The international community considers Israeli settlements to violate the Fourth Geneva Convention's prohibition on the transfer of an occupying power's civilian population into occupied territory.
As settlement on lands west of colonial boundaries violated the Royal Proclamation of 1763, the Watauga and Nolichucky settlers were ordered to leave.
The majority of legal scholars hold the settlements to violate international law, while others have offered dissenting views supporting the Israeli position.
Your settlement violates our border.
The plaintiffs argued that the settlement violated their rights by not allowing them to opt out of some provisions.
At issue is whether the settlements violate the Fourth Geneva Convention, which forbids transferring populations in occupied territories.
It found that the settlement did not violate antitrust law but simply resolved costly and vexatious litigation.
The colonial government recognized Lycoming Creek as the boundary, so settlements made to its west violated the treaty.
His main argument is that the settlements do not violate antitrust law because they resolve costly and vexatious litigation.
"We sought to be as flexible as possible, but would not abandon the position that the settlements violate prevailing international law, as well as being an obstacle to peace."
