RSS
How to Understand the Groundbreaking Decision of Israel’s Supreme Court
A view shows Israelis protesting, as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s nationalist coalition government presses on with its judicial overhaul, in Tel Aviv, Israel March 25, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Oren Alon
In a stunning 8-7 decision, the Israeli Supreme Court struck down the Knesset’s “Reasonableness Law,” a new “Basic Law ” that was intended to limit the court’s ability to exercise oversight over Knesset legislation.
This is the first time in Israeli history that the Court has struck down a Basic Law, meaning that, ironically, the first concrete effect of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s judicial reform efforts have been an increase in the Supreme Court’s powers. And a vast majority of the Supreme Court agreed that justices do have the power to strike down Basic Laws in the future.
Though it may seem less dramatic than the ongoing war against Hamas, hundreds of thousands of protesters recently took to the streets on this very topic, and this Supreme Court decision will impact the lives of Israelis long after the war is over. Here’s what you need to know.
Israel has no constitution
Israel’s lack of a constitution means that its political structure is still evolving. In the United States, the Constitution is the primary legal power and the court system is empowered to strike down any legislation or executive order that violates it as “unconstitutional.” The only way to overrule the US Supreme Court is through a Constitutional amendment, which can be passed only through a “super majority” vote: consisting of 75% of all the state legislatures.
Without a constitution, there can be no such thing as “unconstitutional.” Instead, Israel has the “Basic Laws,” a set of legislation that governs individual rights and balance of powers: a kind of equivalent of America’s Constitutional amendments but with one key difference — Israel’s Basic Laws can be changed via a simple majority vote in the Knesset.
This means that any coalition which controls the Knesset can theoretically exercise unlimited power, including over the Supreme Court. How then, does Israel’s Supreme Court provide the necessary checks and balances?
For one thing, as part of its decision this week, Israel’s Supreme Court ruled 12-3 that it does indeed have the power to strike down a Basic Law, a fundamental difference from the United States where the Supreme Court is subordinate to the Constitution.
In addition, for years the Israeli Supreme Court has struck down executive orders and administrative decisions that it deems “unreasonable.” (This does not relate to overturning actual laws, which is done via a different mechanism.)
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other proponents of this judicial reform refer to the Reasonableness Standard as an excessive and unstructured power in the hands of un-elected judges. Indeed, the power to define any law as “unreasonable” rather than specifically unconstitutional could allow Israel’s Supreme Court to overstep its proper powers.
Yet the power of the legislature to effectively change the country’s very structure by passing Basic Laws is also excessive. Until now, these two excesses had somewhat sloppily, but effectively, canceled each other out: the very “balance of chaos” that characterizes the miracle of Israeli society.
In March of 2023, Israeli President Herzog suggested a compromise that would limit the Court’s ability to strike down laws based on “reasonableness,” but would also limit the Knesset’s ability to pass Basic Laws without a super-majority vote, thus maintaining the necessary balance of power and moving Israel closer to an American style system. However, the compromise was rejected.
What happens now?
Members of the current ruling coalition have vigorously objected to the Court’s decision, in some cases stating that they would “not accept” it, though it is unclear exactly what action the legislature could take in that regard.
The Court itself is already changing, with some of its members retiring and no clarity as to who will replace them. Similarly, the disastrous intelligence and security failures of October 7 will probably put an end to the careers of many in Israel’s political leadership, though such transitions will likely occur only after the ongoing war is complete.
So there remain a lot of unknowns on the political level as to how this decision will play out in the future, or who will be in power when it does, but one thing is certain: Israel’s Supreme Court has decided by a wide margin that it can, and has demonstrated through its actions that it will, strike down even a Basic Law when the Court feels it is appropriate to do so.
Young Democracy
In its first 100 years, the United States saw the infamous Sedition Act, an actual gun duel between the Vice President and the Secretary of the Treasury, and of course, secession and the American Civil War.
In its first 200 years as an emerging democracy, Britain faced several civil wars and rebellions, as well as the society wrenching Reformation.
At only 75 years old, Israel is actually unusually stable compared to the turbulent early histories of most democracies, Israel’s arguments have been passionate but peaceful, and its laws are still evolving. While it is completely appropriate to feel care and concern over Israel’s evolution, it is not yet time to assume catastrophe.
Daniel Pomerantz is the CEO of RealityCheck, a think tank dedicated to deepening public conversation through robust research studies and public speaking. He previously worked as a lawyer in the United States, including in the field of international law. Daniel lives in Tel Aviv, Israel, where he lectures at Reichman and Bar Ilan Universities, to soldiers of the IDF and the US Marine Corps, and frequently appears on international media. You can learn more about RealityCheck at: www.RealityCheckResearch.org.
