Feed aggregator

Bnei Brak Mayor Chanoch Zeibert is pushing back against reports portraying the city as being in financial collapse, saying that a combination of wartime revenue losses, delayed property-tax collections, soaring special-education expenses and other unexpected shortfalls created a temporary budget gap that the municipality is now working to close.

In an extensive interview with B’Chadrei Chareidim ahead of Rosh Hashanah 5787, Zeibert addressed growing public concern over Bnei Brak’s finances, problems with street cleanliness and possible cuts to municipal services and employees. He insisted that the city’s difficulties are manageable and said he expects Bnei Brak to finish 2026 with a balanced budget.

“There is nothing ‘sudden’ here, and there is no conspiracy of decline. This is a controlled situation whose background needs to be understood in depth,” Zeibert said.

He explained that Bnei Brak has traditionally operated with little financial cushion, balancing revenues and expenditures each year while simultaneously funding numerous municipal projects.

“First of all, we are built around balancing the budget anew every year alongside projects, and it does not balance itself automatically. It is important to say that Bnei Brak has always lived on the edge in terms of income versus expenses, and that is how it operates — without surpluses and without large profits. We are not a wealthy city. We have the BBC complex, without which we would not be able to sustain a city of Torah, and the large sums that come in from there are what keep the city above water every year. What happened is that in 2025, we dealt with specific events that opened budget gaps for us. Everyone was saying it would be a year of growth, and accordingly, we also built economic plans and a budget that we brought for approval…”

Then came the war.

“We entered a period of war during which you cannot simply stop a budget. The city has to function, provide activities — perhaps even more than usual — and allow everything to continue flourishing. On the other hand, it caused us a loss of revenue.”

Zeibert pointed to several examples, each of which he said cost the municipality more than NIS 10 million.

“Let’s take several examples, each one of which cost the municipality more than NIS 10 million. First example: floors that the municipality rents to the Defense Ministry — everything was delayed by almost a year because of all the security events. Not only did we lose monthly rent and property tax, we also paid management fees on the property. Second example: parking. Not only did no money come in from parking throughout the security period, we have a municipal ordinance regulating parking rates that has not been signed for nearly two years because there is no interior minister in office. It was included in our revenue projections, and we prepared expenditures against it, but in practice, it did not happen.”

Zeibert said the slowdown in construction and commercial real estate added to the municipality’s problems.

“Third example: betterment levies and commercial property tax, where there has been a slowdown in the country over the past year and a half. There isn’t much new commercial construction, occupancy is delayed, companies prefer to leave floors vacant so they don’t have to pay property tax and management fees. In wealthy cities, this is felt less. In Bnei Brak, it was another burden. Should I continue?”

Asked to elaborate, Zeibert pointed to one of the city’s largest growing expenses: special education and individualized assistance.

“Okay. There is the major issue of education and personal assistance. Today, many people choose to take an individual package instead of a special-education institution, and that creates an enormous burden. About two-thirds of the cost is paid by the Education Ministry and approximately one-third by the municipality, which reaches sums of NIS 15 million to NIS 20 million a year, and sometimes even more. These things are growing at a dizzying pace that you are not prepared for.”

The mayor said Bnei Brak entered 2026 having already instituted efficiencies based on lessons learned from the previous year, only to encounter another problem: delays in collecting municipal property taxes, known as arnona.

“In 2026, despite the efficiencies we introduced in many areas as lessons learned from the 2025 deficit, we got stuck with a cash-flow problem involving property-tax collection after the Interior Ministry published the discount table late this year, and all collections were delayed. The money will eventually come in, but a cash-flow problem is never healthy, especially when you are trying to stabilize such a large system — this is the sixth-largest city in Israel.”

Zeibert said the late approval of arnona discount schedules forced the municipality to begin collecting payments approximately three months behind schedule. At the same time, Bnei Brak was carrying out major construction and infrastructure projects.

He said another source of anticipated revenue disappeared when bidders failed to participate in tenders issued by the city’s economic development company amid the construction slowdown.

“There were many tenders from the economic company that, because of the entire construction freeze, people simply did not bid on. They did not bid — money did not come in, and that caused a deficit because no one anticipated that people would not bid on the tenders.”

Taken together, Zeibert said, the delayed collections, infrastructure spending and rapidly rising education expenses produced an unusually pronounced gap during the opening quarters of 2026.

“There are always gaps at the beginning of a year, but this time it was felt much more.”

Asked why the municipality’s financial problems became public in a manner that generated widespread concern, Zeibert said some Interior Ministry officials had told the city that the information had not been intended for publication.

“There were officials in the Interior Ministry who told us they did not want to publicize it, but the information leaked out,” he said, declining to elaborate.

Zeibert nevertheless insisted that the city has a clear plan for addressing the shortfall.

“Certainly. We know exactly how to identify the gap, and we expect to present all the stages and solutions to the Interior Ministry and local government authorities. We have major projects in the pipeline, including a project that will bring in significant sums and that the public will hear about very soon, which is now in its final stages. Parking enforcement is returning, tenders are being published, and money is beginning to come in, alongside efficiency measures that we are implementing and constantly reviewing. Everything is being managed under supervision, and very soon we will present the precise figures that will prove that things are balancing out.”

Zeibert said municipal officials have already presented an initial recovery plan to the Interior Ministry and expect to return within two weeks with a more comprehensive proposal.

“I say and declare constantly that, with Hashem’s help, we will finish 2026 with a balanced budget, without exceeding what is permitted. The year 2027 will also be a balanced year, with Hashem’s help, and we will remain vigilant. Again, assuming there are no significant surprises.”

Beyond the budget, Zeibert addressed another issue that has generated considerable frustration among Bnei Brak residents: declining cleanliness on city streets.

The mayor acknowledged that residents had legitimate complaints and said he was personally familiar with conditions throughout the city.

“Let’s tell the truth about this as well. I walk around all the time, and I know exactly what is happening. We are all scarred from the past. About two years ago, at the beginning of 2025, we ran a sanitation program that required an additional NIS 20 million in the budget. We approved the overage, and in the end, we exceeded that by another NIS 17 million beyond the program. When half of 2026 had passed, it became clear that we were exceeding the budget by another NIS 10 million. I understood that there was no way to allow gaps like these to open and that we could not continue this way.”

According to Zeibert, tighter municipal oversight revealed that some private sanitation contractors were being paid for work they were not actually completing.

“We discovered that the contracting companies were not always doing the work properly. Our inspections proved it unequivocally: a company takes money but does not carry out all the collections. For example, a company is supposed to empty four underground garbage containers at a particular location; in practice, they empty only one but report four. Or they bring one truck and photograph it in several locations. Contractors who did things like this created a situation in which the city suffered. I decided to get deeply involved and demand strict oversight of the companies, with GPS and close supervision.”

Zeibert acknowledged that the crackdown angered the sanitation contractors and initially contributed to visible problems on the streets.

“That’s correct. The companies flexed their muscles because suddenly they were being hit in the pocket, and people come and complain — rightfully so — when they see problems in the streets. But that is part of my job, and I am strong enough to do it,” Zeibert said.

“The alternative was to look the other way and continue deepening the deficit because of this. It is like medical treatment — sometimes it hurts, but you have to do it. Baruch Hashem, we can already see improvement in the city compared to what it was. We have resumed additional garbage collections, the situation is steadily improving, and things on the ground are returning to normal. I hope that within a period of time the city will once again be clean, but without it costing the residents and the municipality many times more.”

Zeibert also sought to reassure Bnei Brak’s municipal employees that they would not be made to bear the brunt of the city’s cost-cutting effort.

“Under no circumstances will we allow only the employees to carry the burden. We are holding lengthy working meetings in order to minimize the impact on employees,” Zeibert said.

He argued that confronting excessive spending by outside sanitation companies was itself necessary to protect city employees and essential municipal services.

“The truth is that if I had not put things in order with the sanitation contractors, the money ultimately would have had to come from somewhere else. Either culture would have been harmed, or education, or welfare, or the employees would have been hurt much more.”

Zeibert revealed that he had received a firm demand to dismiss a number of municipal workers but resisted doing so.

“I received an unequivocal demand to fire a number of municipal employees, but the employees are dear to my heart and I did not want to fire a single worker. So we decided to carry out a very small efficiency measure regarding the employees and leave the workers at their posts, out of respect for their work.”

“We appreciate the effort and dedication of our employees, but we have a short blanket. We are performing the surgery that is necessary to protect the home, and with Hashem’s help, we will get through this challenging period with complete success.”

{Matzav.com}

Tensions within United Torah Judaism continued to escalate Thursday, as Agudas Yisroel Secretary-General Chanoch Zeibert formally notified Meir Porush and Eliakim Stark that their membership in Agudas Yisroel has ended following their departure from the party and establishment of the new Chomas Toras Yisroel faction.

In separate letters sent to Porush and Stark, Zeibert wrote that their decision to leave Agudas Yisroel and run in the elections for the 26th Knesset as part of a separate party automatically terminated their membership in Agudas Yisroel, along with all rights and authority stemming from that membership.

The move comes one day after Porush and Stark announced the establishment of Chomas Toras Yisroel amid the ongoing upheaval within United Torah Judaism.

On Thursday morning, Hamivaser, the newspaper affiliated with Shlomei Emunim, portrayed the split as merely a technical move. Zeibert, however, rejected that characterization in his letters, citing Agudas Yisroel’s bylaws.

Under those rules, Zeibert wrote, a member of Agudas Yisroel may not simultaneously be a member of, belong to, or associate with another political party or an organization politically affiliated with another party. He therefore maintained that Porush and Stark’s move to Chomas Toras Yisroel resulted in the immediate termination of their Agudas Yisroel membership.

One immediate consequence involves control over the party’s finances.

Earlier this week, at Monday’s meeting of Agudas Yisroel’s National Council, Porush and Stark were approved as authorized signatories on the party’s bank account. That decision was made before the two publicly announced that they were leaving Agudas Yisroel.

Zeibert informed them Thursday that the authorization is now void and that they no longer possess signing authority over Agudas Yisroel’s accounts.

In his letter, Zeibert also raised questions about when Porush decided that he would not run as part of Agudas Yisroel. According to Zeibert, there is reasonable cause to suspect that Porush already knew at the time of the meeting that he would not be running on the Agudas Yisroel slate, even as the party leadership was approving him as an authorized signatory.

Zeibert added that the following day, when the electoral lists were submitted, Porush told him that he had not voted in favor of the provision granting him signing authority.

The split will also have significant financial consequences for Agudas Yisroel itself.

Zeibert wrote that under an agreement between the parties comprising United Torah Judaism, Agudas Yisroel will now receive approximately half of the political funding allocation it had previously received. The other half will be allocated to the newly established party headed by Porush.

With Agudas Yisroel therefore facing a substantially different financial structure — and with the Knesset election campaign underway — Zeibert announced that the party is temporarily freezing its regular operations.

For the time being, ongoing Agudas Yisroel activities will be suspended, with the exception of operations necessary to prepare for and conduct the upcoming election campaign.

Despite what Zeibert characterized as a complete separation between the two parties going forward, he acknowledged that some coordination will still be necessary during the election period.

He therefore asked Porush and Stark to appoint a representative on behalf of Chomas Toras Yisroel who can serve as a liaison with Agudas Yisroel on matters requiring cooperation between the two parties during the campaign.

The letters mark another significant step in the rapidly widening split within the chassidish political camp, transforming what Shlomei Emunim has described as a technical electoral arrangement into a formal organizational separation, with immediate consequences for party membership, finances and authority.

{Matzav.com}

Thousands of yungeleit in the Ateres Shlomo kollel network across Eretz Yisroel received three months of overdue stipends on Thursday after an unusual agreement in which Rosh Yeshiva Rav Shalom Ber Sorotzkin agreed to travel with a wealthy American donor to Uman for Rosh Hashanah in exchange for the donor covering the massive shortfall.

Thousands of avreichim learning in Ateres Shlomo kollelim throughout Eretz Yisroel had not received their regular monthly stipends for three consecutive months due to serious financial difficulties.

The financial strain was attributed in part to the low exchange rate of the U.S. dollar, which has reduced the value in shekels of donations raised overseas.

The administration of the sprawling Torah network had been attempting to navigate the mounting budgetary shortfalls, but the crisis appeared to have no immediate solution, leaving thousands of avreichim and their families awaiting badly needed funds as the Yomim Noraim and the Tishrei Yomim Tovim approached.

The dramatic breakthrough came when Rav Sorotzkin visited the home of a wealthy donor from Miami.

During the visit, the donor surprised the Rosh Yeshiva with an unusual proposition.

“If the Rosh Yeshiva comes with me to Uman for Rosh Hashanah, I will cover all the debts that same day and transfer the full amount for the three months,” the donor told him.

Rav Sorotzkin, who carries the enormous responsibility of sustaining the Ateres Shlomo Torah network, did not immediately respond.

Late Wednesday night, Rav Sorotzkin held an urgent telephone consultation with one of the Gedolei Yisroel, presenting the complicated question and the condition imposed by the American donor.

After considering the circumstances and the plight of the thousands of families awaiting a solution before Yom Tov, the Gadol instructed Rav Sorotzkin to accept the offer.

Rav Sorotzkin immediately contacted the donor and gave him his answer.

“Transfer the money, and I’m coming,” he said.

Rav Sorotzkin subsequently departed for Uman, with a photograph showing the Rosh Yeshiva aboard the plane en route.

Within hours, the arrangement produced its intended result.

On Thursday, the bank accounts of thousands of Ateres Shlomo avreichim were credited with the outstanding funds, with the full amount of all three months of unpaid stipends deposited into their accounts.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has opened a massive collection of previously unreleased city records concerning air quality and health hazards following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, accusing government leaders at the time of misleading New Yorkers about the dangers of breathing the air around Ground Zero.

The Mamdani administration on Tuesday made approximately 170,000 pages of records available through a new public portal examining the city’s response to the attacks and their aftermath. The city’s fiscal 2027 budget includes $34.2 million for the creation and maintenance of the portal, which officials say will eventually contain additional records from numerous city agencies.

“Close to 25 years later, more people have died from 9/11-related illnesses than were killed on the day itself,” Mamdani said during a press conference announcing the release.

Mamdani appeared alongside relatives of 9/11 victims, first responders and advocates. Rep. Jerry Nadler and comedian Jon Stewart, who has spent years advocating for 9/11 first responders and survivors, also participated in the event.

“It would be one thing if government had stood alongside survivors and provided them with everything they needed at every step of the way,” Mamdani added, noting that “could not be further” from what occurred.

“People got sick because the leaders they trusted lied and told them they were safe to breathe in toxic air,” the mayor continued.

The newly released material includes records dealing with health concerns, environmental conditions and the city’s actions following the destruction of the World Trade Center. Among the documents are the so-called Harding Memo and the “68 boxes” of records that officials say were not located until 2025 despite repeated Freedom of Information Law requests.

The release also brings an end to two lawsuits filed against the city by 9/11 Health Watch, which had fought for access to records concerning what city officials knew about environmental and health dangers following the attacks.

Ben Chevat, executive director of 9/11 Health Watch, thanked Mamdani “for being the Mayor, after 25 years, who finally begins to answer the question, ‘What did the City know about the dangers from the toxic cloud at Ground Zero and when did it know it?’”

Mamdani is the fifth mayor to lead New York City since the attacks. Rudy Giuliani was mayor on September 11, 2001, and was succeeded by Michael Bloomberg, Bill de Blasio, Eric Adams and Mamdani.

The terrorist attacks killed 2,977 victims at the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and aboard United Airlines Flight 93 in Pennsylvania. In the years since, however, the health consequences of exposure to the toxic dust and debris have continued to claim lives and cause serious illnesses.

More than 400,000 people were exposed to contaminants resulting from the destruction of the World Trade Center, according to the 9/11 Memorial & Museum. Its figures show approximately 140,000 people enrolled in the World Trade Center Health Program as of March 2024, with about 49,000 first responders and survivors diagnosed with cancers certified by the program as connected to their World Trade Center exposure.

The health consequences remain particularly pronounced among first responders. A report released this month by the city and FDNY found that more than 10,000 FDNY members have been certified as suffering from a physical health condition related to 9/11.

The World Trade Center Health Program was established under the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act, signed into law by President Barack Obama in 2011. The program provides medical monitoring and treatment for eligible responders and survivors suffering from conditions associated with exposure to the World Trade Center disaster.

During Tuesday’s press conference, Mamdani said the documents being made public could help provide a clearer picture of what city officials knew about the environmental dangers surrounding Ground Zero and how the government responded.

Asked specifically by a reporter whether Giuliani had lied about air quality following the attacks, Mamdani declined to make that accusation directly.

“I leave it to New Yorkers to make their judgements.”

Mamdani added, “What we want to do is finally allow them the documents that they have long been demanding.”

The initial 170,000-page release is only the beginning. Mamdani said additional batches of records will be published during the coming year, potentially bringing the total number of available documents much higher and allowing survivors, first responders, families and researchers to examine records that had remained inaccessible for decades.

Yesterday, Agudath Israel of America filed an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief in the Supreme Court of the United States in Grand v. City of University Heights, a case involving the right to hold religious gatherings in the home.

The case centers on Daniel Grand, a man who sought to organize an at-home minyan (a Jewish prayer gathering requiring a quorum of ten men) on Shabbos. Because observant Jews cannot drive or use electronics on Shabbos, the city’s alleged concerns regarding traffic and noise were entirely negated. Nonetheless, University Heights treated the gathering as “a home operating as a house of worship” and required Mr. Grand to obtain a special use permit, while also encouraging neighbors to report gatherings and deploying police surveillance of the home. Mr. Grand sued the City in federal court. Ultimately the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals declined to reach the merits of his religious-liberty claims, ruling instead that they were not yet ripe because the local zoning board had not yet made a final determination as to whether the permit requirement applied to his gatherings.

