Uncategorized
Israeli democracy may not survive a ‘reform’ of its Supreme Court
(JTA) — On Dec. 29, Israel swore in Benjamin Netanyahu’s sixth government. The Likud leader became Israel’s prime minister once more, and one week later, Israel’s long-anticipated judicial counterrevolution began.
In the Knesset Wednesday, newly minted Justice Minister and Netanyahu confidant Yariv Levin unveiled a package of proposed legislation that would alter the balance of power between Israel’s legislature and its Supreme Court.
At the core of this plan is a bill to allow the Knesset to override the Supreme Court. Levin’s proposals — which almost certainly have the immediate support of a Knesset majority, regardless of Levin’s assurances that they would be subject to “thorough debate” — would pave the way for Israel’s new government to pass legislation that curtails rights and undermines the rule of law, dealing a blow to Israeli democracy.
The dire implications of this proposed judicial reform are rooted in key characteristics of the Israeli political system that set it apart from other liberal democracies. Israel has no constitution to determine the balance of power between its various branches of government. In fact, there is no separation between Israel’s executive and legislative branches, given that the government automatically controls a majority in the parliament.
Instead, it has a series of basic laws enacted piecemeal over the course of the state’s history that have a quasi-constitutional status, with the initial intention that they would eventually constitute a de jure constitution.
Through the 1980s, the Knesset passed basic laws that primarily served to define state institutions, such as the country’s legislature and electoral system, capital and military. In the 1990s, there was a paradigm shift with the passage of two basic laws that for the first time concerned individuals’ rights rather than institutions, one on Human Dignity and Liberty (1992) and the other on Freedom of Occupation (1994). These laws enshrined rights to freedom of movement, personal freedom, human dignity and others to all who reside in Israel.
Aharon Barak, the president of Israel’s Supreme Court from 1995 to 2006, argued that these laws constituted a de facto bill of rights, empowering the court to review Knesset legislation and to strike down laws that violate civil liberties, a responsibility not explicitly bestowed upon the court in the basic law pertaining to the judiciary. In 1995, the Supreme Court officially ruled that it could indeed repeal legislation that violates the country’s basic laws, heralding an era of increased judicial activism in Israel in what became known as the “judicial revolution.” The court has struck down 20 laws since, a fairly modest number compared to other democracies.
The judicial revolution of the 1990s shifted the balance of power in Israel’s political system from one of parliamentary sovereignty, in which the Knesset enjoyed ultimate power, to one in which the legislature is restricted from violating the country’s (incomplete) constitution. Israel’s Supreme Court became a check on the legislative branch in a country that lacks other checks and balances and separations of power.
As a result of these characteristics, the Supreme Court currently serves as one of the only checks on the extraordinary power of Israel’s 120-member Knesset — which is why shifting that balance of power would have such a dramatic impact on Israel’s democracy.
Levin’s proposed judicial overhaul includes several elements that would weaken the power and independence of Israel’s Supreme Court. The plan includes forbidding the Supreme Court from deliberating on and striking down basic laws themselves. It would require an unspecified “special majority” of the court to strike down legislation, raising the threshold from where it currently stands.
Levin has also called for altering the composition of the selection committee that appoints top judges to give the government, rather than legal professionals, a majority on the panel. It would allow cabinet ministers to appoint legal advisors to act on their behalf, rather than that of the justice ministry, canceling these advisors’ role as safeguards against government overreach. Should a minister enact a decision that contravenes a basic law, the ministry’s legal advisor would no longer report the violation to the attorney general, and would instead merely offer non-binding legal advice to the minister.
The pièce de résistance is, of course, the override clause that would allow the Knesset to reinstate laws struck down by the Supreme Court by 61 members of Knesset, a simple majority assuming all members are present. The sole restriction on this override would be a provision preventing the Knesset from re-legislating laws struck down unanimously, by all 15 judges, within the same Knesset term.
This plan’s obvious and most immediate result would be the effective annulment of the quasi-constitutional status of Israel’s basic laws. If the Knesset’s power to legislate is no longer bound by basic laws, these de facto constitutional amendments no longer have any teeth. There are no guardrails preventing any Knesset majority from doing as it wishes, including violating basic human rights. The Knesset could pass laws openly curtailing freedom of the press or gender equality, for example, should it choose to do so.
This counterrevolution, in effect, goes further than merely undoing what occurred in the 1990s.
Most crucially, the Knesset that would once again enjoy full parliamentary sovereignty in 2022 is not the Knesset of Israel’s first four decades. Shackling the Supreme Court is essential to the agendas of the new government’s various ultra-right and ultra-religious parties. For example, the haredi Orthodox parties are eager to re-legislate a blanket exemption to the military draft for their community, which the court struck down in 2017 on the grounds that it was discriminatory. They also have their sights on revoking recognition of non-Orthodox conversions for immigrants to Israel, undoing a court decision from 2021.
The far-right, Jewish supremacist parties of Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, meanwhile, see an opportunity to deal a decisive blow to an institution that has long served as a check on the settlement movement. They hope to tie the court’s hands in the face of oncoming legislation to retroactively legalize settlements built on private Palestinian land, which are illegal under Israeli law. But this is only the beginning: Neutering the authority of the court could pave the way for legal discrimination against Israel’s Arab minority, such as Ben-Gvir’s proposal to deport minorities who show insufficient loyalty.
The timing of Levin’s announcement Wednesday could not be more germane. The Knesset recently amended the basic law to legalize the appointment of Aryeh Deri, the Shas party leader who is serving a suspended sentence for tax fraud, as a minister in the new government. The Supreme Court convened Thursday morning to hear petitions against his appointment from those arguing that it is “unreasonable” to rehabilitate Deri given his multiple criminal convictions, a view shared by Israel’s attorney general. Levin’s proposals would bar the court from using this “reasonability” standard.
The Israeli right has long chafed at the power of the Supreme Court, which it accuses of having a left-wing bias. But a judicial overhaul like this has never enjoyed the full support of the government, nor was Netanyahu previously in favor of it. Now, with a uniformly right-wing government and Netanyahu on trial for corruption, the prime minister’s foremost interest is appeasing his political partners and securing their support for future legislation to shield him from prosecution.
In a system where the majority rules, there need to be mechanisms in place to protect the rights of minorities — political, ethnic and religious. Liberal democracy requires respect for the rule of law and human rights. Yariv Levin’s proposals to fully subordinate the Supreme Court to the Knesset will concentrate virtually unchecked power in the hands of a few individuals — government ministers and party leaders within the coalition who effectively control what the Knesset does. That those individuals were elected in free and fair elections is no guarantee that the changes they make will be democratic.
—
The post Israeli democracy may not survive a ‘reform’ of its Supreme Court appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Amsterdam’s New Warning to Europe on Antisemitism
Anti-Israel protesters clash with police outside Amsterdam’s Concertgebouw, breaking through barricades and setting off smoke bombs during a demonstration against a performance by the IDF’s chief cantor. Photo: Screenshot
Amsterdam likes to present itself as a city of tolerance. It celebrates diversity, prides itself on openness, and often reminds the world of its history as a refuge for those seeking freedom. Yet something deeply troubling happened in Amsterdam last week that should concern not only the Netherlands, but all of Europe:
A municipal debate about antisemitism had to be held at a secret location because of security concerns.
Pause for a moment and consider what that means. In a democratic European capital, a discussion about protecting a Jewish minority could not take place openly for fear of threats and intimidation. If that does not signal a serious problem, what does?
That’s in addition to the bombing of a Jewish school, and another attack that just occurred.
During the meeting, a 15-year old Jewish boy addressed the room. His testimony cut through political rhetoric and statistics with the clarity only a young voice can bring. Since the October 7, 2023, massacre in Israel, he said, life for Jewish students in Amsterdam has changed dramatically. Many of his friends have already left the city. They no longer see a future there.
Imagine hearing those words in 2026 in one of Europe’s most celebrated liberal cities. A teenager speaking calmly about the disappearance of his community.
Amsterdam alderman Melanie van der Horst was visibly moved and struggled to hold back tears. The emotional moment showed that some political leaders understand the gravity of what is happening. Yet empathy alone will not solve the problem.
Another participant in the debate raised a painful but necessary question: How must it feel for Jewish residents to walk daily through public spaces where demonstrations take place in which their country and their people are shouted down? Pro-Palestinian protests have become a constant presence in parts of the city. Political protest is a democratic right, but when rhetoric turns into open hostility toward Jews, society has crossed a dangerous line.
One proposal during the debate illustrated the level of frustration. A politician suggested sending undercover police officers into the streets wearing a kippah in order to identify those who harass Jews. Critics called the idea controversial. But the fact that such a measure is even being discussed reveals how serious the situation has become.
The problem extends beyond the streets. Jewish organizations in the Netherlands increasingly report difficulties renting venues for events. Cultural gatherings and lectures sometimes struggle to find halls willing to host them. It rarely makes headlines, but this quiet exclusion sends a clear message: you are welcome in theory, but not visibly.
History has taught Europe where that kind of atmosphere can lead. Antisemitism rarely begins with violence. It begins with discomfort, social pressure, and the slow normalization of hostility toward Jewish identity.
Meanwhile, another factor fuels the problem. Much of the European media landscape presents Israel through a lens that reduces a complex reality to a simple narrative of aggressor and victim. When context disappears and facts are replaced by slogans, public perception shifts. The hostility directed at Israel easily spills over into hostility toward Jews living thousands of kilometers away.
That is why factual education and responsible journalism matter so much. Civil society organizations that work to counter misinformation often struggle to be heard. Yet without a commitment to truth, public debate becomes an echo chamber for activism rather than a search for understanding.
There is also a question for Jewish communities themselves. When fear grows, the instinct to become less visible is understandable. But invisibility comes at a cost. If intimidation forces people to hide their identity, those spreading hatred learn that their tactics work.
The lesson of Jewish history is painfully clear. Silence has never protected Jewish communities.
Strength does not mean confrontation. It means refusing to surrender identity and dignity to intimidation. It means raising a generation that is proud rather than afraid. It means understanding that resilience is sometimes the only answer to those who seek to erase a people’s presence.
The young boy in Amsterdam asked a simple question without even intending to pose a challenge to Europe: will the Jewish community still exist here in the future?
That question should echo far beyond the walls of the municipal chamber where he spoke. Because if a Jewish teenager in Amsterdam already doubts his future in the city, then Europe is facing not just a Jewish problem.
It is facing a moral test of its own values.
Uncategorized
Billy Crystal Leads Tribute at Oscars for His Late Best Friend, Jewish Filmmaker Rob Reiner
Billy Crystal speaks about Rob Reiner during the Oscars show at the 98th Academy Awards in Hollywood, Los Angeles, California, US, March 15, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Mike Blake
Billy Crystal delivered an emotional tribute to his late best friend and legendary actor-turned-director Rob Reiner at the 98th Academy Awards on Sunday night, and was joined on stage by several of Reiner’s other Hollywood friends and stars of his iconic films.
While eulogizing Reiner at the Dolby Theatre in Los Angeles, Crystal, 78, spoke about his longtime friend as a “master storyteller” and mentioned his long list of memorable projects. The longtime collaborators first met in 1975, when Crystal was cast as Reiner’s best friend in an episode of “All In The Family.”
“My friends, Rob’s movies will last for lifetimes, because they were about what makes us laugh and cry, and what we aspire to be far better in his eyes: far kinder, far funnier, and far more human,” Crystal said. He then talked about Reiner’s marriage to the late Michele Singer Reiner, who was killed alongside her husband on Dec. 14. Crystal called the two “unstoppable” together and said the couple’s loss is “immeasurable.”
“A gifted photographer, she not only produced films with Rob, but it was her energy that had them working tirelessly to fight social injustice in the country that they both loved,” he added. “Rob and Michele Reiner became the driving force in the landmark decision for marriage equality across the United States.”
“To the millions who have enjoyed his films all these years, I want you to know, here and around the world, how many times Rob told me that it meant everything to him, that his work meant something to you — and for us who had the privilege of working with and knowing him and loving him,” Crystal continued.
After the “When Harry Met Sally” star concluded his speech — by saying “Buddy, what fun we had storming the castle” — over a dozen actors who worked alongside the director on films joined Crystal on stage and stood silently together. They included Meg Ryan, Michael McKean, Jerry O’Connell, Mandy Patinkin, Kathy Bates, Annette Bening, John Cusack, Demi Moore, Kiefer Sutherland, Daphne Zuniga, Christopher Guest, Wil Wheaton, Fred Savage, Cary Elwes, Carol Kane, and Kevin Pollak. They had worked with the late filmmaker on movies that included “When Harry Met Sally,” “The Princess Bride,” “This Is Spinal Tap,” “Misery,” “A Few Good Men,” and “Stand by Me.”
Sunday night’s tribute came three months after the director died at the age of 78 on Dec. 14.
Crystal was introduced to the stage by Conan O’Brien, who was hosting the Oscars on Sunday night but was also one of the last people to see the Reiners alive. The couple was found stabbed to death in their Brentwood home hours after they attended a holiday party at O’Brien’s house on Dec. 13. Two sources who attended the party said they witnessed a loud verbal exchange between the Reiners and their middle son, 32-year-old Nick Reiner. He was arrested the following night and charged with murdering his parents.
The younger Reiner is charged with two counts of first-degree murder with special circumstances, including the use of a knife. He pleaded not guilty and has remained in custody without bail since his arrest. Reiner is next due in court on April 29 and could face life in prison without parole, or the death penalty, if convicted.
Uncategorized
Israel Says It Has Plans for At Least 3 Weeks of War as Airstrikes Pound Iran
Emergency personnel work at the site of a strike on a residential building, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Tehran, Iran, March 16, 2026. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
Israel said on Monday it had detailed plans for at least three more weeks of war as it pounded sites across Iran overnight, while Iranian drone attacks temporarily shut Dubai airport and hit a key oil facility in the United Arab Emirates.
The US-Israeli war on Iran is now entering its third week with no clear end in sight, largely shutting the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20% of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas flow, pushing up energy prices and raising fears of a spike in global inflation.
US President Donald Trump on Sunday called for a coalition of nations to help reopen the strait and said the US-led NATO defense alliance faced a “very bad” future if its members failed to help.
But while allies voiced support for diplomatic efforts to reopen the route, they were cautious about joining any military action.
ISRAEL STILL HAS ‘THOUSANDS’ OF TARGETS IN IRAN
Israeli military spokesperson Lieutenant Colonel Nadav Shoshani told reporters there were detailed operational plans for the war with Iran for the next three weeks, and other plans extending further ahead.
Israel has said it wants to weaken Iran‘s capacity to threaten it, striking ballistic missile infrastructure, nuclear facilities, and the security apparatus, and that it still has thousands of targets to hit.
“We want to make sure that they are as weak as possible, this regime, and that we degrade all their capabilities, all parts and all wings of their security establishment,” Shoshani said.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi for his part said Tehran had not asked for a ceasefire or exchanged messages with the US, according to Iran‘s semi-official Student News Network.
In a post on X, Araqchi also said that some “neighboring states” that host US forces and permit attacks on Iran were also actively encouraging the killing of Iranians.
“Stances should be promptly clarified,” he said.
He said 200 children were among the hundreds of Iranian civilians killed in US or Israeli bombings.
Fars News Agency reported that several civilians had been killed in a strike near Tehran’s Martyrs’ Square, without giving figures.
ISRAEL CLAIMS STRIKES ON IRAN‘S SPACE PROGRAM
The Israeli military said on Monday it was carrying out air strikes on Tehran, Shiraz, and Tabriz.
It said its Air Force had also struck sites linked to Iran’s space program, including destroying a research facility in Tehran involved in developing a satellite launched in 2024.
One Tehran resident told Reuters that there had been no internet overnight and Iranians felt isolated from the world.
“People are being killed,” Shahnaz, 62, said via WhatsApp. “Just days before Nowruz (Iranian New Year, on March 20), but people are not in the mood to celebrate. When will this end?”
Asked if she supported the Islamic Republic, Shahnaz said: “No, I don’t. How can I? They killed my granddaughter in [January’s] protests. We want this regime to go. We want this misery to end.”
In Israel, air raid sirens warned of Iranian missiles. Iran‘s Revolutionary Guards said Tehran had launched attacks on areas In Tel Aviv, the US al-Dhafra air base in Abu Dhabi, the US naval base in Bahrain, and Bahrain’s Sheikh Issa air base.
Furthermore, oil loading operations at the UAE port of Fujairah on the Gulf of Oman were suspended following an Iranian drone strike.
Fujairah is a key exit point for the UAE’s Murban crude – a volume equivalent to roughly 1% of global demand.
Flights at Dubai International Airport, one of the world’s busiest, were suspended for several hours after a drone strike on a nearby fuel storage facility sent plumes of black smoke into the sky. Saudi Arabia intercepted 34 drones in its eastern region in one hour, state media said. No injuries were reported in either incident.
Later on, Reuters reporters also heard booms in the Qatari capital, Doha.
OIL SLIPS ON BESSENT SHIPPING COMMENTS
Despite the turbulence, oil prices, which had been above $100 a barrel, fell sharply and stocks rallied after US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC the US was “fine” to let some Iranian fuel vessels sail through the strait, and believed Indian and Chinese tankers had also passed through.
Ship-tracking data showed a Pakistan-bound oil tanker had passed through the Strait of Hormuz over the weekend, indicating that some countries are able to negotiate safe passage for their vessels.
On Sunday, Trump had demanded that countries relying heavily on oil from the Gulf should help protect the strait, and said he hoped China, France, Japan, South Korea, Britain, and others would participate.
However, many – including Germany, Italy, Greece, Japan, and Australia – said they would not send warships.
Israel continued to strike Lebanon and Gaza, attacking Iran-backed Hezbollah and Palestinian Hamas terrorists. The Israeli military said its troops had begun limited ground operations against Hezbollah positions in southern Lebanon.