Connect with us

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.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Palestinian-French lawmaker arrested after praising 1972 bomber of Ben Gurion Airport

(JTA) — French police detained Rima Hassan, a member of the European Parliament from France, on suspicion of “advocating for terrorism” after she quoted one of the perpetrators of a 1972 terror attack on ​an Israeli airport in a social media post.

Hassan, 33, was detained for several hours on Thursday by French authorities over a March 26 post in which she quoted an individual convicted of participating in the 1972 terror attack on Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv, which killed 26 people.

The post, which Hassan later deleted, included Japanese and Palestinian flags as well as a quote from Kozo Okamoto, a member of the terror group, which read, “I dedicated my youth to the Palestinian cause. As long as there is oppression, resistance will not only be a right, but a duty.”

The Paris prosecutor’s office said it had released Hassan and given her a court date of July 7 “to be ‌tried on charges of advocating terrorism committed online.” If convicted, Hassan could face up to a seven-year jail term and a fine of up ​to 100,000 euros, or $115,290.

Hassan, who was elected to the European Parliament in 2024 ⁠for the French far-left party France Unbowed, has previously said that “Hamas’s actions are legitimate from an international perspective” and argued that Franco-Palestinians “must be able to join the Palestinian armed resistance.” She also participated in the Gaza-bound flotilla protesting Israel’s blockade of the enclave last June, and, last month, was denied entry into Canada ahead of a scheduled conference appearance.

The arrest came after two France-based antisemitism watchdogs, the International League Against Racism and Antisemitism and the European Jewish Organization, lodged complaints over Hassan’s post.

“Statements presenting the acts committed by terrorists in a favorable light constitute an apology for terrorism,” the European Jewish Organization wrote in a post on X on Thursday. “It is on this basis that the OJE has filed a complaint against RH for the statements made on X and for which she appears to have been placed in police custody today.”

The prosecutor’s office said that Hassan is under investigation in six additional cases, and that 16 other cases involving alleged online hate speech have been closed. Police are also separately investigating “substances resembling CBD and 3-MMC,” illegal drugs, that were found among her belongings.

In a post on X Friday, Hassan, who was born in Syria in a Palestinian refugee camp and has made pro-Palestinian advocacy and fierce criticism of Israel a hallmark of her political career, said that she was the “target of political, judicial, and media harassment.”

“This custody hearing was followed by a fifth summons this Friday, well illustrating the politico-judicial harassment that the Palestinian cause is enduring after more than 2 years of genocide and inaction on the part of our government,” wrote Hassan in a subsequent post.

French Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez dismissed claims that the case against Hassan was politically motivated, saying in a television appearance, “No one is above the law, especially on subjects as serious as the glorification of terrorism.”

The post Palestinian-French lawmaker arrested after praising 1972 bomber of Ben Gurion Airport appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Michigan Democrats, Jewish leaders uneasy over Senate candidate’s alliance with Hasan Piker

(JTA) — Just weeks after an attack on a Michigan synagogue, a U.S. Senate candidate’s decision to campaign in the state with Hasan Piker — a streamer accused of antisemitic rhetoric — is prompting unease among Jewish leaders and fellow Democrats.

Abdul El-Sayed, a physician and former county health executive, is set to appear with Piker at two different Michigan universities on Tuesday.

The Hillel at Michigan State University said it was “deeply troubled” by Piker’s planned visit to campus, calling him a “known antisemite,” while at least one planned speaker, a state representative, backed out of the rallies citing the concerns of her Jewish constituents.

National Jewish leaders also criticized the planned events, with some comparing Piker to Nick Fuentes, the openly antisemitic livestreamer who has divided Republicans and others drawing a connection to the attack last month on Temple Israel.

“Abdul El-Sayed’s decision to host campaign rallies with Piker is not just alarming; it’s absolutely shocking. It reflects a broader trend: the dangerous normalization of antisemitism in our politics,” tweeted Jonathan Greenblatt, the head of the Anti-Defamation League. “That this is happening in Michigan, where Temple Israel was targeted in a violent antisemitic attack … makes it even more egregious.”

