In the Media

Director Eugene Kontorovich Quoted in Jewish News Syndicate on the UN Blacklisting of Israeli Businesses in Judea and Samaria

February 12, 2020

From Jewish News Syndicate:

International-law expert Eugene Kontorovich said “the UNHRC’s blacklist is nothing more than attempt to demonize companies for doing business with Jews.”

“Nothing in international law prohibits Israeli or other companies from doing business in the West Bank, regardless of how one views the status of that territory,” he continued. “Many European countries have explicitly stated that there is no legal obstacle to such business.”

“Even the UNHRC itself knows that doing business in disputed territories is not legally problematic,” added Kontorovich. “As our research has shown, many of the world’s leading multinationals do business in occupied territories around the world. The UNHRC is not making any efforts to blacklist those companies and has never suggested their actions are problematic.

Read more here.

Director Eugene Kontorovich Quoted in Deutsche Welle on Israeli-Sudanese Relations

February 4, 2020

From Deutsche Welle:

“Going forward, the challenge will be in ensuring the Khartoum government [of Sudan] follows through, and that the rapprochement is not undermined by more extremist elements there,” said Eugene Kontorovich, director of the Center for the Middle East and International Law at George Mason University Scalia Law School.

“Khartoum was once the place from which the Arab world rejected Israel,” Kontorovich told DW. “Now it’s the place from which they reject rejectionism.”

Read more here.

Director Eugene Kontorovich Quoted in The Algemeiner on Trump Peace Plan

February 3, 2020

From The Algemeiner:

Perhaps the Trump plan’s most important achievement is to put on record the truth about the Jews’ unique rights to the land of Israel. As it states, the areas that Israel is being asked to yield to the Palestinians nevertheless constitute “territory to which Israel has asserted valid legal and historical claims, and which are part of the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people.”

As for the loud protests that Israel is being allowed to “annex the West Bank,” professor of international law Eugene Kontorovich has tweeted that the United States is not proposing to recognize Israeli annexation of the territory: “It is recognizing that Israel has always had a legitimate claim on this land.” In other words, the application of Israeli sovereignty is to be based on its preexisting rights to the land.

Read more here.

Director Eugene Kontorovich Testifies before a House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Antisemitic Terrorism

January 15, 2020

On Wednesday, January 15, Director Eugene Kontorovich testified before a House Homeland Security subcommittee on “Confronting the Rise in Domestic Antisemitic Terrorism” in Washington, D.C.  He reflected on the impact that the pernicious “Boycott, Divest, Sanction” Movement has had on the rise of antisemitism in the United States and on the potential for the anti-Israel movement to provide a safe haven to those wishing to engage in antisemitism within polite society. Professor Kontorovich’s full testimony may be found here.

Eugene Kontorovich, law professor at the Antonin Scalia Law School, testifies before a House Homeland Security subcommittee on “Confronting the Rise in Domestic Anti-Semitic Terrorism” in Washington, DC, on Jan. 15, 2019. Photo: Jay Mallin

 

Director Eugene Kontorovich, along with ten other constitutional law professors, files amicus brief in the Fifth Circuit in defense of statewide anti-BDS legislation.

September 6, 2019

Twenty-seven states have adopted measures preventing state
government agencies from entering into certain kinds of economic
relationships with businesses that discriminate against persons or
businesses that have a connection to the State of Israel. In addition,
federal law has since 1977 made it a criminal offense for American
businesses to comply with boycotts of Israel organized by foreign countries,
such as the Arab League boycott that has been maintained
since the creation of Israel.

The district court opinion now before this Court, and the
subsequent decision of the same court rejecting Texas’s argument that
plaintiffs’ claims are moot because the statute plaintiffs had challenged
was no longer on the books, are the product of two errors….

Find the entire brief here.