Feed aggregator

Degel HaTorah’s Ousted Veterans Join New Candidates for First Election Strategy Meeting

Matzav -

Days after a major shakeup within Degel HaTorah that saw longtime MKs Moshe Gafni and Uri Maklev replaced on the party’s Knesset slate, the veteran representatives sat alongside their successors Monday night for the first time as the party began preparations for the upcoming election.

The meeting, held at Degel HaTorah headquarters in Bnei Brak, was billed as a kickoff and organizational session ahead of the election. Both the newly selected candidates and the veteran lawmakers who were removed from the slate participated.

The gathering followed several turbulent days for the Litvishe party after the removal of Gafni and Maklev, longtime fixtures in chareidi politics. The manner in which their replacement was handled drew considerable criticism and generated an internal storm within the party.

In an official Degel HaTorah announcement distributed by spokesman Yaakov Morgenbesser, who in recent years served as Gafni’s spokesman, the party notably listed its new candidates first, followed by its veteran representatives.

According to the announcement, those attending included the party’s new chairman, MK Yaakov Asher, who is also expected to serve as chairman of United Torah Judaism; MK Yitzchok Pindrus; Moshe Rosenthal; Yehuda Weissfish; Dovid Zaltz; Dovid Ochana; and Eliyahu Baruchi.

Also present were Gafni, who continues to hold the title of chairman of the Degel HaTorah movement; Maklev, who remains a member of the party leadership; Yitzchok Reich; Menachem Shapiro, director of the party’s municipal department; and Degel HaTorah director Moshe Schiffman.

The meeting focused on preparations for Israel’s 26th Knesset elections and on strategies for mobilizing Degel HaTorah supporters to turn out on Election Day.

The participants also discussed efforts to maximize support for the joint United Torah Judaism slate, which is expected to include Degel HaTorah together with Agudas Yisroel and the new party established by MK Meir Porush.

The gathering marked the first time since the controversial reshuffling of the Degel HaTorah slate that Gafni and Maklev appeared together in an official party setting with the candidates selected to lead the party into the next election.

{Matzav.com}

12-Year-Old Boy in Lithuania Learns Four Blatt Gemara a Day, Hopes to Finish Shas by His Bar Mitzvah

Matzav -

A 12-year-old Jewish boy living in Lithuania has inspired listeners in Israel after revealing that he learns four blatt Gemara every day and hopes to complete the entire Shas by his bar mitzvah next year.

Yehuda Sheinfeld, who lives with his family in Kovno, Lithuania, spoke with radio host Menachem Toker on the Kol Chai program “Zman Avir” about the ambitious daily learning schedule he has maintained for approximately a year.

Yehuda first attracted attention after surprising Reb Eli Stefansky during one of his popular Gemara shiurim by telling him about the learning schedule he had undertaken.

During his conversation with Toker, Yehuda explained that his family has been living in Lithuania for 14 years. His parents originally moved there after being asked to assist local Jews with kosher food, Torah classes and other Jewish needs.

What was initially supposed to be a roughly 10-month shlichus ultimately became a long-term commitment. Yehuda said his father enjoyed the work he was doing for the Jewish community, and the family decided to remain in Kovno.

Yehuda said there is no established Jewish school available for him in Lithuania, and his primary companions are his own siblings. Much of his Torah learning is therefore accomplished through Rabbi Stefansky’s online shiurim.

“With the rebbe’s shiurim, you can accomplish even more. He makes the shiurim very interesting,” Yehuda said.

The 12-year-old also encouraged listeners to begin learning along with the program as a new masechta gets underway.

Yehuda’s daily schedule consists of the Daf Yomi plus another three blatt from masechtos of his choosing. He said he has maintained the four-blatt-a-day pace for approximately a year, with his sights set on an extraordinary milestone: completing Shas by his bar mitzvah.

“I still have a long way to go,” Yehuda said.

His interest in the shiurim began through his father, who learns every day. After hearing the classes himself, Yehuda became intrigued and eventually began learning them on his own.