El-Sayed has defended his decision to campaign with Piker, including to Greenblatt, saying that he agrees with Piker on some issues but not others. Their points of agreement, he said, include “the way that AIPAC has decimated our politics and made us think that the most important goal of our foreign policy is to backstop Israel.”

He recently told a pro-Palestinian podcast that Piker’s past comments have been “taken out of context,” adding that Piker represents “where the disaffected people are” and that the streamer “has taken great pains to condemn any attempt to tie the government of Israel to the Jewish people.”

The campaign stops come as both Piker and El-Sayed — both Muslim progressives — face scrutiny over their comments about Jews and Israel.

Piker has increasingly divided Democrats, with a Jewish congressman from Illinois recently calling him “an unapologetic antisemite” even as some of his colleagues have continued to appear with him on his streaming show and in real life.

El-Sayed, meanwhile, grew up in a heavily Jewish suburb of Detroit and has the endorsement of some progressive Jews including former U.S. Rep. Andy Levin. He raised eyebrows with his response to the Temple Israel attack last month — he condemned the attack but also criticized Israel’s offensive in Lebanon, where the attacker’s brother was killed — as well as his reluctance to comment on the death of Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

A former security official with El-Sayed’s campaign recently told a local blog that he had witnessed comments from the candidate that the staffer thought would “give credibility to the claims of [El-Sayed’s] antisemitism and pro-Islamist regimes/factions” before resigning. The blog did not report any specifics.

“Personally, I regret and feel shame for excusing antisemitism and for not leaving sooner,” the former staffer said.

El-Sayed and Piker are set to appear with Rep. Summer Lee of Pennsylvania as well as candidates for local office, at both MSU and the University of Michigan.

In the leadup to the rallies, one of El-Sayed’s primary opponents, state Sen. Mallory McMorrow, as well as the head of the AJC compared Piker to white nationalist Nick Fuentes, who has celebrated Hitler and attacked “organized Jewry.”

Piker’s most vociferous critics have pointed to a history of his comments in which, among other things, he has denied or downplayed that rape took place during the Oct. 7 attacks and compared Houthi rebels to Anne Frank.

Piker rejects allegations of antisemitism. But in a recent interview he expressed regret over some of his more extreme rhetoric, including referring to Haredi Orthodox Jews as “inbred,” and offered additional context for some of his other remarks spotlighted by Greenblatt and other critics including the centrist Democratic group Third Way.

He has also said it is “Islamophobic to say: ‘Oh, this Muslim critic of Israel who has the majority opinion on Israel should not be going to a campaign rally.’”

El-Sayed has suggested that Piker’s critics are more broadly conflating criticism of Israel with antisemitism.

“I love and revere the Jewish people because I love ALL people. And I criticize Israel’s genocide because I love ALL people. I pray someday you understand,” El-Sayed tweeted in response to Greenblatt’s criticism of his association with Piker.

In a subsequent video, the candidate pointed out that former Vice President Kamala Harris invited Piker to stream at the 2024 Democratic National Convention, during her bid for president. He said he would not apologize “for every single video that people put up there that Hasan said this or Hasan said that” — and that he thought the progressive cause was larger than those critiques.

“Any Democrat who tells you that you cannot speak with some group of people because of one offensive thing that they might have said is missing the point of what it means to actually bring people into a legitimate mainstream policy where we can actually fight for the things we need and deserve,” El-Sayed said.

Third Way has called on El-Sayed to outline specifically where his views and Piker’s differ.

“If you insist on campaigning with an extremist like Piker just weeks after an attack on Jews at Temple Israel in Michigan, voters in your state deserve to know what you truly believe and how closely you align with his most abhorrent views,” wrote the group’s president, Jonathan Cowan. He asked six questions including, “Do you also dismiss the mass rape of Jewish and Israeli women by Hamas?” and “Do you believe as he does that ‘Hamas is a thousand times better’ than the Israeli state?”

