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
California Democrat Scott Wiener Accuses Israel of ‘Genocide’ in Sharp Reversal Following Debate Backlash
California State Sen. Scott Weiner. Photo: Screenshot
California State Sen. Scott Wiener, a Democrat seeking to succeed former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in the US Congress, announced on Sunday that he believes Israel’s military campaign in Gaza meets the definition of “genocide,” a sharp reversal from a recent debate in which he declined to use the term.
Wiener’s declaration came after a contentious candidate forum last week in San Francisco, during which he declined to answer a direct question about whether he believed Israel was committing genocide in Gaza. That hesitation was met with jeers from the audience.
In a video posted Sunday on the X social media platform, Wiener, who is Jewish, said he had “stopped short of calling it genocide, but I can’t anymore,” citing the “devastation and catastrophic death toll” in Gaza as justification for using the term. Weiner also accused Israeli officials of making “genocidal” statements while justifying their military operations against the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas in Gaza and claimed that Israel schemed to “destroy Gaza and push Palestinians out.”
The state senator also acknowledged the emotional weight the word holds for many Jews, given its origins in describing the Holocaust.
For years, I’ve condemned Netanyahu and his extremist government and the devastation they’ve inflicted on Gaza. It’s why I’ve been clear I won’t support U.S. funding for the destruction of Palestinian communities. I’ve stopped short of calling it genocide, but I can’t anymore. pic.twitter.com/71nIt6K527
— Senator Scott Wiener (@Scott_Wiener) January 11, 2026
Denying accusations of genocide, Israel says it has gone to unprecedented lengths to try and avoid civilian casualties, noting its efforts to evacuate areas before it targets them and to warn residents of impending military operations with leaflets, text messages, and other forms of communication.
Another challenge for Israel is Hamas’s widely recognized military strategy of embedding its terrorists within Gaza’s civilian population and commandeering civilian facilities like hospitals, schools, and mosques to run operations and direct attacks.
Wiener’s accusation of genocide marks a complete reversal not only from his recent debate answer but also from a new profile of him published in The Atlantic, in which he denied accusations of genocide lobbed at Israel and decried the weaponization of the war in Gaza as a “purity test.” He compared such ideological mandates to medieval attempts to divide the Jewish community between “good Jews” and “bad Jews.” Weiner also argued that Jewish liberals are being pushed out of progressive spaces if they don’t demonstrate sufficient hatred for Israel.
“If part of your Jewishness is, you know, that you support the homeland of the Jews and the home of one-half of all Jews on the planet, then that makes you a bad Jew,” Weiner said. “If you’re not willing to use the exact language that we want you to use, then you’re a bad Jew.”
The article came out on Sunday, the same day of his social media post accusing Israel of genocide.
Weiner has been a frequent target of anti-Israel demonstrators. In October, a group of agitators confronted the state lawmaker and accused him of supporting “genocide.”
Mallory McMorrow, a Democratic candidate for US Senate in Michigan, similarly lamented that accusations of “genocide” against Israel are becoming a “purity test” within Democratic primaries. She argued in a new interview with Detroit Public Radio that there exists a “broadly shared goal among most Michiganders, that this violence needs to stop, that a temporary cease fire needs to become a permanent cease fire, that Palestinians deserve long term peace and security, that Israelis deserve long term peace and security.”
However, the candidate argued, “I also feel like we are getting lost in this conversation, and it feels like a political purity test on a word — a word that, by the way, to people who lost family members in the Holocaust, does mean something very different and very visceral.”
McMorrow, who has previously claimed she agrees that Israel committed a so-called “genocide” in Gaza, suggested that some candidates in the race are “using this as a political weapon and fundraising off of it.” Abdul El-Sayeed, a progressive Democrat in the Senate race, has condemned Israel for committing “genocide” and has called for an arms embargo on the Jewish state.
Uncategorized
Megyn Kelly Gushes Over Nick Fuentes: ‘There Is Value to Be Derived From That Guy’s Messaging’
Megyn Kelly hosts a “prove me wrong” session during AmericaFest, the first Turning Point USA summit since the death of Charlie Kirk, in Phoenix, Arizona, US, Dec. 19, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Caitlin O’Hara
Megyn Kelly expressed her sympathies for white nationalist Nick Fuentes and antisemite Candace Owens, two Holocaust deniers who are rising in popularity among millennials and Gen Zers, in a video interview with fellow right-wing podcaster Tucker Carlson published last week.
Immediately following the murder of prominent conservative activist Charlie Kirk last year, Owens began promoting the conspiracy theory of Israeli involvement, sentiments likewise promoted by Carlson.