Agudath Israel’s brief urged the Supreme Court to reverse that decision, arguing that religious Americans should not be forced to submit to a discretionary permitting regime before a court may consider whether government action has already chilled core religious exercise in the home.

The brief explains to the Court how deeply religious practices and the Jewish home are intertwined, giving examples such as sitting shiva in the home (thus requiring minyan to take place there as well), the obligation of teaching children, beshivtecha b’vaisecha, while sitting at home (recited every day in Shema) and bonding with family around the Shabbos and Yom Tov table. The brief relates the extensive history of government’s attempts to regulate religious gatherings in homes and the steps the founding fathers took to curtail that power.

“A small prayer gathering in a private home is not merely a land-use issue.” said Daniel Kaminetsky, General Counsel of Agudath Israel. “It is a core exercise of faith. Zoning laws and permit requirements should not be used to burden religious worship in the home. The First Amendment and RLUIPA were designed to protect religious practice from exactly this kind of government interference, and we trust that the Court will reaffirm that religious worship is not dependent on the permission of local officials.”

Agudath Israel thanks the Harvard Law School’s Religious Freedom Clinic and the attorneys who prepared the brief, Josh McDaniel, Kathryn Mahoney, and Jake McIntosh.

A 23-year-old Quebec man has pleaded guilty to deliberately opening fire on a Montreal yeshiva in November 2023, although prosecutors say investigators found insufficient evidence to establish that the attack was motivated by antisemitism.

Abdirazak Mehdi Ahmed, of LaSalle, Quebec, entered his guilty plea Wednesday in a Montreal courtroom in connection with the shooting. Prosecutor Jean-Christophe Arsenault said following the hearing that the police investigation had failed to uncover evidence sufficient to prove that the attack was an antisemitic hate crime.

“There was no evidence that we could present, beyond a reasonable doubt, that this was a hate crime,” Arsenault said, explaining that prosecutors therefore could not raise such a motive in court.

During the hearing before Judge Pierre Labelle, the prosecutor said both sides are expected to jointly recommend a prison sentence of 66 months when the case returns to court in October.

The sentencing recommendation could have been presented immediately, but the proceeding was postponed after members of Montreal’s Jewish community asked to participate in the sentencing process. Community representatives were informed last week that Ahmed intended to plead guilty and requested an opportunity to have their voices heard before the sentence is imposed.

The shooting took place on November 12, 2023, at approximately 5 a.m.

According to the agreed statement of facts, Ahmed fired four shots into the entrance door of the yeshiva before jumping into the passenger seat of a stolen black Acura as it was moving away from the scene.

Investigators subsequently located the vehicle and discovered a black surgical mask and gloves inside. DNA recovered from the items was linked to Ahmed.

Police also recovered two 9mm rounds from the vehicle that matched the four bullets and shell casings discovered at the yeshiva. Cellphone-location evidence further showed that Ahmed’s phone traveled along the route taken by the getaway vehicle.

Ahmed was arrested in May 2024. While being held in custody, he made incriminating statements about the shooting to an undercover officer who had been placed in his cell.

A shooting charge against another suspect, 21-year-old Feijo Lito Joseph, was subsequently dropped. Joseph, however, continues to face a charge connected to driving the stolen vehicle and allegedly assisting the gunman in fleeing the scene.

The November 12 shooting came amid a deeply unsettling period for Montreal’s Jewish community.

In an earlier incident that month, shots were fired at a yeshiva at approximately 4:30 a.m., before the bochurim had arrived for the day. No one was injured.

Three days later, gunfire was again directed at a Montreal yeshiva. Police received numerous calls at approximately 5 a.m. after multiple shots were heard being fired toward the building.

Despite Ahmed’s admission that he intentionally fired at the yeshiva, prosecutors stressed that the evidence gathered during the investigation did not allow them to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that antisemitism was the motive behind the attack.

Fox News anchor Bret Baier challenged Vice President JD Vance Wednesday night over President Donald Trump’s newly announced proposal to send $5,000 payments to American adults if Republicans retain control of Congress in November, raising questions about the enormous cost and accusations that the plan amounts to an election-year incentive. Trump announced the proposal at the Republican midterm convention in Dallas.

Baier raised the issue during an interview with Vance just hours after Trump unveiled the plan, telling the vice president that he could already anticipate the reaction from the president’s opponents.

“I can hear the critics’ heads exploding,” Baier told Vance late Wednesday.

“They’re saying out loud, I guarantee you: ‘The president is bribing voters to vote for Republicans to take over the House, and then he’s bankrupting the country because the deficit and debt is huge and inflation would come back if this comes into play,’” the host added.

Vance pushed back against that criticism, portraying the proposed checks as a way for Americans to benefit directly from revenue being generated by the administration’s economic policies.

The vice president described the payments as a “dividend for American workers.”

“We’re taking an extraordinary amount of revenue,” Vance said, pointing specifically to money collected through President Trump’s tariffs. The administration has previously discussed smaller tariff-funded payments, including a proposed $2,000 dividend.

“If you keep us in power and allow us to continue to do these things, then you’re going to share in some of the benefit of this incredible wealth that we’re creating in the United States of America,” the vice president continued. “I don’t think it’s a controversial idea.”

Trump unveiled the $5,000 proposal during his lengthy address Wednesday on the opening night of the Republican midterm convention in Dallas. The president tied the payments directly to Republicans maintaining control of both chambers of Congress after the November elections.

“Because of our tremendous strength and success economically, I will issue a dividend to every adult citizen in the United States of America for $5,000,” the president told the crowd.

Trump also stipulated that recipients would have to spend the money inside the United States, although he did not explain how such a requirement would be administered or enforced.

“We don’t want you going to Canada to spend the money,” Trump added. “We don’t want you going to China, to Germany.”

The proposal would require congressional authorization before any payments could be distributed. With nearly 270 million adults living in the United States, the program as broadly described by Trump would carry a price tag exceeding $1 trillion. The precise total would depend on eligibility requirements, including whether every adult citizen would qualify.

Tariff revenue alone would not currently be sufficient to finance payments of that magnitude, according to an Associated Press analysis. Vance subsequently suggested that higher-income Americans might not ultimately receive the checks, potentially reducing the total cost, although Trump did not announce such an income restriction when unveiling the plan.

For now, the $5,000 payments remain a proposal rather than an enacted federal program, with significant details still unresolved and any eventual payout dependent on congressional approval.

The British government has clarified that it does not consider Israeli Jews who visit the Kosel or are present in the Jewish Quarter of Yerushalayim to be there unlawfully, despite Britain’s adoption of a legal position concerning Israeli-controlled areas beyond the pre-1967 lines.

The clarification was issued following questions raised by Britain’s Jewish Chronicle over the possible ramifications of the government’s newly announced policy regarding territories under Israeli control beyond the Green Line.

The issue arose after British Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband announced Tuesday that Britain would prohibit goods originating from Jewish communities in Yehudah and Shomron. At the same time, the government accepted the position expressed in an advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice, which characterized Israel’s continued presence in territories captured from Jordan during the 1967 Six-Day War as unlawful.

Britain had previously drawn a distinction between Jewish communities in Yehudah and Shomron, which it has long regarded as illegal under international law, and the broader question of Israel’s control of territories captured in 1967. Regarding Yerushalayim, London has maintained that the city’s ultimate status should be resolved through negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

Britain’s decision to embrace the ICJ’s position, however, prompted a particularly sensitive question for Jews: Would that position mean that a Jew visiting the Kosel, davening there, or living in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City would now be regarded by Britain as unlawfully present?

The British Foreign Office said the answer is no.

“The government will always protect religious freedoms – including the rights of Jews to pray at the Western Wall,” a Foreign Office spokesperson told the Jewish Chronicle.

“It is not the government’s position that the presence of Israelis in Jerusalem, including the Jewish Quarter or at the Western Wall, is unlawful.”

The clarification is significant because both the Kosel and the Jewish Quarter are located beyond the Green Line, even though they are among the most historically and religiously significant Jewish sites in Yerushalayim.

In announcing Britain’s new trade measures, Miliband said the government believed that its legal position concerning Israel’s presence in the territories should be reflected in Britain’s economic dealings with those areas as well.

Miliband also unveiled what he described as a new framework for sanctions, while indicating that exemptions would be included for matters involving religion.

The Kosel and the Jewish Quarter of the Old City returned to Jewish control during the Six-Day War in 1967, when Israel captured eastern Yerushalayim from Jordan. Jews had been barred from accessing the Kosel throughout the 19 years of Jordanian rule.

In 1980, Israel formally applied Israeli law to eastern Yerushalayim and regards the entire city as its capital. Many countries, including Britain, do not recognize Israeli sovereignty over eastern portions of the city.

Despite that broader diplomatic dispute, Britain is now making clear that its newly adopted position should not be interpreted as declaring Jews who come to the Kosel to daven, or Israelis who are present in the Jewish Quarter, to be there unlawfully.

The Justice Department has directed election officials in at least 30 states to preserve records connected to the 2024 presidential election, an unusual move that comes as the department continues a sweeping legal campaign to obtain states’ complete voter-registration databases.