At least one planned participant, Ann Arbor-based state Rep. Carrie Rheingans, has backed out of the rallies. She told local media that she still endorses El-Sayed and has “heard him denounce antisemitism vehemently multiple times,” but added, “I don’t appreciate many of Piker’s antisemitic comments… Maybe Hasan Piker has some room to learn how his comments affect other people, but I have to say, Jews, Muslims, and Arabs in Michigan are hurting for a lot of really good reasons right now.”

MSU Hillel, meanwhile, did not mention El-Sayed by name in its statement.

“At a time when Jewish students are experiencing heightened fear and vulnerability — especially in the wake of the recent attack on Temple Israel in West Bloomfield — this choice is especially concerning,” the Hillel chapter wrote on Instagram. “Hosting individuals like Hasan Piker who consistently use harmful, inflammatory and antisemitic rhetoric creates a hostile environment for Jewish students, threatening their security and belonging.”

The comparisons between Piker and Fuentes have opened a new flashpoint in debates over the role that streaming personalities are playing in American politics.

“In Piker’s case, his record speaks for itself, the same with Nick Fuentes. I don’t need to go into details about who they are or what they represent,” Ted Deutch, CEO of the American Jewish Committee, told Jewish Insider while urging Democrats not to associate with Piker. “Neither one of them belongs in the middle of the political process as a result of candidates choosing to put them there.”

In a statement, AJC Detroit, the region’s Jewish community relations arm, cautioned associating with both Piker and Fuentes but also did not name any candidates.

“AJC has reached out to leaders of both parties to warn about the dangers of platforming extremists like Hasan Piker and Nick Fuentes and helping them spread their virulent antisemitism,” spokesperson Amy Sapeika wrote. “With increasing polarization and the rise of extremism from the far left and far right, both parties need to make clear that antisemites like them have no place on their stages.”

The comparison is also shaping the Senate race directly. Piker “is somebody who says extremely offensive things in order to generate clicks and views and followers, which is not entirely different from somebody like Nick Fuentes,” McMorrow told Jewish Insider.

The other Democratic candidate in the Senate primary, Rep. Haley Stevens, said El-Sayed was “choosing to campaign with someone who has a history of antisemitic rhetoric” but did not make a Fuentes comparison. (Elissa Slotkin, the state’s centrist Jewish senator who is not up for reelection this year, said she wasn’t familiar with Piker’s rhetoric but that it “sounds deeply antisemitic.”)

Stevens, who is not Jewish, is generally seen as a centrist candidate preferred by AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobby that has emerged as a bogeyman in Democratic politics. McMorrow, who has a Jewish husband and Jewish child, is battling El-Sayed for the progressive mantle: She has the endorsement of liberal Zionist group J Street and has said Israel committed genocide in Gaza.

The post Michigan Democrats, Jewish leaders uneasy over Senate candidate’s alliance with Hasan Piker appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Over Half of All New York City Hate Crimes Have Targeted Jews Since Mamdani Took Office, Police Says

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani holds a press conference at the New York City Office of Emergency Management, as a major winter storm spreads across a large swath of the United States, in Brooklyn, New York City, US, Jan. 25, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Bing Guan

The majority of all hate crimes in New York City over the first three months of this year have targeted Jews, according to new data released by the New York Police Department (NYPD).

The striking figures, announced last week by NYPD Commissioner Jessica Tisch, will likely fuel criticism of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who took office on Jan. 1 and has been accused of promoting antisemitism and not doing enough to denounce violence against Jews.

“Confirmed hate crimes increased nearly 12 percent this quarter citywide. We continue to see that the vast majority of our hate crimes are antisemitic in nature,” Tisch said on Thursday in an appearance at 1 Police Plaza with Mamdani to discuss the overall crime data for the year.

“In fact, in the first quarter of 2026, more than half of all confirmed hate crimes, or 55 percent, were antisemitic, despite Jews only making up approximately 10 percent of the population of New York City,” the police commissioner added.

Explaining that the NYPD Hate Crimes Task Force “determines whether an incident meets the legal standard for hate crime under New York state law,” Tisch announced that “as of today, and for the first time, our monthly hate crime data will include two clear, accurate sets of numbers. Reported hate crimes, those flagged for investigation by the task force and confirmed hate crimes as determined by the task force.”