The post How to Understand the Groundbreaking Decision of Israel’s Supreme Court first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Syria’s Sharaa Says Talks With Israel Could Yield Results ‘In Coming Days’
Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa speaks at the opening ceremony of the 62nd Damascus International Fair, the first edition held since the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, in Damascus, Syria, Aug. 27, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Khalil Ashawi
Syria’s President Ahmed al-Sharaa said on Wednesday that ongoing negotiations with Israel to reach a security pact could lead to results “in the coming days.”
He told reporters in Damascus the security pact was a “necessity” and that it would need to respect Syria’s airspace and territorial unity and be monitored by the United Nations.
Syria and Israel are in talks to reach an agreement that Damascus hopes will secure a halt to Israeli airstrikes and the withdrawal of Israeli troops who have pushed into southern Syria.
Reuters reported this week that Washington was pressuring Syria to reach a deal before world leaders gather next week for the UN General Assembly in New York.
But Sharaa, in a briefing with journalists including Reuters ahead of his expected trip to New York to attend the meeting, denied the US was putting any pressure on Syria and said instead that it was playing a mediating role.
He said Israel had carried out more than 1,000 strikes on Syria and conducted more than 400 ground incursions since Dec. 8, when the rebel offensive he led toppled former Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad.
Sharaa said Israel’s actions were contradicting the stated American policy of a stable and unified Syria, which he said was “very dangerous.”
He said Damascus was seeking a deal similar to a 1974 disengagement agreement between Israel and Syria that created a demilitarized zone between the two countries.
He said Syria sought the withdrawal of Israeli troops but that Israel wanted to remain at strategic locations it seized after Dec. 8, including Mount Hermon. Israeli ministers have publicly said Israel intends to keep control of the sites.
He said if the security pact succeeds, other agreements could be reached. He did not provide details, but said a peace agreement or normalization deal like the US-mediated Abraham Accords, under which several Muslim-majority countries agreed to normalize diplomatic ties with Israel, was not currently on the table.
He also said it was too early to discuss the fate of the Golan Heights because it was “a big deal.”
Reuters reported this week that Israel had ruled out handing back the zone, which Donald Trump unilaterally recognized as Israeli during his first term as US president.
“It’s a difficult case – you have negotiations between a Damascene and a Jew,” Sharaa told reporters, smiling.
SECURITY PACT DERAILED IN JULY
Sharaa also said Syria and Israel had been just “four to five days” away from reaching the basis of a security pact in July, but that developments in the southern province of Sweida had derailed those discussions.
Syrian troops were deployed to Sweida in July to quell fighting between Druze armed factions and Bedouin fighters. But the violence worsened, with Syrian forces accused of execution-style killings and Israel striking southern Syria, the defense ministry in Damascus and near the presidential palace.
Sharaa on Wednesday described the strikes near the presidential palace as “not a message, but a declaration of war,” and said Syria had still refrained from responding militarily to preserve the negotiations.
RSS
Anti-Israel Activists Gear Up to ‘Flood’ UN General Assembly
US Capitol Police and NYPD officers clash with anti-Israel demonstrators, on the day Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses a joint meeting of Congress, on Capitol Hill, in Washington, DC, July 24, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Umit Bektas
Anti-Israel groups are planning a wave of raucous protests in New York City during the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) over the next several days, prompting concerns that the demonstrations could descend into antisemitic rhetoric and intimidation.
A coalition of anti-Israel activists is organizing the protests in and around UN headquarters to coincide with speeches from Middle Eastern leaders and appearances by US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The demonstrations are expected to draw large crowds and feature prominent pro-Palestinian voices, some of whom have been criticized for trafficking in antisemitic tropes, in addition to calling for the destruction of Israe.
Organizers of the demonstrations have promoted the coordinated events on social media as an opportunity to pressure world leaders to hold Israel accountable for its military campaign against Hamas in Gaza, with some messaging framed in sharply hostile terms.
On Sunday, for example, activists shouted at Israel’s Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon.
“Zionism is terrorism. All you guys are terrorists committing ethnic cleansing and genocide in Gaza and Palestine. Shame on you, Zionist animals,” they shouted.
BREAKING: PRO-PALESTINE PROTESTORS CONFRONT “ISRAELI” AMBASSADOR DANNY DANON AT THE UNITED NATIONS
1/5 pic.twitter.com/4G1VYEMGzV
— Within Our Lifetime (@WOLPalestine) September 14, 2025
The Combat Antisemitism Movement (CAM), warned on its website that the scale and tone of the planned demonstrations risk crossing the line from political protest into hate speech, arguing that anti-Israel activists are attempting to hijack the UN gathering to spread antisemitism and delegitimize the Jewish state’s right to exist.
Outside the UN last week, masked protesters belonging to the activist group INDECLINE kicked a realistic replica of Netanyahu’s decapitated head as though it were a soccer ball.