The letters inform the states’ chief election officials that they “are currently under investigation” and are involved in “ongoing litigation,” according to The New York Times. The Justice Department has not publicly identified the specific investigation referenced in the notices or said whether it is civil or criminal in nature.

The preservation demands come as the DOJ is pursuing states for access to full, unredacted statewide voter-registration lists. Some election officials have resisted turning over portions of the requested information, citing state privacy laws and concerns about sensitive voter data.

The preservation notices are distinct from the lawsuits the department has brought over access to voter rolls, although the two efforts involve many of the same states.

Since 2025, the Justice Department has filed lawsuits across the country seeking voter-registration records. By April, the department said it had sued 30 states and Washington, D.C., with cases targeting states under both Republican and Democratic control.

Many of those cases have subsequently been dismissed by federal courts, while others remain pending or are being appealed. A University of Wisconsin Law School tracker shows, for example, that courts dismissed cases involving Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada and New Jersey, with appeals or other proceedings continuing in several of them.

The Justice Department maintains that federal law gives the attorney general broad authority to demand election records from states in order to assess compliance with federal voting laws. In announcing its voter-roll lawsuits earlier this year, the department said the Civil Rights Act of 1960 permits the attorney general to obtain statewide registration lists for inspection and analysis, including efforts to identify potentially improper registrations.

Justice Department spokeswoman Kiersten Pels confirmed that the new preservation notices had been sent to “the states we are in active litigation against regarding their failure to provide the full” statewide registered voter list.

The department’s efforts have involved states governed by both political parties. Republican-led Idaho, Kentucky and West Virginia, for example, have been among those sued by the DOJ over their refusal to provide the full records sought by federal officials.

Arizona officials, meanwhile, said they already comply with the applicable requirements for maintaining election records and would continue doing so.

“Our office and our counties follow state document retention laws,” Calli Jones, a spokeswoman for the Arizona secretary of state’s office, said, “and to imply otherwise is an insult to the work that election administrators do in Arizona.”

The dispute is part of a broader federal effort to scrutinize voter-registration records and identify registrations that the administration believes may be invalid. The Trump administration has also sought to use federal citizenship and immigration information to check state voter rolls, an effort that has generated separate litigation over privacy, statutory authority and the accuracy of the federal data.

A Justice Department legal opinion issued in May concluded that federal law permits the department to compel production of statewide voter lists and share information with the Department of Homeland Security for investigations involving possible voter fraud.

Some state election officials have strongly objected to the federal government’s approach, describing the demands as unnecessary and overly aggressive.

Nevada Secretary of State Francisco Aguilar, a Democrat, characterized the effort as “‘flood the zone’ of harassment and intimidation and threats of legal action hoping we’d fold at some point.”

“We’re going to continue to follow the law and do what’s in the best interest of our voters,” Aguilar said.

The timing of the preservation letters is notable because they arrived shortly before the federal record-retention requirement for materials associated with the 2024 election was set to expire.

Federal law generally requires election officials to retain records and papers relating to registration and voting in federal elections for 22 months. Separate provisions of the National Voter Registration Act require states to retain certain voter-list-maintenance records for at least two years.

David Becker, a former Justice Department voting-rights lawyer, questioned why the additional preservation letters were necessary, arguing that election officials involved in litigation are already obligated to preserve material relevant to those cases.

Sending such a notice shortly before the November midterm elections “is completely meaningless,” Becker said.

“There’s only two reasons to send that letter: Either the lawyers who send it don’t understand litigation obligations, or they’re hoping that states will misinterpret it and retain more than they’re legally required,” he added.

{Matzav.com}

A decades-old airport security restriction could soon be loosened for some travelers, as the Transportation Security Administration reportedly considers allowing TSA PreCheck passengers to carry full bottles of water through security checkpoints at certain U.S. airports.

The proposed change would not initially apply nationwide. Instead, it would reportedly be introduced only at selected airports equipped with sufficiently advanced screening technology.

According to senior administration officials cited by CBS, the plan under consideration would apply at airports using newer computed tomography, or CT, scanners that can analyze the contents of a bottle and distinguish water from other liquids.

Exactly which airports might be included in the program has not yet been disclosed.

The technology necessary to screen full liquid containers already exists, but the TSA does not currently have enough of the equipment installed across the country to implement such a policy nationwide, even if it were restricted to passengers enrolled in PreCheck.

Funding presents another obstacle. According to the report, the TSA presently lacks the money necessary to deploy the advanced screening systems on a sufficiently large scale for a broader rollout.

The proposal would mark another significant easing of the airport security procedures travelers have become accustomed to since restrictions on liquids were introduced. Under current rules, passengers generally may carry liquids, gels and aerosols through checkpoints only in containers of 3.4 ounces or less, with limited exceptions.

TSA PreCheck already provides qualifying passengers with a less cumbersome screening process. Members typically have access to expedited security lanes and can generally leave on their shoes, belts and light jackets. Enrollment generally costs under $100 and lasts for five years.

The possibility that PreCheck travelers could also avoid emptying or discarding their water bottles before reaching security quickly attracted attention among frequent flyers online.

“Welcome to 2026, USA,” one Reddit user wrote.

Another commenter suggested the convenience could make the PreCheck membership worthwhile, writing, “This might finally convince me to get TSA Pre-Check, to be honest.”

Not everyone was convinced that the change would make airport travel simpler. Some travelers said a policy that applies only at certain airports — and only to PreCheck members — could produce yet another set of rules passengers have to remember as they travel from one airport to another.

“Sounds great, but I am conditioned to carry an empty bottle through security,” one commenter wrote.

“A new level of confusion coming. Airport + PreCheck variables. Oh my,” another Redditor chimed in. “In Newark I was able to bring water but in Boise I cannot. It is not fair.”

Others responded with humor, pointing to the frequently changing instructions passengers encounter at security checkpoints depending on the airport, equipment and screening lane.

“What will they yell at us about now that we can bring water?” one person asked.

“Laptop stays in the bag. No no no laptop out of the bag,” another joked.

For now, travelers should continue following existing TSA liquid restrictions. But if the proposal moves forward, passengers at airports with the necessary scanning technology could eventually find that one of the most familiar rituals of air travel — arriving at security with an empty water bottle or throwing out a full one — is no longer necessary.

{Matzav.com}

As Yidden in Eretz Yisroel prepare to usher in Rosh Hashanah 5787, Israel’s population has climbed to approximately 10.305 million people, according to new figures released by Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics.

The annual figures, published ahead of Rosh Hashanah, offer a snapshot of the country’s population over the past year, including births, deaths, immigration and emigration, as well as the religious identification of Israel’s adult Jewish population.

Of Israel’s approximately 10.305 million residents, roughly 7.828 million are classified by the Central Bureau of Statistics as “Jews and others,” representing 78.3% of the Israeli population. Approximately 2.173 million residents are Arabs, accounting for 21.7%, while another approximately 304,000 are foreign nationals.

Israel’s population increased by approximately 124,000 people since last Rosh Hashanah, representing annual population growth of 1.2%.

During the past year, approximately 182,000 babies were born in Israel, while approximately 50,000 people passed away.

At the same time, Israel recorded a negative international migration balance. Overall, migration resulted in a net reduction of approximately 8,000 people from the Israeli population during the year.

Approximately 24,000 new olim arrived in Eretz Yisroel over the course of the year, while approximately 4,000 additional people arrived through family reunification.

Another approximately 21,000 Israelis who had previously moved abroad returned to the country. However, approximately 57,000 Israelis left the country to live abroad, contributing to the negative migration balance recorded for the year.

The new figures also provide an interesting look at how adult Israeli Jews define themselves religiously.

Among Jews aged 20 and older, 39.6% described themselves as secular or nonreligious.

Another 21.8% identified themselves as traditional but “not so religious,” while 14% described themselves as traditional-religious.

Approximately 12.4% identified themselves as religious, while just 11.5% described themselves as chareidi.

The figures are based on respondents’ own definitions of their religious identity rather than on an outside determination based on observance or communal affiliation.

The data means that slightly more than one in nine Jewish Israelis aged 20 and older identify themselves as chareidi. The percentage applies specifically to the adult Jewish population and should not be confused with the percentage of Israel’s total population that is chareidi, particularly because the chareidi population has a comparatively large proportion of children under age 20.

The Central Bureau of Statistics also released an estimate of the worldwide Jewish population.

At the beginning of 2026, approximately 15.9 million Jews were estimated to be living around the world. About 46% of the world’s Jews live in Eretz Yisroel, according to the estimate.

That means that nearly half of the world’s Jewish population now resides in the Jewish state, with the remainder spread among Jewish communities throughout the world.

{Matzav.com}

Rep. Nancy Pelosi sharply criticized President Donald Trump’s handling of the war with Iran on Wednesday, arguing that the conflict could have been avoided had the United States remained in the nuclear agreement negotiated under President Barack Obama and accusing Trump of failing to fulfill his promise to quickly bring the fighting to an end.

