Your constitutional illiteracy is matched only by your reflexive disregard for Jewish rights. You are wrong on the facts, wrong on the law, and wrong on the application.
@NYCMayor Khalil wasn’t targeted for “free speech.” He was arrested for conduct and leadership in a movement that has repeatedly crossed the line from advocacy into unlawful conduct. You can't launder illegal activity into “constitutional rights” just by calling it “pro-Palestinian.”
Jan 14 • 30 tweets • 4 min read
Dear @antonioguterres,
You are gravely mistaken about UNRWA. As we told the court today (among other things):
(1) UNRWA isn’t truly a UN subsidiary organ; and
(2) even if it were, immunity doesn’t cover conduct violating jus cogens.
I shouldn't have to, but let me explain:
@antonioguterres Resolution 302 creating UNRWA does not refer to UNRWA as a UN “subsidiary organ.” unrwa.org/content/genera…
Nov 4, 2025 • 13 tweets • 2 min read
Dear @KevinRobertsTX,
I share your dislike of cancel culture and respect for open dialogue. That’s why I hope you’ll use this moment to show real leadership — by acknowledging a blind spot too many still share and using your platform to help others see it clearly.
Let me help:
@KevinRobertsTX The Supreme Court has long protected even hateful speech from government punishment. But that protection is a shield against state coercion, not a command that private citizens or institutions must lend their platforms to every voice.
Sep 9, 2025 • 12 tweets • 2 min read
Dear @BernieSanders,
Hello there you despicable hypocrite!
As usual, you are wrong on every level. Not only was Israel's precision strike against Hamas leadership in Qatar justified, you yourself have publicly applauded the legal principles that prove it.
@BernieSanders After 9/11, the United States invoked the doctrine of Article 51 self defense to go after the terrorist perpetrators. The United Nations Security Council, in Resolutions 1368 and 1373, confirmed that this was in accordance with the UN Charter.
Jun 22, 2025 • 59 tweets • 8 min read
Dear @aoc,
Your hateful ignorance knows no bounds.
Everything you said is wrong, and it must bother you to no end that President Trump just saved the free world.
@AOC First the legal landscape: The President has full constitutional and statutory authority to respond to attacks against the United States without waiting for Congressional permission.
Jun 13, 2025 • 32 tweets • 5 min read
Dear @ComicDaveSmith,
I know that your 'thing' is spreading misinformation, and that even though you're 'not an expert' you are entitled to your opinion. That is true.
But just so you know, your opinion here as in so many cases is comically, farcically, wrong.
@ComicDaveSmith Words have meaning. A war of aggression (comes from Article 231 of the Treaty of Versailles) is a military conflict waged without the justification of self-defense, usually for territorial gain and subjugation, in contrast with the concept of a just war.
Jun 10, 2025 • 28 tweets • 6 min read
Dear @RepMTG,
I used to excuse your antisemitism based on your obvious stupidity, but there comes a time where even half-wits must be held accountable.
Everything you said here is wrong, and you are antisemitic.
First, of course all hate crimes are wrong, and this resolution never said anything to the contrary. And Congress does vote on matters concerning hate crimes committed against other people.
Jun 4, 2025 • 11 tweets • 2 min read
The new Harvard article about antisemitism is wrong.
The authors' central claim is that Zionism is not a protected Title VI characteristic because it is just a belief. Here is what they don't get:
Zion is not an idea: Zion is a hill, in Jerusalem, Israel, where Jews are from.
For the vast majority of Jewish people across time and space, Zionism is a core part of their actual physical identity- Zion is, in the most literal sense, their racial/national origin.
May 29, 2025 • 34 tweets • 6 min read
Dear @ChrisVanHollen,
It appears you didn't actually read the decision.
Ironic, because the Judge made the same grave mistake that you often make: He got it wrong because he minimized the dangers of antisemitism.
Here is why he is incorrect- and how I know you didn't read it:
@ChrisVanHollen First the easy part- your self-righteous post about the First Amendment is more of an embarrassing self-own given this key paragraph in the opinion:
May 8, 2025 • 14 tweets • 3 min read
Dear @MoKhan_3,
You are one stupid self-righteous antisemite, and you appear hellbent on destroying your own future way faster than @stoolpresidente ever could. It seems you lack the capacity for self-reflection and the intelligence to understand basic principles.
Let me help:
Most modern antisemites are smart enough to hide their hatred of Jews behind at least a thin veil of camouflaging anti-Zionism. Not you!
You argue that a “Fuck the Jews” sign is just one way of raising awareness about Israel.
Lol. Even Hamas pretends its not a "Jew" thing.
