Renowned legal scholar Eugene Kontorovich (Antonin Scalia School of Law) debates the legal future of the West Bank against Avidan Cover (Case Western Reserve University School of Law). Kontorovich, a self-described legal "formalist," stakes out the more conservative position, while Cover, presumably more of a legal "realist," argues against him. Kontorovich audaciously contends that there is in fact no "occupation" of the Palestinian-designated West Bank, because that land is technically already a part of Israel. According to Kontorovich's interpretation of international law pertaining to the creation of new countries, the "last top-level administrative unit" that was in place, the Mandate for Palestine of 1922, should be used for creating the borders of the new state. Thus, as of its creation in 1948, Israel's borders actually include the West Bank (and more), as stipulated in the expansive 1922 Mandate. Therefore, Kontorovich argues, there can be no "occupation" if the land is already technically part of Israel. Cover counters this argument by noting the UN Partition Plan and the numerous decisions handed down by the Israeli Supreme Court that acknowledge the reality that the West Bank is indeed "occupied" and is eventually owed to the Palestinians. The two fine legal minds go back and forth in a fascinating discussion that also includes thoughts about annexation (or "applying sovereignty"), as well as the legality of the settlements. This event, hosted by law student Joseph Hendlin, was sponsored by the local chapter of The Federalist Society at Case Western Reserve University School of Law and was sent to JBS electronically as a ZOOM recording.
