused by the police to Hannah Thomas, spoken to on ground witnesses who witnessed what occurred, and with the knowledge that Hannah has experienced serious injuries and hospitalisation, I am calling for a critical incident to be declared urgently," Higginson wrote in her letter. A police statement said the medical advice they had received about the incident did not meet the threshold for a critical incident declaration. "Should further medical advice be received, the decision can be reviewed," it said. ADVERTISEMENT Protest organisers say another protester was grabbed by the neck and choked, while others were knocked to the ground. SEC Plating is reportedly providing plating services for various parts used in F-35 jets, of which the Israeli military has about 40. Zack Schofield, a 26-year-old Rising Tide organiser who was arrested, said he was "objecting to genocide and the complicity of Australia in this". "The excessive force used by police was brutal and will be put into question," he said. Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi said Thomas had been a "tireless advocate" for the tens of thousands of people killed in Palestine. "Hannah has long been a fearless and strong advocate for the rights of all people to live without oppression and occupation... I am in awe of her courage and conviction in supporting people who need help," she said. The five arrested protesters were granted bail to appear in Bankstown Local Court on July 15.
Scoop
a day ago
- Scoop
BRIEFING NOTES: Israel-OPT
Spokesperson for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights: Thameen Al-Kheetan Location: Geneva Date: Subject: Israel-OPT Desperate, hungry people in Gaza continue to face the inhumane choice of either starving to death or risk being killed while trying to get food. Since the 'Gaza Humanitarian Foundation' started operating on 27 May, the Israeli military has shelled and shot Palestinians trying to reach the distribution points, leading to many fatalities. Reportedly, over 410 Palestinians have been killed as a result. At least 93 others have also been reportedly killed by the Israeli army while attempting to approach the very few aid convoys of the UN and other humanitarian organisations. At least 3,000 Palestinians have been injured in these incidents. Each of these killings must be promptly and impartially investigated, and those responsible must be held to account. The killing and wounding of civilians resulting from the unlawful use of firearms constitute a grave breach of international law, and a war crime. Palestinians across Gaza are suffering from hunger and the lack of other lifesaving necessities. The Gaza Strip remains on the verge of famine as a result of Israel's closure and blockade, as well as ongoing unlawful restrictions on the entry and distribution of humanitarian assistance. This adds to Israel's systematic destruction of local food production and the economy, as well as the repeated forced mass displacements over the past 20 months. Israel also continues to impose severe restrictions on the work of the UN and other humanitarian organisations, preventing them from bringing and distributing food, fuel and lifesaving assistance into Gaza. Only a very few trucks have been allowed in since 2 March 2025. We are seeing scenes of chaos around the food distribution points of the 'Gaza Humanitarian Foundation' and the few UN humanitarian convoys. Women, children, older and disabled people in particular are facing multiple challenges at these points, and are potentially at risk of aggravated forms of exploitation and abuse. Israel's militarised humanitarian assistance mechanism is in contradiction with international standards on aid distribution. It endangers civilians, and contributes to the catastrophic humanitarian situation in Gaza. The weaponisation of food for civilians, in addition to restricting or preventing their access to life-sustaining services, constitutes a war crime and, under certain circumstances, may constitute elements of other crimes under international law. The Israeli military must stop shooting at people trying to get food. Israel must also allow the entry of food and other humanitarian assistance needed to sustain the lives of Palestinians in Gaza in accordance with international law and humanitarian principles. It must immediately lift its unlawful restrictions on the work of UN and other humanitarian actors. Third States have the obligation to take concrete steps to ensure that Israel, the occupying power in Gaza, complies with its duty to ensure that sufficient food and lifesaving necessities are provided to the population.