“And then came Candace Owens. And she really drives people crazy. She drives them crazy,” Kelly said, provoking snickers from Carlson. “Very angry. I didn’t call her out for Israel possibly being involved with Charlie Kirk. Well, I didn’t call her out because I was totally fine with those questions being raised.”
Kelly then raised her open palm to her face and declared, “And still am!”
Carlson cackled again in response and Kelly continued, insisting, “But I am. I’m sick of this bulls–t. I’m allowed to have questions about what if anyone aligned with Israel or from Israel might have had to do with Charlie’s death.”
Kelly: “I am sick of this ********! I am allowed to have questions about what if, anyone, aligned with Israel or from Israel might have had to do with Charlie’s death.”
She’s gone, folks. Stop giving her the benefit of the doubt.
— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) January 8, 2026
In October, Florida state Attorney General James Uthmeier announced charges against Nicholas Ray of Spring, Texas for alleged death threats made with a “zionistarescum” X account against Jewish conservatives identified online by Owens as allegedly involved in Kirk’s murder.
There has been no actual evidence showing Israeli complicity in Kirk’s murder, for which Tyler Robinson, 22, has been charged. He was romantically involved with his transgender roommate, and prosecutors have reportedly argued that Kirk’s anti-trans rhetoric was a key factor that allegedly led him to shoot the Turning Point USA founder.
Kelly also praised Fuentes during her conversation with Carlson.
“He’s very interesting and he’s very smart,” Kelly said of Fuentes, who has praised Adolf Hitler. “And on a lot of things there is value to be derived from that guy’s messaging. I’m sorry, but he actually has a lot of things he talks about that you’re like ‘that’s not a bad point about our country.’”
Adopting a mocking affectation, Kelly said, “I won’t condemn and say that Candace Owens is hateful. They want me really, really badly to condemn Candace Owens. And I’m sorry to break it to them but I am responsible for what I say. Not for what anybody else says. I am not Candace Owens’s policeman. And by the way they’re kidding themselves that if just one more voice will say something nasty about Candace she can finally be controlled.”
In response to right-wing X influencer Ian Miles Cheong (who has 1.2 million followers and reportedly posts from Malaysia) sharing a clip of this statement, Kelly raged back: “You’re a pathetic misinformation whore. I was explaining why young white men are listening to Fuentes & made clear that while I believe he makes interesting points about the govt etc I was not speaking about his thoughts on Jews, women, blacks etc. F–k you & your lies.”
In December, the Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI) released a report analyzing online support for Fuentes, suggesting he has received a major boost from inauthentic amplification by anonymous actors in foreign countries such as India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Malaysia, and Indonesia. For example, the research revealed that “in a sample of 20 recent posts, 61% of Fuentes’s first-30-minute retweets came from accounts that retweeted multiple of these 20 posts within that same ultra-short window – behavior highly suggestive of coordination or automation.”
Earlier this month, Owens blamed Zionists for inspiring US President Donald Trump to capture Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.
On Tuesday, Fuentes wrote on X in reference to Venezuela: “Your oil, our choice. Forever [American flag rmoji],” a reference to his infamous popularization of the phrase “your body, my choice” among his Groyper followers.
Fuentes described his views on Venezuela on Jan. 3, explaining that while he thought the military action “initially seemed like a solid operation to cleanly, bloodlessly, and quickly remove Maduro from power last night” he thought “this new policy of ‘running Venezuela’ with US soldiers sounds like a massive over-commitment. I have zero confidence in nation-building. Big mistake.”
The next day Fuentes continued on X, articulating his foreign policy vision of banditry, fantasizing, “Now that Venezuela has been liberated, we must send every single Venezuelan illegal, refugee, and criminal back home. Take the oil, remigrate the foreigners.”
On Sunday, Fuentes promoted another conspiracy theory, asserting that “the chaos in Iran is totally astroturfed by Israel and the US for regime change. This was always their endgame after over a decade of industrial sabotage, sanctions, political subversion, & espionage. Why do you think Iran wanted nuclear weapons? To prevent this exact scenario.”
Uncategorized
Fundraiser for ICE agent who killed Renee Good includes antisemitic attack on Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey
(JTA) — Supporters of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer who shot and killed Renee Good, a U.S. citizen, in Minneapolis last week are flocking to an online fundraiser to, in its organizer’s words, “Defend the Agent Who Stopped a Deadly Attack on America’s Border Enforcers!”
Included in the fundraiser’s pitch: antisemitic language directed at the city’s Jewish mayor, Jacob Frey.