US activist group plays soccer with Bibi’s mock decapitated HEAD right outside NYC UN HQ
Peep shot at 00:40
Footage posted by INDECLINE collective just as UN General Assembly about to kick off
‘Following the game, ball was donated to Palestinian Genocide Museum’ pic.twitter.com/TQ84sgZhKr
— RT (@RT_com) September 9, 2025
Within Our Lifetime (WOL), a radical anti-Israel activist group, has vowed to “flood” the UNGA on behalf of the pro-Palestine movement.
WOL, one of the most prolific anti-Israel activist groups, came under immense fire after it organized a protest against an exhibition to honor the victims of the Oct. 7 massacre at the Nova Music Festival in southern Israel. During the event, the group chanted “resistance is justified when people are occupied!” and “Israel, go to hell!”
“We will be there to confront them with the truth: Their silence and inaction enable genocide. The world cannot continue as if Gaza does not exist,” WOL said of its planned demonstrations in New York. “This is the time to make our voices impossible to ignore. Come to New York by any means necessary, to stand, to march, to demand the UN act and end the siege.”
Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) and Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM), two other anti-Israel organizations that have helped organize widespread demonstrations against the Jewish state during the war in Gaza, also announced they are planning a march from Times Square to the UN headquarters on Friday.
“The time is now for each and every UN member state to uphold their duty under international law: sanction Israel and end the genocide,” the groups said in a statement.
JVP, an organization that purports to fight for “Palestinian liberation,” has positioned itself as a staunch adversary of the Jewish state. The group argued in a 2021 booklet that Jews should not write Hebrew liturgy because hearing the language would be “deeply traumatizing” to Palestinians. JVP has repeatedly defended the Oct. 7 massacre of roughly 1,200 people in southern Israel by Hamas as a justified “resistance.” Chapters of the organization have urged other self-described “progressives” to throw their support behind Hamas and other terrorist groups against Israel
Similarly, PYM, another radical anti-Israel group, has repeatedly defended terrorism and violence against the Jewish state. PYM has organized many anti-Israel protests in the two years following the Oct. 7 attacks in the Jewish state. Recently, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) called for a federal investigation into the organization after Aisha Nizar, one of the group’s leaders, urged supporters to sabotage the US supply chain for the F-35 fighter jet, one of the most advanced US military assets and a critical component of Israel’s defense.
The UN General Assembly has historically been a flashpoint for heated debate over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Previous gatherings have seen dueling demonstrations outside the Manhattan venue, with pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian groups both seeking to influence the international spotlight.
While warning about the demonstrations, CAM noted it recently launched a new mobile app, Report It, that allows users worldwide to quickly and securely report antisemitic incidents in real time.
RSS
Nina Davidson Presses Universities to Back Words With Action as Jewish Students Return to Campus Amid Antisemitism Crisis
Nina Davidson on The Algemeiner’s ‘J100’ podcast. Photo: Screenshot
Philanthropist Nina Davidson, who served on the board of Barnard College, has called on universities to pair tough rhetoric on combatting antisemitism with enforcement as Jewish students returned to campuses for the new academic year.
“Years ago, The Algemeiner had published a list ranking the most antisemitic colleges in the country. And number one was Columbia,” Davidson recalled on a recent episode of The Algemeiner‘s “J100” podcast. “As a board member and as someone who was representing the institution, it really upset me … At the board meeting, I brought it up and I said, ‘What are we going to do about this?’”
Host David Cohen, chief executive officer of The Algemeiner, explained he had revisited Davidson’s remarks while she was being honored for her work at The Algemeiner‘s 8th annual J100 gala, held in October 2021, noting their continued relevance.
“It could have been the same speech in 2025,” he said, underscoring how longstanding concerns about campus antisemitism, while having intensified in the aftermath of Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel, are not new.
Davidson argued that universities already possess the tools to protect students – codes of conduct, time-place-manner rules, and consequences for threats or targeted harassment – but too often fail to apply them evenly. “Statements are not enough,” she said, arguing that institutions need to enforce their rules and set a precedent that there will be consequences for individuals who refuse to follow them.
She also said that stakeholders – alumni, parents, and donors – are reassessing their relationships with schools that, in their view, have not safeguarded Jewish students. While supportive of open debate, Davidson distinguished between protest and intimidation, calling for leadership that protects expression while ensuring campus safety.
The episode surveyed specific pressure points that administrators will face this fall: repeat anti-Israel encampments, disruptions of Jewish programming, and the challenge of distinguishing political speech from conduct that violates university rules. “Unless schools draw those lines now,” Davidson warned, “they’ll be scrambling once the next crisis hits.”
Cohen closed by framing the discussion as a test of institutional credibility, asking whether universities will “turn policy into protection” in real time. Davidson agreed, pointing to students who “need to know the rules aren’t just on paper.”
The full conversation is available on The Algemeiner’s “J100” podcast.