Appearing on CNN’s “The Lead,” the California Democrat praised the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, in unusually glowing terms, calling the Obama-era agreement a “masterful, virtuoso diplomatic accomplishment.”

Pelosi began by stressing that despite her disagreement with Trump over how the United States reached the current situation, she supports the country and American forces during the ongoing conflict.

“Our country is at war. We always root for our country under any circumstance. So let’s get this done. Mr. President, you said it would take a few weeks, clearly you did not know what you were talking about.”

The war with Iran has now continued for months, despite Trump’s earlier predictions that the fighting would be relatively brief. Trump said Wednesday that he now believes the conflict will end immediately after the Nov. 3 midterm elections, contending that Iran is attempting to hold out until then in hopes of influencing American politics.

Pelosi argued that the roots of the current confrontation stretch back years, specifically to Trump’s decision during his first term to withdraw the United States from the JCPOA.

“The fact that is so sad about this war, it could have been so totally avoided. President Obama was a masterful, virtuoso diplomatic accomplishment when he did the Iran nuclear agreement. They had it stopped. We accomplished all of our goals, then this one comes in and tears that up and now says he’s going to stop the development of nuclear weapons in Iran, which he hasn’t.”

The JCPOA was reached in July 2015 between Iran and the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia, China and the European Union. Under the agreement, Iran accepted restrictions on its nuclear activities and enhanced international monitoring in return for relief from nuclear-related economic sanctions. The International Atomic Energy Agency was charged with verifying Iran’s nuclear-related commitments.

President Trump withdrew the United States from the agreement on May 8, 2018, and ordered the reimposition of U.S. sanctions that had been lifted or waived under the deal. At the time, Trump argued that the JCPOA failed to permanently prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons and did not adequately address Tehran’s ballistic missile program and regional activities.

The Obama administration and supporters of the agreement had maintained that its restrictions and inspections provided the best available mechanism for preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Trump and other critics countered that some of the deal’s nuclear restrictions eventually expired and that the agreement left other Iranian activities outside its scope.

That long-running debate has acquired new significance amid the current U.S.-Iran war and renewed international concern about Tehran’s nuclear activities. On Wednesday, the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Board of Governors referred Iran to the United Nations Security Council over its failure to cooperate with an investigation into uranium traces found at undeclared sites. Iran maintains that its nuclear program is peaceful.

Pelosi also focused on the consequences of the current fighting for American servicemembers, rejecting any effort to minimize the seriousness of the conflict.

“So it’s really sad, but our troops are in harm’s way. And this is not a small potatoes thing as that person you had on the screen might refer to it. Small potatoes is not how we describe our men and women in uniform risking their lives. So this Iran war is taking a toll on the nation.”

The conflict has also had significant economic repercussions. Oil prices have climbed above $100 per barrel amid escalating attacks and disruptions involving Iran and shipping in the region, adding to political pressure over energy costs as the United States approaches the midterm elections.

Trump, meanwhile, has continued to defend the military campaign and insist that Iran will not be permitted to acquire a nuclear weapon. At the Republican midterm convention in Dallas on Wednesday, he argued that the United States was prevailing in the confrontation and defended his administration’s strategy.

{Matzav.com}

Israeli security forces this week arrested three Palestinian Authority policemen accused of illegally establishing a checkpoint in Area C of Yehudah and Shomron and violently assaulting an Israeli reservist, following an IDF investigation that found the officers had acted outside their authority.

The three Palestinian policemen were taken into custody over their alleged involvement in the incident near Beitunia, in the Binyamin region, involving IDF reservist Shlomo Rosenthal. They are currently being questioned by Israeli security forces.

Israeli defense officials characterized the incident as a “serious deviation by the Palestinian security mechanisms,” saying the officers had exceeded their authority by operating in Area C and had endangered Rosenthal while using force against him that officials described as “aggressive and severe.”

The IDF stressed that security coordination with the Palestinian Authority continues in accordance with directives from Israel’s political leadership, but made clear that such coordination does not give PA security personnel permission to operate beyond the limits established for them.

“The IDF will not accept any deviation from procedures,” the military said.

The arrests came several weeks after an IDF investigation determined that PA policemen had set up a checkpoint in Area C, where the Palestinian Authority does not have security jurisdiction under the framework established by the Oslo Accords.

According to the investigation, the PA officers unlawfully detained Rosenthal, who was serving in the reserves at the time. Rosenthal was traveling through the area in civilian clothing and carrying a firearm when he encountered the Palestinian checkpoint.

The officers detained him and only later transferred him into the custody of the IDF, the investigation found.

Those findings contradicted the initial account of the incident, according to which the Palestinian policemen had intervened to assist Rosenthal after he was attacked and faced an immediate threat to his safety.

The subsequent IDF probe concluded that this was not what had occurred. According to the investigation, the Palestinian policemen stopped Rosenthal on their own initiative and had not arrived at the scene in response to an attack against him.

Rosenthal said the incident began as he was driving from his home toward Route 443 along the Tzir Hama’ozim road.

Upon reaching the Beitunia junction, he noticed what appeared to be a police vehicle and checkpoint. Rosenthal said he initially assumed that the men stationed there were members of an Israeli security force.

As he approached, however, he realized that the men were Palestinian Authority policemen.

Rosenthal subsequently told Arutz Sheva that the policemen blocked his path and surrounded him. The encounter then turned violent, according to his account.

Rosenthal said that after one of the officers grabbed his hand, the policemen descended upon him, sprayed him with pepper spray and kicked him. He said they confiscated his firearm, cellphone and car keys.

His eyeglasses were broken during the altercation, Rosenthal said, and the PA policemen handcuffed him before placing him inside one of their vehicles.

According to Rosenthal, he was then driven for approximately half an hour in the direction of Ramallah and brought toward the vicinity of a Palestinian police station.

At some point during the ordeal, Rosenthal was able to speak with a representative of Israel’s District Coordination and Liaison office. He was eventually transferred from Palestinian custody to IDF forces.

Rosenthal rejected claims made in the immediate aftermath of the incident that he had mistakenly entered Palestinian-controlled territory and that PA police had come to rescue him.

The IDF investigation subsequently supported key elements of Rosenthal’s account, determining that the checkpoint itself had been established in Area C and that the Palestinian officers were not authorized to operate there in the manner they had.

The episode raised serious questions over the permissible scope of activity by Palestinian security forces in Area C, which remains under Israeli security and administrative control under the Oslo framework.

Yisroel Gantz, head of the Binyamin Regional Council and chairman of the Yesha Council, welcomed the arrests, saying Israeli authorities had sent an important message regarding Israel’s security authority in the area.

“I welcome the IDF and security forces for arresting the Palestinian policemen who abducted and attacked a resident of Binyamin. This is an important and necessary step that sends a clear message: The State of Israel is the sovereign in Area C, and we will not allow the Palestinian Authority mechanisms to establish checkpoints there, abduct Israeli citizens and use violence against them,” Gantz said.

He argued that Israel’s responsibility for the security of its citizens extends beyond Area C as well.

“The security responsibility of the State of Israel does not end at the borders of Area C. Even in Area B, responsibility for the security of Israeli citizens belongs to the State of Israel, and the Palestinian Authority mechanisms must not be allowed to turn security coordination into a tool that grants them freedom of action against Israelis.”

Gantz said the arrests validated the position he had taken immediately following the incident.

“As we said immediately after the incident, a sovereign state cannot remain silent when an armed force of the Palestinian Authority crosses the boundaries of its authority and harms an Israeli citizen. I thank Central Command chief Avi Bluth, Binyamin Brigade commander Col. Anan Fares and the members of the security establishment for their determined handling of the matter. This arrest must send a clear message going forward: Wherever an Israeli citizen faces danger, the State of Israel is responsible for his security and it is the one that must act.”

The arrests mark a significant development in a case that had initially been portrayed very differently. What was first described as an intervention by PA police to assist an Israeli in danger was subsequently determined by the IDF investigation to have involved an unauthorized Palestinian checkpoint, an unlawful detention and the alleged use of serious violence against an Israeli reservist.

The three PA policemen now remain in Israeli custody as security authorities continue investigating the incident.

The NYPD will significantly increase its presence outside shuls, yeshivos and other Jewish institutions across New York City during the upcoming Yomim Noraim, with Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch saying this year’s deployment will be larger than in previous years amid heightened concerns over antisemitism and the international security situation.

City officials stressed Wednesday that there is currently no specific or credible threat targeting Rosh Hashanah or Yom Kippur observances in New York. Nevertheless, the NYPD is preparing a substantial security operation across all five boroughs, including additional uniformed officers, foot posts and dedicated patrols around batei medrash, yeshivos and other locations where large numbers of Yidden will gather.

“You will see increased NYPD presence around synagogues, yeshivas and other sensitive locations across the five boroughs,” Tisch said during a security briefing at One Police Plaza.

Tisch said the enhanced deployment reflects what she described as the security realities facing the city this year, particularly amid the ongoing war with Iran and continuing threats against Jewish targets.

“Our deployment this year at the World Trade Center for 9/11 will be larger than it has been in previous years, as will be our deployment this year for the High Holy Days at shuls and yeshivas and Jewish cultural institutions, just based on the reality of the world that we live in today,” Tisch said.

Rosh Hashanah begins Friday evening this year, coinciding with the 25th anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks. That unusual convergence has left the NYPD preparing two major security operations simultaneously: a massive deployment in Lower Manhattan surrounding the annual 9/11 commemoration and a separate citywide operation protecting Jewish institutions as Rosh Hashanah begins.

Tisch said the operation protecting Jewish communities will already be underway before the 9/11 commemorations conclude.

“As of today, there are no specific, credible threats directed at High Holy Day celebrations in New York City, but we remain vigilant,” Tisch said.

“There will be assets you see, and others that you don’t,” she added. “Our intelligence and counterterrorism bureaus are watching here at home and around the world, working closely with federal, state, local and international partners to identify emerging threats and direct resources where they are needed.”

The security measures will include additional uniformed foot posts and specialized house-of-worship patrols. NYPD precinct commanders and Community Affairs officers are also working directly with rabbonim and administrators of Jewish institutions to develop security plans appropriate for individual communities and facilities. Traffic officers will monitor conditions surrounding houses of worship as well.

The expanded protection comes amid troubling new statistics regarding antisemitic incidents in New York.

According to figures cited by Tisch, confirmed hate crimes throughout the city have risen approximately 16 percent this year, while confirmed antisemitic hate crimes have increased about 9 percent. More than half of all confirmed hate crimes in New York City this year have targeted Jews, despite Jews representing only about 10 percent of the city’s population.

NYPD figures previously released for the first eight months of 2026 showed 425 reported hate crimes, compared with 367 during the corresponding period last year. Of those incidents, 217 targeted Jews.

Officials also pointed to several recent incidents underscoring the concerns confronting the Jewish community. In July, a Jewish man was stabbed outside a shul on Manhattan’s Upper West Side. More recently, an individual disrupted Shabbos services at Central Synagogue and assaulted both a congregant and a member of the shul’s security team.

The NYPD has also dealt with more serious threats behind the scenes. Tisch said the department’s intelligence apparatus has, since October 7, tracked threats and helped disrupt alleged plots involving Jewish institutions, including plans directed at a Manhattan shul and a Jewish center in Brooklyn.

Tisch sought to reassure Jewish New Yorkers who have expressed fears about openly displaying their Yiddishkeit or walking to shul.

“Of course, I have had numerous conversations with Jewish New Yorkers where they have expressed fear about walking around the city openly identifying as being Jewish, going to shul on Shabbos or for the High Holy Days,” Tisch said.

She added that many Jewish New Yorkers have also expressed appreciation for the officers and private security personnel protecting their communities.

“As I have said to so many of them standing at so many synagogues, there are 35,000 noble members of the New York City Police Department willing to risk their own lives for that of a stranger,” Tisch said. She said the department has developed “a robust plan” in coordination with shuls, yeshivos, Jewish cultural institutions and communal security personnel.

The city’s security preparations are being supplemented by additional measures at the state level. Gov. Kathy Hochul announced this week that New York will make $70 million available through its Securing Communities Against Hate Crimes grant program, doubling the $35 million initially proposed for the program in the state budget. Approximately 300 nonprofit organizations statewide are expected to receive grants that can be used for cameras, alarm systems, security personnel training, cybersecurity and other protective measures.

Hochul has also directed the New York State Police and the state Hate Crimes Task Force to increase patrols around religious institutions during Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. State troopers are expected to conduct regular checks at shuls and other gathering places throughout the Yomim Noraim.

With thousands of mispallelim expected to fill shuls throughout Brooklyn, Queens, Manhattan, the Bronx and Staten Island beginning Friday evening, law enforcement officials said the visible police presence will be only one portion of the security apparatus.

Intelligence officers and counterterrorism personnel will also be monitoring developments both domestically and overseas throughout the Yom Tov period.

Despite the heightened precautions, the NYPD emphasized that the increased deployment should not be interpreted as an indication that authorities have uncovered a specific plot against the Jewish community. Officials said the measures are precautionary and reflect both the elevated threat environment and the sharp increase in antisemitic incidents.

{Matzav.com}

The IDF announced Thursday that it eliminated Hamas Nukhba terrorist Ismail Ibrahim Darwish Kandil, who participated in the October 7 massacre and was involved in the killing of Nahal Brigade commander Col. Yonatan Steinberg Hy”d.

Kandil was killed in an IDF strike in the Khan Younis area of the southern Gaza Strip. According to the military, he was a member of Hamas’ elite Nukhba force and was among the terrorists who infiltrated Israel during the October 7, 2023, attack.

During the massacre, Kandil participated in the killing of Col. Steinberg, who commanded the Nahal Brigade. Steinberg was killed while making his way to confront Hamas terrorists near Kerem Shalom after the attack began.

The IDF said Kandil had remained actively involved in terrorism since October 7. More recently, he worked to plan and advance attacks targeting both IDF soldiers and Israeli civilians while helping Hamas rebuild its military capabilities.

According to the military, those activities constituted systematic violations of the ceasefire, and Kandil was targeted because of the continuing threat he posed.

The IDF added that precautions were taken before carrying out the strike in an effort to minimize the danger to civilians in the area. Those measures included aerial surveillance and the use of precision weaponry.

{Matzav.com}

A new federal tax credit scheduled to take effect next year could open a major new stream of scholarship funding for yeshivos across the United States, and Agudath Israel of America and Torah Umesorah have now thrown their support behind a nationwide Jewish effort designed to maximize the opportunity.

The two organizations announced their endorsement of the Opportunity Fund for Jewish Education, a newly created national Scholarship Granting Organization, or SGO, that will seek to collect tax-credit-eligible contributions and direct the funds toward scholarships at participating Jewish schools and yeshivos.

The move follows months of discussion within Agudath Israel and Torah Umesorah over how the Orthodox community could best utilize the new Federal Scholarship Tax Credit, which takes effect Jan. 1, 2027. The discussions included extensive consideration by Agudah’s Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah and Torah Umesorah’s Vaad Roshei Hayeshivos. The organizations ultimately determined that participating in a large, unified national SGO offered the greatest potential to generate substantial new funding for yeshivos rather than establishing a separate system serving only one segment of the Jewish community.

The Opportunity Fund was launched through a partnership of the Orthodox Union and Teach Coalition, Jewish Federations of North America, and Prizmah: Center for Jewish Day Schools. In addition to Agudath Israel and Torah Umesorah, the initiative has attracted backing from other Jewish organizations, creating an unusually broad coalition centered on expanding scholarship assistance for Jewish education.

At the heart of the initiative is a provision of the federal tax law enacted in 2025 and signed by President Donald Trump. Section 25F of the Internal Revenue Code creates a federal income-tax credit for individuals who make qualifying cash contributions to approved SGOs. Beginning in 2027, an eligible taxpayer may receive a credit of as much as $1,700 per year.

The distinction between a tax credit and the charitable deduction familiar to most donors is significant.

A charitable deduction generally reduces the amount of income on which a taxpayer owes taxes. The new program instead provides a dollar-for-dollar credit against federal income-tax liability. Thus, subject to the law’s requirements, a taxpayer who contributes $1,700 to a qualifying SGO could reduce his federal income-tax liability by $1,700. The credit is nonrefundable, although unused amounts may generally be carried forward for as many as five years.

The money collected by SGOs is then used to provide scholarships for eligible elementary and secondary school students. Under the federal law, student eligibility is generally limited to children from households with income not exceeding 300% of the area median gross income. Scholarships may be used for qualifying K-12 educational expenses, including private-school tuition.

For the yeshiva community, the implications could be enormous.

Rather than asking families and supporters simply to make additional charitable donations, participating yeshivos could encourage taxpayers to use money that can qualify for the federal credit to fund scholarships. If participation becomes widespread, thousands of individual $1,700 contributions could produce millions of dollars in additional tuition assistance.

The Opportunity Fund’s structure is intended to allow individual communities to benefit directly while simultaneously taking advantage of the reach of a national campaign. Donors will be permitted to designate participating schools they wish their contributions to benefit, according to the organizations behind the initiative.

The Fund has also committed that 100% of money designated for a particular school will be used for scholarships for students at that school. Administrative and operating costs are expected to be funded separately rather than deducted from those designated scholarship contributions.

That feature could allow a yeshiva to mobilize its own network of parents, grandparents, alumni and supporters much as it would for an ordinary fundraising campaign. The difference is that those efforts would operate within a much larger national system capable of reaching donors who may have no previous connection to a particular yeshiva.

Organizers believe that broader reach is critical.

If the program merely causes existing yeshiva donors to redirect money they would have contributed anyway, the net financial benefit to the community could be limited. A national effort, however, could potentially bring an entirely new pool of contributors into Jewish education, including taxpayers who do not currently donate to yeshivos or who do not have children attending Jewish schools.

Paul Bernstein, CEO of Prizmah, said the organizations concluded that collaboration offered a greater opportunity than having individual Jewish groups pursue the program separately.

