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
How the Left and Right Converge to Form a Horseshoe of Antisemitism
US Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) speaks at a press conference with activists calling for a ceasefire in Gaza in front of the Capitol in Washington, DC, Dec. 14, 2023. Photo: Annabelle Gordon / CNP/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
“One of the things that antisemitism does is, it creates coalitions,” Rabbi David Wolpe recently observed.
How ironic that he made this comment on the show of Theo Von, a right-wing podcaster who interviewed Trump during the 2024 election campaign. Some months later, upon his return from a trip to Qatar, Von suddenly felt the need to talk about the alleged “genocide” in Gaza, only to be quoted favorably in the hard-left music magazine Rolling Stone.
The far-right and the far-left have been coming together over antisemitism at least since 1961, when 10 members of the American Nazi Party attended a Nation of Islam (NOI) rally. Members of the NOI escorted the Nazis to front-row seats for a speech by Malcolm X, who was filling in for the originally scheduled speaker, Elijah Muhammad.
More recently, in 2019, former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke called Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-MN) “the most important member of the US Congress” for her “Defiance to Z.O.G. [Zionist Occupied Government].”
That same year, the shooter at the Chabad synagogue in Poway, California, left behind a manifesto that both embraced white supremacist ideology and incorporated tropes promoted by the Nation of Islam’s Louis Farrakhan and the anti-Israel BDS movement, such as the false claims that Jews had a “large role in every slave trade for the past two thousand years” or that Jews persecute “Christians of modern day Syria and Palestine.” In 2021, left-wing academics adopted the language of David Duke and of the Nazis when they accused Israel of “Jewish supremacy.”
So it shouldn’t really have been a huge surprise to see this marriage of convenience beginning to make its way into today’s free-for-all media landscape. Rolling Stone, whose political slant generally is hard left and whose coverage of Israel, as CAMERA has documented at length, is egregiously biased, gushed over Von:
On Tuesday [May 19], comedian and podcaster Theo Von — who promoted the president during his 2024 campaign and accompanied him on a trip to Qatar last week — said the U.S. was “complicit” in creating the horrors that were taking place in Gaza.
“It feels to me like it’s a genocide that’s happening while we’re alive here … in front of our lives. And I feel like I should say something,” Von said on this week’s episode of the This Past Weekend podcast….
Pope Leo and Von couldn’t be more different, but frustration with the lack of progress toward a sustained cease-fire in Gaza, and the looming threat of more devastation to the region, reflect sentiments both in the U.S. and abroad.
There was a similar love-fest between Dave Smith, the conservative libertarian comedian best known for spouting nonsense on The Joe Rogan Experience, and Krystal Ball, the hard-left host of the online political news show Breaking Point, on Monday. Once again, Dave Smith let loose a dizzying blitz of false information, including making the claim that Iran was in compliance with non-proliferation agreements.
Smith said, “we’re left in the position where you’re supposed to sit here and justify a sneak aggressive, preemptive attack, like somehow you’re supposed to feel like you’re the good guys in an absolute war of choice, against a country that does not have nuclear weapons … Iran is a member of the non-proliferation treaty….”
But despite Iran’s (partial) ratification of the NPT, there have long been concerns about its enrichment capabilities, its building of new nuclear facilities, and its lack of cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, leading up to the June 12 declaration by the IAEA that Iran was out of compliance with its NPT obligations, just a day before Israel’s attack. After that report, Iran threatened to leave the NPT altogether (although it’s clear it was not complying with the treaty).
And yet, instead of pointing any of this out, Ball responded, “and they’re [Israel] a rogue nation attacking like six of their neighbors as we speak and are not part of the non-proliferation [treaty] and we’re supposed to be cool with that” — while Smith nodded in agreement. Later in the show, in what may have been the only accurate claim made on that program, Ball remarked, “that’s the Israel horseshoe, between you and me, Dave.”
The October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel functioned as a siren call to antisemites everywhere: “It’s open season on the Jews.” Not only has this signal been heeded by certain individuals from both the far-left and the far-right, but a media environment that has no guardrails provides ample opportunities for these two nefarious groups to come together over their ignorance-fueled bigotry.
Karen Bekker is the Assistant Director in the Media Response Team at CAMERA, the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis, and frequently writes about antisemitism in the media.
