the "Jerusalem law" changed nothing in Israel's relationship to East Jerusalem even under domestic Israeli law because after the Knesset's first reading of the bill they purpusfully ommited both the borders of "United Jerusalem" and ommitted the word "annexation". Why? Because the lawmakers knew that would prevent adding more and more of the West Bank into the municipal "boundries" (which remain undefined) of Greater Jerusalem, and specifying borders (even if null & void) the law itself could be used as Israeli proof of Israeli expansionism in international courts. So Israel's relationship to E Jerusalem remains exactly the same as when it captured it in 1967 & before the "Jerusalem 'law'". Nothing changed. It is still occuied territory. It hasn't annexed East Jerusalem cos the Jerusalem law is not a law purporting annexation (even if it did it would be null and void in international law). Israel just extended civilian law over E Jerusalem with the "Jerusalem law" as smoke screen.
Red Cross: Scale of sexual violence in South Sudan is unprecedented (Reuters)
from the article: Jerusalem planning committee to hold first meet since Biden's visit