“We realized we are much more likely to be successful if we work together across the entire community,” Bernstein said. “This really does have the potential to have a huge impact, but it depends on us mobilizing the Jewish community to really participate in the tax credit and support our schools.”

The potential pool is substantial. The Joint Committee on Taxation has estimated that the federal program could generate approximately $500 million in contributions to SGOs, according to eJewishPhilanthropy. The federal program itself does not impose an overall annual nationwide cap on the amount of credits available, although each individual taxpayer’s annual credit is capped at $1,700.

Sydney Altfield, national director of Teach Coalition, said the scale of Jewish education in the United States makes national infrastructure particularly important.

“This is an amazing opportunity for the Jewish community to come together and make sure we maximize the benefit of this new federal program for Jewish families,” Altfield said. “With more than 900 Jewish day schools and yeshivas across the country, we need the infrastructure to make it easy for schools to participate, for donors to contribute and for those dollars to reach families. By working together nationally, we can turn this into meaningful tuition relief at a scale that could have a real impact on Jewish education.”

There is, however, an important condition to the new program: participation is not automatic in every state.

Federal law requires a state to opt into the program and submit to the IRS a list of qualifying SGOs. A contribution to an SGO can qualify for the federal credit only under the rules established by Section 25F, including the state-participation requirements.

As of the IRS’s most recently published list, dated July 24, 30 states had made advance elections to participate in the 2027 program. They include Florida, Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania-neighboring West Virginia, and numerous other states, but notably do not yet include New York or New Jersey, home to two of the country’s largest concentrations of yeshivos and Orthodox families.

Efforts surrounding state participation are continuing. In New Jersey, legislation has been introduced that would require the state to elect participation in the federal program and direct the state education commissioner to provide the information necessary to maintain that participation annually.

Treasury has meanwhile been working on regulations governing the program. The department said in June that it expected to issue proposed regulations by the end of September, with states, taxpayers and SGOs expected to be able to rely upon those regulations as they prepare for the January 2027 launch.

Agudath Israel has been involved with the federal scholarship-credit effort well before this week’s announcement. The organization advocated for federal school-choice legislation for years and subsequently submitted recommendations to Treasury concerning implementation of the new program.

With the law now moving toward implementation, the focus is shifting from Washington advocacy to mobilizing schools and taxpayers.

Yeshivos can begin registering with the Opportunity Fund and preparing their communities for the program, while prospective contributors can pledge now to participate once eligible contributions begin in January. Agudah and Torah Umesorah said they intend to work with yeshivos over the coming months to help schools prepare.

For yeshivos struggling with rising payrolls, facilities costs and other expenses, and for parents carrying increasingly heavy tuition obligations, even a modest level of participation could produce meaningful assistance. If the program reaches the scale its organizers envision, however, its effect could be considerably greater.

Instead of each yeshiva attempting to navigate a complicated new federal program independently, Agudah and Torah Umesorah are betting that a coordinated national infrastructure — coupled with aggressive local participation by individual mosdos and their supporters — offers the best opportunity to channel a potentially significant new source of funding into Torah education.

The dollars will not begin flowing until 2027, and important regulatory and state-level questions remain to be resolved. But the preparations are already underway for what could become one of the most consequential new sources of scholarship funding available to American yeshivos in years.

{Matzav.com}

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday blocked Missouri from using a newly drawn congressional map in November’s midterm elections, at least temporarily preventing the state from implementing district lines that could have given Republicans control of seven of Missouri’s eight House seats.

In a brief order with no noted dissents, the justices granted an emergency request to stay a federal court ruling that had required election officials to use the new map. The order leaves the Republican-backed map on hold while the litigation over Missouri’s congressional districts continues.

Unless another court ruling changes the situation, Missouri will conduct the November election using the congressional boundaries adopted following the 2020 census. Under those lines, the state’s current House delegation consists of six Republicans and two Democrats.

The disputed map, approved by Missouri lawmakers in 2025, substantially reshaped portions of Kansas City in a way that made the 5th Congressional District, represented by Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, a Democrat, more favorable to Republicans. Had the map been used, the St. Louis-area 1st District represented by Democratic Rep. Wesley Bell could have been the only Democratic-held congressional seat in the state.

Thursday’s Supreme Court intervention came after an unusual series of conflicting state and federal court decisions over which map Missouri should use in the rapidly approaching election.

Last week, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that opponents of the new map had validly invoked the state Constitution’s referendum process after collecting the required signatures. The court ordered Secretary of State Denny Hoskins to place the map before voters on the November ballot and prohibited state officials from using the new districts unless voters approve them.

The state’s high court concluded that the referendum petition was timely and legally valid and that the Missouri Constitution permits voters to challenge congressional redistricting legislation through the referendum process. Under its ruling, the congressional districts established in 2022 were to remain in effect for the November election.

The dispute took another turn Tuesday when U.S. District Judge Stephen Clark in St. Louis issued a temporary restraining order requiring Hoskins to use the newly drawn map rather than the older district lines. That federal ruling came shortly after Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh had declined a separate request from Missouri officials to interfere with the Missouri Supreme Court’s decision.

Opponents of the new districts then returned to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to suspend Clark’s order. Thursday’s ruling granted that request, once again putting the newer congressional map on hold as the broader legal battle continues.

The Trump administration is proposing a major overhaul of the 2030 Census that would exclude illegal immigrants and many foreign nationals temporarily living in the United States from the population count used to determine congressional representation, Electoral College votes and the distribution of federal resources.

Under a proposed rule released by the Commerce Department and Census Bureau this week, the government would change the longstanding criteria for determining who qualifies as a “usual resident” of the United States. For purposes of congressional apportionment, the proposal would generally limit the population count to U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents, excluding people living in the country illegally as well as many noncitizens present under temporary legal status.

The proposal could have significant consequences for states with large immigrant populations because the decennial census is used to allocate the 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives among the states. A state’s number of House members, combined with its two senators, also determines its number of Electoral College votes.

The Census Bureau said in its proposal that it had reconsidered how the Constitution and federal law should be interpreted in determining which residents are included for apportionment.

“In particular, the Census Bureau finds merit in the interpretive argument outlined above and has preliminarily determined that, under the best reading of the Constitutional mandate, illegal aliens (among others) should not be included in the apportionment count, as they are not true inhabitants, members of the body politic, or persons with a ‘usual residence’ in the United States due to their lack of a sufficient tie and allegiance to the United States,” the proposed rule states.

The bureau offered a second legal justification as well, saying it believes federal census law gives the government discretion to determine which categories of people should be included in the apportionment count.

“Additionally and/or in the alternative, the Census Bureau has preliminarily determined, after revisiting and reviewing the applicable law, that excluding illegal aliens (among others) from the apportionment count is a lawful and appropriate exercise of the Census Bureau’s discretion under 13 U.S.C. 141, Franklin v. Massachusetts, and all other applicable law.”

The proposed regulations would define a person’s “usual residence” as the residence where he or she has “lawfully spent the greatest number of days during the census enumeration period.” The proposal says that determination should be consistent with evidence including tax returns and W-2 forms.

The change would extend beyond illegal immigrants. Reuters reported that the proposed rules would also exclude foreign nationals who are legally in the United States on a temporary basis, meaning the resulting population count would generally encompass citizens and lawful permanent residents rather than everyone physically residing in the country.

That represents a significant departure from the Census Bureau’s traditional approach. The 14th Amendment states that House seats are to be apportioned among the states according to their “whole number of persons,” and the census has historically counted residents regardless of citizenship or immigration status. The administration’s interpretation of that language is therefore expected to face legal challenges.

The proposal is now subject to a 30-day public-comment period, meaning the rules have not yet been finalized. The next full decennial census is scheduled to take place in 2030.

President Donald Trump has sought for years to change how noncitizens are treated in the census and congressional apportionment.

During his first term, the Trump administration attempted to add a citizenship question to the 2020 Census. The Supreme Court blocked that effort in 2019, concluding that the Commerce Department’s stated justification for adding the question did not adequately match the administrative record before the court.

Trump subsequently sought to exclude illegal immigrants from the population totals used to divide House seats among the states. Litigation over that policy reached the Supreme Court, but the justices did not resolve the underlying constitutional question before Trump left office.

The new proposal goes further in certain respects because its exclusions would encompass some immigrants and foreign nationals who are lawfully present in the United States but do not have permanent resident status.

Supporters of excluding noncitizens from apportionment have long argued that including people who cannot vote can increase the political representation of jurisdictions with large noncitizen populations because House seats are allocated according to total population rather than the number of eligible voters.

A 2024 analysis by the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors lower levels of immigration, examined the relationship between noncitizen populations and political representation. It concluded that congressional districts containing larger shares of foreign nationals tended to vote more heavily Democratic. The researchers emphasized, however, that their findings did not indicate that noncitizens themselves were voting.

“This reflects the fact that the voters who live around non-citizens tend to be Democrats, who end up having more voting power due to the presence of a large number of non-citizens,” the researchers wrote. “This is not evidence of non-citizens voting.”

