Feed aggregator

Israel’s High Court of Justice ruled that the number of mispallelim permitted to daven at the Kosel may be increased to 100 at any given time, up from the previous limit of 50, while also issuing a conditional order and scheduling a further hearing for Thursday, stating that the earlier discussion “was not exhausted.”

The upcoming hearing will require the state to explain whether current security policies regarding access to the makomos hakedoshim properly balance safety concerns with the right to freedom of tefillah and religion.

The ruling comes amid ongoing restrictions from the Home Front Command, which generally cap gatherings at 50 people. However, in a separate decision, the court allowed a protest in Habima Square in Tel Aviv to proceed with up to 600 participants, creating a sharp contrast between limits placed on demonstrations and those placed on tefillah.

During earlier proceedings, Yonatan Mozes of the High Court petitions department outlined the state’s position, noting that a professional inspection had been conducted that morning to explore possible leniencies. He said experts concluded that the number could be raised to 100 individuals, including staff, based on the capacity of two protected areas at the site, calculated according to a density of 2.5 people per square meter.

Justice Ruth Ronen questioned how many of those permitted would be staff members, but Mozes responded that he did not have that information. He also explained that regarding the Kosel tunnels, the Home Front Command maintains there is concern over blast impact and potential structural collapse, even while recognizing the importance of tefillah.

Justice Yitzchak Amit addressed the tension between competing considerations, noting that while the Home Front Command carries responsibility for safety, broader administrative law principles and the realities of an ongoing war must also be taken into account. He described the issue as one of balance across different locations, emphasizing that freedom of religion is a central value. He added, “I watched the live broadcast of Birkas Kohanim, and it was embarrassing to see the Kosel, the very soul of the Jewish people, standing empty.”

A representative for the petitioners argued that in the past, mispallelim were directed into the Kosel tunnels during sirens, calling into question current claims of danger. He said that Home Front Command guidelines can vary depending on circumstances and suggested that a framework should be developed to allow for broader participation. “The easiest position to take is to forbid,” he said, adding that calculated risks should be weighed alongside the importance of tefillah.

A major legal breakthrough in the United States is paving the way for substantial compensation to victims of terrorism, as a federal appeals court in New York has reinstated a 2015 judgment requiring the Palestinian Authority and the PLO to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to victims of attacks during the Second Intifada in Yerushalayim.

The ruling follows a landmark decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in May 2025, which determined that U.S. courts have jurisdiction to hear international terrorism cases involving the Palestinian Authority.

The lawsuit, originally filed in 2004, was brought by ten families affected by terrorist attacks during the Second Intifada. Among the plaintiffs were families who lost children in the Hebrew University cafeteria bombing, victims of the Route 19 bus bombing in Yerushalayim, and individuals wounded in attacks along Jaffa Street.

In 2015, a jury found both the Palestinian Authority and the PLO responsible for the attacks and ordered them to pay $655.5 million in damages. However, that ruling was later overturned on appeal after a court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the case.

Over the past decade, the victims and their legal team, including attorneys Nitsana Darshan-Leitner and Kent Yalowitz, pursued an extended legal fight that reached the Supreme Court and involved legislative changes passed by Congress. Central to this effort was the enactment of the PSJVTA law, which states that certain actions by foreign entities—such as payments tied to terrorism or continued activity connected to the United States—may be considered consent to U.S. jurisdiction.

In its 2025 decision, the Supreme Court sided with the plaintiffs, ruling that jurisdiction exists. The court highlighted that policies involving payments to individuals responsible for attacks on American citizens create sufficient legal ties to the United States under the new law.

Following that decision, the appeals court was tasked with deciding whether to restore the original judgment or allow the case to be retried. Taking into account the lengthy legal process and Congress’s stated interest in combating terrorism, the court ruled that the law applies retroactively and reinstated the original verdict.

Attorney Nitsana Darshan-Leitner described the decision as a turning point in the fight against terrorism, saying it restores the victims’ ability to seek compensation after years of legal battles and reshapes the legal landscape by enabling U.S. courts to hear cases that were previously beyond their reach.

Dr. Alan Bauer, who was seriously wounded in a 2002 Yerushalayim attack and is among the plaintiffs, said the path to justice had been long and difficult, but emphasized that the victims remained determined throughout and characterized the ruling as a historic victory.