The post How the Left and Right Converge to Form a Horseshoe of Antisemitism first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Anti-Israel Activists Damage Planes at UK Military Base
An activist from Palestine Action sprays a military aircraft engine with red paint at RAF Brize Norton, to damage it, in Carterton, Britain, June 20, 2025, in this still image obtained from handout video. The group’s action was in protest of British military assistance to Israel, claiming that they, “interrupted Britain’s direct participation in the commission of genocide and war crimes across the Middle East”, stating on their website. Photo: Palestine Action/Handout via REUTERS
Anti-Israel activists broke into a Royal Air Force base in central England on Friday, damaging and spraying red paint over two planes used for refueling and transport.
Palestine Action said two members had entered the Brize Norton base in Oxfordshire, putting paint into the engines of the Voyager aircraft and further damaging them with crowbars.
“Despite publicly condemning the Israeli government, Britain continues to send military cargo, fly spy planes over Gaza and refuel US/Israeli fighter jets,” the group said in a statement, posting a video of the incident on X.
“Britain isn’t just complicit, it’s an active participant in the Gaza genocide and war crimes across the Middle East.”
Prime Minister Keir Starmer condemned the “vandalism” as “disgraceful” in a post on X.
Britain’s defense ministry and police were investigating.
“It is our responsibility to support those who defend us,” the defense ministry said.
A spokesperson for Starmer said the government was reviewing security across all British defense sites.
Palestine Action is among groups that have regularly targeted defense firms and other companies in Britain linked to Israel since the start of the conflict in Gaza.
The group said it had also sprayed paint on the runway and left a Palestine flag there.
The Gaza war was triggered when Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists attacked Israel in October 2023, killing 1,200 and taking about 250 hostages.
US ally Israel subsequently launched a military campaign in Gaza aimed at dismantling Hamas and freeing the hostages.
The post Anti-Israel Activists Damage Planes at UK Military Base first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
US Supreme Court Upholds Law on Suing Palestinian Authorities Over Terror Attacks
The US Supreme Court building is seen the morning before justices are expected to issue opinions in pending cases, in Washington, DC, June 14, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz
The US Supreme Court upheld on Friday a statute passed by Congress to facilitate lawsuits against Palestinian authorities by Americans killed or injured in terrorist attacks abroad as plaintiffs pursue monetary damages for violence years ago in Israel and the West Bank.
The 9-0 ruling overturned a lower court’s decision that the 2019 law, the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act, violated the rights of the Palestinian Authority and Palestine Liberation Organization to due process under the US Constitution.
Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts, who authored the ruling, said the 2019 jurisdictional law comported with due process rights enshrined in the Constitution’s Fifth Amendment.
“It is permissible for the federal government to craft a narrow jurisdictional provision that ensures, as part of a broader foreign policy agenda, that Americans injured or killed by acts of terror have an adequate forum in which to vindicate their right” to compensation under a federal law known as the Antiterrorism Act of 1990, Roberts wrote.
The US government and a group of American victims and their families had appealed the lower court’s decision that struck down a provision of the law.
Among the plaintiffs are families who in 2015 won a $655 million judgment in a civil case alleging that the Palestinian organizations were responsible for a series of shootings and bombings around Jerusalem from 2002 to 2004. They also include relatives of Israeli-American Ari Fuld, who was fatally stabbed by a Palestinian in 2018.
“The plaintiffs, US families who had loved ones maimed or murdered in PLO-sponsored terror attacks, have been waiting for justice for many years,” said Kent Yalowitz, a lawyer for the plaintiffs.
“I am very hopeful that the case will soon be resolved without subjecting these families to further protracted and unnecessary litigation,” Yalowitz added.
The ongoing violence involving Israel and the Palestinians served as a backdrop to the case.
US courts for years have grappled over whether they have jurisdiction in cases involving the Palestinian Authority and PLO for actions taken abroad.
Under the language at issue in the 2019 law, the PLO and Palestinian Authority automatically “consent” to jurisdiction if they conduct certain activities in the United States or make payments to people who attack Americans.
Roberts in Friday’s ruling wrote that Congress and the president enacted the jurisdictional law based on their “considered judgment to subject the PLO and PA [Palestinian Authority] to liability in US courts as part of a comprehensive legal response to ‘halt, deter, and disrupt’ acts of international terrorism that threaten the life and limb of American citizens.”
New York-based US District Judge Jesse Furman ruled in 2022 that the law violated the due process rights of the PLO and Palestinian Authority. The New York-based 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling.
President Joe Biden’s administration initiated the government’s appeal, which subsequently was taken up by President Donald Trump’s administration. The Supreme Court heard arguments in the case on April 1.
The post US Supreme Court Upholds Law on Suing Palestinian Authorities Over Terror Attacks first appeared on Algemeiner.com.