Opponents of the administration’s proposal argue that the Constitution requires the census to count people rather than only citizens or permanent residents. They also warn that removing millions of residents from census totals could affect not only congressional representation but the demographic information used by federal, state and local governments and the allocation of federal funding.

Meeta Anand, senior director of the census and data equity program at the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, told Reuters that the proposed changes could have sweeping consequences for communities with substantial immigrant populations.

Census data “undergirds so much of our democracy and our society,” Anand said. “So you’ll start seeing a very inaccurate picture of our country, and then we’re making political decisions, business decisions, investment decisions based on data that are flawed.”

The proposal would make another notable change to the census by eliminating portions of the questionnaire collecting information about race and ethnicity, according to Reuters. Such information has been collected in various forms since the first federal census in 1790 and is now used for purposes ranging from civil-rights enforcement to demographic research.

The stakes surrounding the apportionment question are particularly high because even relatively small population shifts can determine which states gain or lose seats in Congress following the census.

If finalized and allowed to take effect, the Trump administration’s proposal would therefore alter not simply how the federal government describes the American population, but which residents are included when the government determines how political representation is divided among the states.

President Donald Trump has spoken publicly for the first time about Britain’s sweeping new measures targeting Israeli communities in Yehudah and Shomron, saying he intends to speak directly with Israel and with the countries behind the initiative before taking a position on the sanctions.

Trump made the comments Wednesday after being asked by reporters about measures announced by Britain, France, Canada and other Western countries restricting trade connected to Israeli communities in Yehudah and Shomron. Rather than endorse or condemn the initiative, Trump said he wanted to learn more about the reasoning behind the sudden move.

“Well, I’ve just seen it and I’ll be speaking to Israel, I’ll be speaking to them and I’ll find out what they — what’s their thinking. I understand. You know, I understand exactly what’s going on, but I want to find out why all of a sudden has that happened.”

Trump’s comments came amid a rapidly escalating diplomatic confrontation between Israel and Britain following the announcement by the government of British Prime Minister Andy Burnham of significant new restrictions aimed at Jewish communities in Yehudah and Shomron.

British Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband announced Tuesday that Britain intends to prohibit imports of goods produced in what the British government calls “illegal settlements.” London also plans to prohibit the advertising or promotion in Britain of property in those communities and create new powers to sanction individuals and businesses that finance, facilitate or profit from settlement activity.

The British government said the restrictions are intended to pressure Israel over construction in Yehudah and Shomron and preserve the possibility of establishing a Palestinian state. Britain also said the measures target settlement-related economic activity rather than Israelis or Jews because of their nationality or religion.

Miliband used particularly harsh language in announcing the policy, accusing some Israeli settlers of engaging in “ethnic cleansing” of Palestinians and charging that members of Israel’s government have supported their displacement.

Israel responded forcefully.

The Israeli government announced that it would close the British consulate in eastern Yerushalayim and bar a group of British political figures from entering the country. Israeli officials also announced other diplomatic measures in retaliation for the sanctions. Reuters reported that Israel viewed the British action as interference in its domestic affairs and upcoming elections.

Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar denounced the British accusations, saying, “The accusations today by the Labour government’s foreign secretary in the British parliament were outrageous and false.”

Britain, however, has stood by the measures. Burnham said Wednesday that his government believes Britain must “stand against injustice” and insisted that its policy is intended to preserve prospects for a two-state solution.

The dispute has spread well beyond London and Yerushalayim. Britain announced its initiative in coordination with France and Canada, while Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain and Sweden joined a statement backing national or European restrictions on trade with Israeli communities in Yehudah and Shomron or saying they were actively considering such measures.

The United States has notably declined to join the sanctions initiative.

Before Trump’s remarks Wednesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio had also stopped short of directly endorsing or condemning Britain’s decision. Rubio said the British government had informed Washington in advance about what it intended to do and explained its reasoning.

“The president has not commented on it, nor have I. The British told us they were going to make this decision. We heard their arguments about why they were doing it. We share the goal of stability in the West Bank,” Rubio said.

Rubio has nevertheless indicated that Washington does not want measures that could further destabilize Yehudah and Shomron. The United States has so far declined to impose comparable trade restrictions.

Trump’s response is therefore significant in what he did not say as well as what he did. Asked specifically whether the United States opposed the sanctions, the President did not announce American opposition to them. Instead, he said he had only recently learned the details and wanted to consult Israel and the governments involved before commenting further.

According to reports, Burnham had discussed the planned measures with Trump before their announcement, and Washington did not attempt to prevent Britain from proceeding. The administration has nevertheless stopped short of publicly embracing the sanctions.

The measures represent one of the most serious recent strains in relations between Israel and Britain. The British government says it is responding to accelerated Israeli construction, violence by extremist settlers and concerns that continued expansion will make a future Palestinian state impossible. Israel rejects Britain’s characterization of its policies and has accused London of unfairly singling out the Jewish state.

Particular international attention has centered on Israeli construction plans in the E1 area east of Yerushalayim. Britain and other governments argue that development there would further complicate the territorial viability of a future Palestinian state.

Miliband has also defended his policy against fierce criticism from Britain’s Jewish community. Britain’s Chief Rabbi Sir Ephraim Mirvis described the announcement as a “truly dark day for British Jews,” while Miliband rejected suggestions that targeting the Israeli communities endangered British Jews and reiterated his commitment to fighting antisemitism.

Despite the political rupture, Miliband said intelligence and security cooperation between Britain and Israel is expected to continue. He maintained that the dispute over Yehudah and Shomron would not end cooperation between the two countries’ intelligence services, which London views as serving important mutual security interests.

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich responded even more sharply, calling for Britain’s ambassador to be expelled.

“We will not be the doormat of an antisemitic government, in a country that has been conquered by radical Islam, and which is trying to save itself from economic and social decline by attacking Israel,” Smotrich said.

For now, Trump appears to be reserving judgment. His comments leave open the possibility of further American involvement in the dispute as he speaks with Israel and the governments imposing the restrictions.

“I understand exactly what’s going on,” Trump said, while emphasizing that he first wants to determine “why all of a sudden has that happened.”

The next question is whether those consultations lead Washington to publicly oppose Britain’s measures, support some aspect of them, or continue keeping its distance from the growing diplomatic confrontation.

The Trump administration is preparing to send $500 payments to as many as 1 million Americans who purchase their own health insurance, using approximately $500 million in Affordable Care Act funds that officials say were collected in excess during the Biden administration and remained unused. The still-unannounced plan would distribute the money this fall, ahead of the Nov. 3 midterm elections, according to a report by Axios.

The payments would reportedly be sent to eligible Obamacare enrollees across 30 states. President Donald Trump was expected to discuss the initiative during his appearance at the Republican midterm convention in Dallas.

The proposal centers on roughly half a billion dollars currently held in federal accounts. Trump administration officials contend that the money resulted from excess collections connected to Affordable Care Act coverage during the Biden years.

“That money was over-collected and just sitting there,” an official told Axios.

Eligibility would not extend to everyone enrolled through the ACA marketplaces. According to officials, the $500 payments would go specifically to people who purchase marketplace insurance without receiving federal subsidies toward their premiums, meaning they pay the entire premium themselves.

Officials identified 13 states as having particularly significant numbers of people who could qualify: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, Ohio, South Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin.

The pool of federal money at issue has previously been the subject of a dispute in Washington. During the Biden administration, officials considered using the funds in 2023 to provide contraception without charge to people whose marketplace insurance plans did not cover it.

Republicans in Congress objected to that proposed use of the money. They maintained that the fees had been collected to finance the operation of the ACA exchanges and argued that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services lacked legal authority to redirect them for a different purpose.

The Biden administration ultimately abandoned that proposal.

According to Axios, several Republican aides who had participated in challenging the earlier proposal subsequently took positions in the Trump administration. Officials later reduced some fees in an effort to lower premiums and determined that a substantial amount of money nevertheless remained available.

“It’s time for Congress to pass President Trump’s Great Healthcare Plan, which will finally begin prioritizing people instead of insurance company profits by sending billions in taxpayer-funded healthcare dollars directly to Americans to help them better afford health coverage and care,” an official told Axios.

The proposed rebates fit with Trump’s broader approach to healthcare funding, in which he has advocated directing federal healthcare dollars to individuals rather than channeling the money through insurance companies.

Trump sought unsuccessfully to repeal the Affordable Care Act during his first term in the White House.

The planned payments are emerging less than two months before the midterm elections, as healthcare affordability and other household costs remain significant political issues. ACA premiums are also facing another year of substantial increases, with a recent analysis finding a median proposed increase of 14% for next year.

Questions remain about whether CMS has the legal authority to distribute the money in the manner being contemplated. The agency had not publicly announced the program as of Wednesday, and its newsroom did not list an announcement of the reported rebate plan.

Axios was the first outlet to report details of the proposal, citing unnamed administration officials. CMS did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Administration officials characterize the approximately $500 million as money that was effectively over-collected from Obamacare enrollees. ACA marketplace user fees are technically charged to insurers as a percentage of premiums, although insurance companies generally incorporate those expenses into the premiums ultimately paid by consumers.