A tense confrontation unfolded in Ashdod when a band of extremists opposed to any deal on giyus of bnei yeshivah forced their way into the residential building where Shas MK Yinon Azoulay resides. Their goal was to intimidate him over recent legislative developments tied to the ongoing giyus debate.
Footage from the scene captures the group gathered outside his door, pounding and shouting, while a neighbor tries to push them back and urges them to leave the floor. She warns them repeatedly to move downstairs, but her appeals are brushed off. When she informs them that she has alerted the authorities, the crowd escalates, erupting in cries of “traitor.”
This outburst comes at a time when representatives of both Shas and United Torah Judaism have been singled out by radicals who resent their participation in advancing the latest proposal intended to formalize draft guidelines for bochurim learning in yeshivos.
{Matzav.com}
U.S. District Judge James Boasberg made it clear on Wednesday that he intends to push ahead swiftly with the long-delayed contempt proceedings over whether senior administration officials knowingly brushed aside his directive halting the removal of Venezuelan migrants back in March. From the outset of the hearing, he signaled that he expects cooperation from both sides — and that he is particularly interested in hearing testimony from two Justice Department lawyers deeply connected to the events in question.
The dispute centers on President Donald Trump’s reliance on the Alien Enemies Act — a wartime statute dating back to 1798 — to expel more than 250 Venezuelans earlier this year. Those individuals were flown to a maximum-security facility in El Salvador, despite an emergency order Boasberg issued on March 15 instructing that the flights be stopped immediately. The renewed focus on the contempt issue, and Boasberg’s assertive role overseeing it, is almost certain to inflame Trump’s allies on Capitol Hill.
Boasberg appeared undeterred by the political crossfire. “This has been sitting for a long time,” he remarked, noting that the court had an obligation to proceed. He reiterated that he would “move promptly” and directed attorneys for both the Justice Department and the migrants’ class-action counsel to submit written proposals by Monday outlining how they believe the case should now advance.
The government made its opposition clear. “Your honor, the government objects to any further proceedings of criminal contempt,” Justice Department attorney Tiberius Davis said. Boasberg responded that he “certainly intends to determine what happened” on the day his emergency order was either knowingly or inadvertently ignored, remarking that the government “can assist me to whatever degree it wishes.” He added, “I am authorized to proceed, just as I intended to do in April, seven months ago.”
Among those the court wants to question are Justice Department lawyer Drew Ensign and Erez Reuveni, who represented the government at the time the removals occurred. Reuveni — now a whistleblower — previously testified that senior officials suggested they “may have to consider telling that court, ‘f— you’” if the judge impeded deportations under the Alien Enemies Act. To Boasberg, that alone indicated that “a factual inquiry is in order.”
The core issue remains whether officials defied his emergency order, which had instructed all flights to “immediately” return to the United States. Instead, the migrants were kept for months inside El Salvador’s CECOT supermax facility until July, when they were transported to Venezuela as part of a broader prisoner exchange that included the release of at least 10 Americans.
In April, Boasberg concluded there was “probable cause” to advance criminal contempt proceedings, pointing to what he called the administration’s “willful disregard” for the court’s authority. The matter remained dormant until Friday, when the full appeals court declined to intervene further and directed Boasberg to restart the process. That decision placed him squarely in the sights of Trump and several Republican lawmakers, some of whom mounted a failed eleventh-hour attempt to secure his temporary suspension before the hearing convened.
Wednesday’s arguments also touched on the migrants’ request for injunctive relief. Boasberg’s emergency order in March set off a cascade of legal battles nationwide, and his courtroom became the first venue where the controversial deportations were challenged. By July, he ordered that every noncitizen removed to the El Salvador prison must be given a chance to pursue habeas review and contest any government claims about gang affiliations before being expelled again as part of the prisoner swap.
Efforts to locate the deported migrants are still underway. According to ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt, the “overwhelming” majority of those sent to El Salvador in March still wish to present their due-process arguments in court.
How the next phase will unfold is not yet clear, but Boasberg indicated that the court will examine the remaining legal and procedural issues in the weeks ahead.
{Matzav.com}
[COMMUNICATED]
Guests Of Honor:
Rabbi & Mrs Avi Schron
Parents of the Year:
Rabbi & Mrs Sholom Stahler
Rabbinical Leadership Award:
Rabbi & Mrs Avrohom Klein- Proud parents in our Yeshiva
Beloved 9th grade Rebbe for 64 years:
Horav Yisroel Meir Shain zt”l
Memorial Tribute:
Mr. Isaac Haber a”h
Sunday, December 7, 2025
The Palace, 780 Mcdonald Avenue
The White House has introduced new boundaries for journalists after staff complained that sensitive conversations were being picked up and even recorded without authorization. Press secretary Karoline Leavitt explained that these limits were put in place only after officials discovered behavior they found highly inappropriate.
As of Oct. 31, both the White House and the National Security Council confirmed that reporters may no longer freely walk into Room 140 — known as “Upper Press,” the workspace near the Oval Office where senior aides often pass through. Journalists had long been able to pop in without warning to speak with staffers, but access is now restricted to pre-arranged appointments.
During a conversation with the New York Post’s Miranda Devine on “Pod Force One,” Leavitt explained what prompted the shift. She said the administration realized that some reporters were listening in on private exchanges and even recording information without permission.
“We felt it became very inappropriate for reporters to be loitering around sensitive information in our offices,” Leavitt said. “And we did unfortunately catch some unruly reporters recording us without our permission, listening in on conversations, eavesdropping.”
She described how morning meetings with staff were being monitored by journalists lingering outside the room. “We’d have staff meetings in the morning. Some of the reporters started to pick up on that, and we’d walk out, and they would be out there trying to listen. If Secretary Rubio or the chief [of staff] want to come in and brief us on something, you’d have reporters out there heckling them. It just became an inappropriate work environment.”
Leavitt stressed that press access has not been eliminated, only regulated. Reporters may still enter the Upper Press area by scheduling a time, and she said many journalists have privately acknowledged that the arrangement is workable despite complaints online.
“A lot of the outrage you’re seeing on Twitter [X], they’ve told us privately they’re okay with how this system works so long as they can still have appointments with me to understand the news of the day,” Leavitt said.
“And we grant them that access. I give them as much time as I possibly can on my schedule, although a lot of my time is with the president and in the Oval Office and sitting in on meetings. So, I try to devote as much time as I can to the press because that is my job, right? That’s the basic duty, is for me to work with the press and make sure they’re telling the truth out there,” she added.
Not everyone is comfortable with the new rules. The White House Correspondents’ Association sharply criticized the move, claiming it weakens reporters’ ability to question key officials. The group’s president, CBS News correspondent Weijia Jiang, made its position clear: “The White House Correspondents’ Association unequivocally opposes any effort to limit journalists from areas within the communications operations of the White House that have long been open for newsgathering, including the press secretary’s office.”
{Matzav.com}
