Zivotofsky ex rel. Zivotofsky v. Clinton

Supreme Court of the United States · 2012 · Constitutional Law

566 U.S. 189 (2012)

Updated July 29, 2026

Constitutional Lawpolitical questionjusticiabilityseparation of powerspassportJerusalemconstitutionality of statuteMarbury v. Madison

Facts

Congress enacted §214(d) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2003, directing the Secretary, upon request, to record "Israel" as the place of birth for a United States citizen born in Jerusalem. Menachem Binyamin Zivotofsky was born in Jerusalem shortly after the statute’s enactment, and his mother requested that his passport and consular report list his place of birth as "Jerusalem, Israel." State Department officials refused, citing department policy that for persons born in Jerusalem the birthplace should be recorded only as "Jerusalem" and not as "Israel" or "Jordan." Zivotofsky sued to enforce the statute and obtain documents reflecting "Israel" as his place of birth.

Issue

Does petitioner’s claim under §214(d) present a nonjusticiable political question because it touches foreign affairs and Jerusalem’s status, or may federal courts decide whether the statute is constitutional and enforceable?

Rule

The political question doctrine does not bar judicial review when a plaintiff seeks enforcement of a specific statutory right and the court need only decide issues of statutory interpretation or constitutionality. A case presents a political question only where there is a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department or a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

Congress enacts a statute requiring the Secretary of State, on request, to list "Taiwan" as the place of birth on passports of U.S. citizens born in Taipei. The State Department refuses Maya Chen's request in Seattle, asserting that compliance would conflict with presidential foreign policy and that any lawsuit would force a court into a sensitive diplomatic dispute.

If Maya sues to enforce the statute, what is the strongest argument that the case is justiciable?

Explanation. The majority held that a case is not barred by the political question doctrine when the plaintiff seeks enforcement of a specific statutory right and the real issue is the statute's constitutionality. Foreign affairs implications alone do not create a political question. The court's role is to determine whether the statute may be given effect or must be invalidated as inconsistent with presidential constitutional authority.