After stating that Good had engaged “in a blatant act of domestic terrorism aimed at killing or maiming the men protecting our borders from the endless invasion,” the description continued: “But this didn’t happen in a vacuum — it’s the direct result of anti-American traitors like Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey (who is Jewish) fanning the flames of resistance.”
The description went on to call Frey a “sanctuary city traitor” and states, “His rhetoric empowers violent agitators, turning Minneapolis into a warzone for our heroes enforcing the law and deporting the hordes that weak leaders like him protect.”
The fundraiser was posted Jam. 7 on GiveSendGo, a crowdfunding website popular with right-wing causes, and has raised more than $186,000 of its $200,000 goal as of Monday afternoon. The co-founder of GiveSendGo, Jacob Wells, has promoted the campaign extensively and claims to have corresponded directly with the ICE agent, Jonathan Ross.
“God bless you all! Keep sharing,” Wells wrote on the social network X, receiving positive responses from the actor Dean Cain, among others.
After being circulated online and verified by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, the clause “(who is Jewish)” was removed from the description of Frey late Monday.
The campaign’s organizer is named as “Tom Hennessey,” and appears to have launched the fundraiser before Ross himself was identified. The campaign does not name Ross.
An account named “TomHennessey69” on X who has claimed credit for the fundraiser bills himself as a “white independent journalist” and “soap enthusiast.” In addition to a stream of anti-immigration rhetoric, Hennessey has also made several antisemitic posts, including one on Monday that blamed Jews for the recent Hanukkah mass shooting in Australia.
“Notice the pattern? Jews arrive in Australia, flood it with non-Whites. Non-Whites rampage—eventually turning on Jews. Jews then push new anti-semitism laws aka free speech bans, gun control to disarm Whites, and ban White nationalist groups for noticing,” Hennessey wrote, adding, “Australia, not a good look for jewish diaspora, many such cases.” In another reply to his post, Hennessey endorsed a neo-Nazi account’s pro-Hitler message.
Hennessey has also used similar language as the fundraiser’s to describe his own Jewish opponents.
Online, the GiveSendGo link has been promoted by figures including Turning Point USA pundit Jack Posobiec and Minnesota-based right-wing journalist Liz Collin.
It is not the only fundraiser to have been set up by self-proclaimed supporters of Ross since Good’s killing. A separate campaign without antisemitic language launched on GoFundMe, a more mainstream crowdfunding website, has raised more than $467,000 to date since its launch on Friday.
The largest donation to date on the GoFundMe fundraiser, $10,000, came from Bill Ackman, the Jewish activist investor who has become a prominent advocate against antisemitism.
“I am [a] big believer in our legal principal [sic] that one is innocent until proven guilty,” Ackman wrote on X over the weekend, in a post about why he donated. He added that he had “intended to similarly support the gofundme for Renee Good’s family” but that “her gofundme was closed by the time I attempted to provide support.”
Comments online suggest that the two fundraisers for Ross may be linked and may have a direct line to Ross himself.
In a Sunday update, the GoFundMe campaign’s organizer, Clyde Emmons, wrote, “the creater [sic] of the givesendgo fund has direct contact with Johnathan! so I am in contact with him gave him my number and he said he would pass it onto John himself so I can finally add him as the beneficiary so he can get these funds he deserves.”
On X, Collin wrote that she was in contact with both organizers and that the GiveSendGo campaign is “now the preferred method to donate to the ICE agent.”
The fundraisers for Ross were launched partly as a response to a GoFundMe for Good’s family, which raised more than $1.5 million before its organizers closed donations.
“Renee was a Christian who knew that all religions teach the same essential truth: we are here to love each other, care for each other, and keep each other safe and whole,” that campaign’s organizers wrote.
Comparisons between ICE agents and Nazis or the Gestapo have grown since the agency has stepped up its presence in American cities under President Donald Trump’s mass deportation plans. Some Jewish communal leaders, including several in Minnesota, have vocally criticized ICE’s actions, with a few linking them to the memory of the Holocaust.
Since Good’s killing, Frey has vocally criticized ICE’s presence in Minneapolis, using an expletive in a press conference as he urged the agents to leave. The fundraiser’s description of the mayor notes this, also blasting Frey for his executive orders.
“These agents are the tip of the spear in reclaiming our country from the illegal invasion—deporting criminals, invaders, and threats that politicians like Frey invited in and shield,” the description states.
It concludes: “Stand tall: Donate today to send a message that we back the men removing illegals and invaders from our soil, no matter the sabotage from mayors who put foreigners over Americans. No apologies, no retreat—Mass Deportations Now!”
The post Fundraiser for ICE agent who killed Renee Good includes antisemitic attack on Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey appeared first on The Forward.