Tisch called this approach “the gold standard for reporting on hate crimes, and that is what we are going to do going forward. This will ensure that the public has an accurate and timely and more robust view than ever of hate crime activity in New York City.”

Tisch’s comments came amid an ongoing surge in antisemitic hate crimes across New York City. In January, for example, such crimes skyrocketed by 182 percent during Mamdani’s first month in office compared to the same period last year.

Jews were also targeted in the majority (54 percent) of all hate crimes perpetrated in New York City in 2024, according to data issued by the NYPD. A recent report released in December by the Mayor’s Office to Combat Antisemitism noted that figure rose to a staggering 62 percent in the first quarter of 2025.

Under Mamdani, however, Jewish New Yorkers have expressed particular alarm about their safety.

A far-left democratic socialist and anti-Zionist, Mamdani has refused to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state; supported boycotts of all Israeli-tied entities; and failed to explicitly condemn the phrase “globalize the intifada,” which has been used to call for violence against Jews and Israelis around the world.

Last week, the mayor said that New York was welcoming to people of all backgrounds.

“This is a city where everyone who lives here should know that they belong across these five boroughs. There is no person of any faith that should ever be made to feel as if this is not their home, that this is not a place where they can be safe,” he said. “And frankly, we are looking to build a city where the threshold is not simply safety. We want this to be a city where New Yorkers are cherished, where they are celebrated. And we know that that is the case for many. And still, there is so much more work to be done to ensure that is the case for all.”

Hours after taking office, Mamdani revoked multiple executive orders enacted by his predecessor to combat antisemitism.

Among the most controversial actions was Mamdani’s decision to undo New York City’s adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism, a framework widely used by governments and law enforcement around the world to identify contemporary antisemitic behavior. The definition has been widely accepted by Jewish groups and lawmakers across the political spectrum, and it is now used by hundreds of governing institutions, including the US State Department, European Union, and United Nations.

In February, a group of New York City politicians and civic leaders sued Mamdani, charging that members of his administration had stonewalled Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) requests related to his choice to cancel the executive order embracing the IHRA definition of antisemitism, a move supported by the mayor’s inner core of radical, anti-Zionist activists.

A reporter at 1 Police Plaza asked about the nature of New York City’s hate crimes and if they had grown more violent. Mamdani’s response notably avoided mentioning the Jewish community by name, despite the NYPD’s focus specifically on antisemitic attacks.

“So, the hate crimes that we are seeing are really, like, very across the board. It could be something — an act of violence. It could be drawing a symbol on a wall, like, for example, a swastika,” Tisch added. “So, I don’t want to characterize them in that way. What I can tell you is that the NYPD has released this month, the gold standard for data about hate crimes. We’ve done this in consultation with experts in the field. And that is data about reported crimes and data about confirmed crimes.”

Concluding the questions, Tisch said, “And so now everyone has access to both pieces of information, and that will continue into the future. I want to make sure that we are incredibly transparent about data because data is power, and I also don’t want to continue or perpetuate the practice of releasing bad data that doesn’t help draw meaningful conclusions.”

Despite Tisch’s comments, not everyone supports the city’s so-called “gold standard” change to hate crime data reporting, which some critics argue is conveniently timed to sanitize the administration’s record on rising antisemitism.

“We’re all watching the manufacturing of propaganda in real time,” Rabbi Chaim Steinmetz of Congregation Kehilath Jeshurun on the Upper East Side, told the New York Post. “They’ll change the method of counting antisemitic crimes and literally six months later the mayor’s office will claim that antisemitism has dropped.”

Elisha Wiesel, son of the Nobel laureate and Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel, shared Steinmetz’s suspicions, telling the Post that “I think there should be a loud outcry telling them to change it back.”

Former NYPD Detective Michael Alcazar, an adjunct professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, called the much-lauded data style an example of “textbook fudging the numbers,” adding, “It’s going to look like they’re combating hate crimes, but they’re not being transparent.”

Alcazar said that if the NYPD really sought transparency, “then they should show the number of complaints they actually receive and what the investigations yielded.”

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News