Yehuda also described his family’s extensive activities on behalf of Lithuania’s Jewish population.

For Rosh Hashanah, the family participated in tefillos and programs organized by the local Jewish community at a hotel rented to accommodate approximately 400 people. Among those who attended were numerous Jewish university students who are not shomrei mitzvos but wanted an opportunity to experience and learn about Rosh Hashanah.

Yehuda said his father delivers Torah shiurim almost every day. On Shabbos, additional shiurim are held, along with opportunities for participants to learn b’chavrusa.

Toker was visibly moved by the remarkable 12-year-old’s story, calling Yehuda an “ambassador of the Daf Yomi” and telling him that he wanted to attend his bar mitzvah celebration.

“You’re invited, and you have a special invitation, with Hashem’s help,” Yehuda replied.

{Matzav.com}

For Generations, Building a Mikvah Required Wealth. Not Anymore.

Matzav -

You’ve seen the plaque on the mikvah wall with someone else’s name. You’ve heard about the bracha it brings. The lives that it has changed.  And you’ve thought  “If only I could build a mikvah too.”                        For as long as you can remember, the zechus of building a mikvah belonged to only a fortunate few.

Today, through Tomchei Taharah, it can belong to you. 

By choosing a donation amount that works for you, you become part of something far greater than any one person could accomplish alone.

Build a Mikvah Every Month.

Hundreds of ordinary monthly partners join together to build 12 new mikvahs every year, bringing taharah to communities across the world.

The Chofetz Chaim teaches that when people join together to give, each person is credited in Shamayim as if they gave it all. 

Click HERE to start your monthly partnership!

Newsom Says He’ll Stay Out of 2028 Race if Kamala Harris Runs: ‘Why Would I?’

Matzav -

California Gov. Gavin Newsom said he would not seek the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028 if Kamala Harris enters the race, declaring that he has no interest in competing against the former vice president for the White House.

Newsom made the disclosure during an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper while the two were fly-fishing in Montana. The conversation was part of a new CNN series in which Tapper joins political figures in settings meaningful to them and discusses their lives, careers and political futures.

As Tapper discussed what could become a large Democratic presidential field, he noted that Newsom would not necessarily be the only Californian considering a campaign. He mentioned Rep. Ro Khanna as well as Harris.

“I don’t know if she runs, but we’ll see,” Newsom said. When Tapper noted Harris had “called around,” the governor added, “But I wouldn’t run if she ran.”

Tapper pressed Newsom to make clear that he was ruling out competing against Harris.

“Of course not. Why would I? I wouldn’t do that to her,” Newsom said. “I wouldn’t waste everyone’s time. Who needs that?”

Newsom said a presidential primary pitting him against Harris would be counterproductive for both of them, describing such a contest as “mutually assured destruction.”

“Electorally, it’s a gift from God for everybody else,” he said. “It services no greater good.”

Tapper pointed out that Harris has already sought the presidency twice, while Newsom has never mounted a White House campaign.

Newsom acknowledged that the distinction could provide an argument for him to run, but said that he and Harris draw support from many of the same people and political networks.

“That would be the case you’d make. Pretty good one, actually,” Newsom said. “I know her base of supporters. I know her friends. The Venn diagram on that is just pure crossover.”

Newsom also said that any decision about seeking the presidency would first have to receive the backing of his family. He said a White House campaign would be a “non-starter” without the support of his four children.

His remarks provided his clearest answer yet about how a Harris candidacy would affect his own deliberations over 2028. Earlier this year, when CNN asked about the possibility of the two running against one another, Newsom said, “And I’ve never gotten in the way of her ambition ever. I haven’t. And I don’t imagine I would in the future.”

Harris, meanwhile, has left open the possibility of another presidential campaign. Asked previously whether she had decided about 2028, Harris said she had not, while reiterating, “I am not done.”

Neither Newsom nor Harris has formally announced a campaign for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination. Newsom’s latest comments, however, establish one condition that he says would keep him out of the contest entirely: a decision by Harris to run.

New York Democrat Gov. Kathy Hochul Pardons Convicted Felon Migrant to Protect Him from Deportation

Matzav -

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul granted a full pardon to a Dominican immigrant convicted of felony assault, a move that eliminated the conviction underlying his removal proceedings and brought an abrupt end to a major Supreme Court case over whether certain noncitizens held for extended periods are constitutionally entitled to bond hearings.

The case centered on Keisy Guerrero Mariano, identified in Supreme Court filings as Keisy G.M., a lawfully present Dominican citizen whose case had become the vehicle for resolving a broader dispute over the federal government’s authority to detain certain noncitizens without bond while removal proceedings are pending.

Mariano pleaded guilty to second-degree assault in New York in 2015 and served time for the offense. Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrested him in 2020, with the aggravated-felony conviction serving as the basis for removal proceedings and mandatory immigration detention.

Mariano remained in ICE custody for nearly two years before being released in 2022 under a nationwide injunction connected to health concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Before that release, U.S. District Judge John P. Cronan of the Southern District of New York rejected Mariano’s habeas petition in November 2021.

The legal landscape changed in May 2024, when the Second Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that ruling and concluded that the government must provide noncitizens with a bond hearing when their detention becomes “unreasonably long.” The appeals court held that failing to provide such a hearing would violate the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.

The Trump administration appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court, arguing against the Second Circuit’s conclusion that the Constitution requires bond hearings in such circumstances. Under federal law, certain noncitizens convicted of specified crimes are subject to mandatory detention while removal proceedings are underway.

The Supreme Court agreed in June to hear the dispute. The case initially involved both Mariano and Carol Williams Black, a Jamaican national who had also challenged his prolonged detention.

Black’s portion of the dispute became moot after he left the United States and submitted a declaration stating that he did not intend to return. That left Mariano’s case as the vehicle through which the justices were expected to decide the constitutional question.

Then, in late August, Hochul granted Mariano a full and unconditional pardon for the aggravated-felony conviction at the center of his immigration case.

The timing immediately changed the Supreme Court litigation. According to Solicitor General D. John Sauer, the pardon came three calendar days before Mariano’s merits brief was due at the Supreme Court.

Because the assault conviction was the basis for Mariano’s pending removal proceedings and the government’s argument that he was subject to mandatory detention, the pardon meant he would no longer be subject to that detention on those grounds, the Solicitor General told the Court.

As a result, both sides agreed that Mariano’s habeas case had become moot.

The parties filed a joint stipulation to dismiss the Supreme Court case on September 11, and the Court’s official docket records that the case was dismissed that day under Supreme Court Rule 46.

The development means the Supreme Court will not use Mariano’s case to decide whether the Second Circuit was correct in holding that prolonged mandatory immigration detention can trigger a constitutional right to a bond hearing.

The Trump administration, however, has made clear that it intends to continue challenging the Second Circuit precedent.

Sauer informed the Supreme Court that the administration would look for another case — an “alternative vehicle” — that could allow the justices to resolve the same legal questions during the Court’s 2026-27 term.

Hochul’s pardon drew criticism from Iowa Solicitor General Eric Wessan, who questioned the governor’s decision to erase the conviction while the Supreme Court litigation was pending.

“I wonder how many non-American felons Governors like Hochul will choose to fully pardon and free to avoid them facing consequences for their actions,” Wessan added.

The federal government had considered asking the Supreme Court to vacate the lower-court rulings after Mariano’s case became moot. Sauer said the administration ultimately decided against doing so, reasoning that vacating those decisions would not resolve conflicting rulings among the federal appeals courts and could delay another suitable case from reaching the Supreme Court.

Instead, the Second Circuit’s ruling remains in place while the administration searches for another case through which it can ask the Supreme Court to decide the broader constitutional dispute.

The episode therefore ended Mariano’s particular Supreme Court battle without resolving the underlying question that brought the case before the justices: when, if ever, the Constitution requires the federal government to provide a bond hearing to a noncitizen who would otherwise be subject to mandatory immigration detention for an extended period.

Pages

Subscribe to NativUSA Portal aggregator