Mar 16, 2025 • 39 tweets • 7 min read
Dear Mayor @StevenFulop,
Your stance against the IHRA bill is dangerously misguided. You claim “most people in the Jewish community haven’t read it” but it genuinely seems like you are the one who hasn't. How can I be so sure?
I wrote it.
Let me explain: rb.gy/7guvn8
@StevenFulop First, to be clear, this is not a debate- the bill is literally in black and white here- feel free to read along: pub.njleg.state.nj.us/Bills/2024/A40…
Mar 14, 2025 • 38 tweets • 8 min read
Dear @aoc,
You are wrong on the facts and the law. Khalil is not being held for speech, he is being held for his actions, which go so far beyond the legal threshold that the only risk in this case is creating an artificially high standard for future deportations. Let me explain:
@AOC Khalil is the leader and public mouthpiece of Columbia University Apartheid Divest (“CUAD”), an association of student organizations formed in 2016 by Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP).
Mar 13, 2025 • 9 tweets • 2 min read
Dear @aoc,
You are wrong on the facts and the law. Khalil is not being held for speech, he is being held for his actions, which go so far beyond the legal threshold that the only risk in this case is creating an artificially high standard for future deportations. Let me explain:
@AOC Khalil is the leader and public mouthpiece of Columbia University Apartheid Divest (“CUAD”), an association of student organizations formed in 2016 by Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP).
Mar 10, 2025 • 30 tweets • 6 min read
Dear @JudiciaryDems ,
You are so incredibly wrong, and I can prove it.
A thread, in response to yours.
The only difference? Mine has citations.
@JudiciaryDems To begin, the Immigration and Nationality Act § 212(a)(3) contains a number of activities for which a person can be deemed ineligible based on security and related grounds. Subsection (B)(i) has nine grounds related to terrorism. uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req…
Mar 4, 2025 • 50 tweets • 7 min read
Dear @SenSanders:
International law is clear on these points, but you are either illiterate or willfully ignorant about what the laws actually say.
Either way, you are wrong and I can prove it because- unlike you- I will bring the receipts.
Let me explain:
@SenSanders Yes, Israel has decided to cut off aid to Gaza because Hamas steals all the supplies and prevents the civilian population from getting them.
Dec 5, 2024 • 5 tweets • 1 min read
Follow up for those who do not understand why @amnesty's 'justification' for changing the definition of genocide here is both stupid and circular- not to mention invalid:
First- they refer to their new definition as a 'broad' reading. Actually, it is an entirely incorrect reading, and even though they quote opinions that agree with them, those opinions are dissents not decisions and are included only to fool those who do not know how law works.
Dec 5, 2024 • 30 tweets • 4 min read
.@amnesty international literally redefined the legal term of genocide to suit their accusation, stripping the term of its actual meaning in the process. The craziest part? They admit this in their report, correctly assuming that most people won't read all the way to p. 101: 🧵
@amnesty This is not just a failure of factual accuracy; it is a willful misrepresentation of international law.
Nov 20, 2024 • 17 tweets • 3 min read
Dear @SenatorWarnock,
You told the press that you are considering voting in favor of @BernieSanders' hateful resolution which would block arms to Israel as it fights for its existence. Please bear these three important points in mind before you make such a terrible mistake:
@SenatorWarnock @BernieSanders 1) The resolutions are based on a mountain of demonstrable lies and libels. Sanders claims that Israel has violated US and international law and used weapons both indiscriminately and disproportionately. And yet...
Sep 23, 2024 • 25 tweets • 5 min read
Dear @TheJusticeDept:
Your letter re: the scope of @UNRWA's immunity makes a lot of assumptions. Some are big, some are small, but most are unfortunately wrong. I hope that you correct them because they can have very dangerous consequences. Here, let me explain:
1) Even absolute immunity is not actually absolute.
In international law, a peremptory norm (jus cogens) is a fundamental principle of international law that is accepted by the international community of states as a norm from which no derogation is permitted.
Sep 18, 2024 • 24 tweets • 5 min read
Dear @aoc and other useful idiots who only discover IHL if they think it hurts Israel:
No, Israel's attack did not violate international law, including your newfound darling 'AP II Article 7' rules against booby traps (which I bet you never heard of until today).
Here is why:
@AOC 1) Communication devices issued by terrorists to terrorists for terrorist purposes do not count as civilian objects. Period.
Jul 19, 2024 • 28 tweets • 5 min read
No surprises in today's non-binding ICJ opinion about Israeli settlements:
The question (What are the legal consequences arising from the ongoing violation by Israel ...) presupposed the answer, and the answer was a restatement of its 2004 Wall opinion. And yet... 🧵
I am always surprised when the Court takes the time to give ahistorical lessons, especially when it does so as a way of avoiding important legal issues. For example:
