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
JD Vance praises Tucker Carlson-Mike Huckabee interview as ‘a really good conversation’
(JTA) — Vice President JD Vance has weighed in on the Tucker Carlson-Mike Huckabee interview that has ignited widespread antisemitism allegations as well as a diplomatic row with Arab states, calling it “a really good conversation that’s going to be necessary for the right.”
Vance made the comments to the Washington Post, which published them Friday morning. He said he had not seen the entire interview, which was more than two hours long, but had viewed “clips here and there.”
Vance is a longtime ally of Carlson, a leading far-right figure who has stirred a rift among conservatives by platforming antisemites, at times promoting antisemitic conspiracy theories himself and increasingly campaigning against Israel. (Carlson says he is not antisemitic.)
Vance’s refusal to criticize Carlson or seek to end the rift has increasingly alarmed Jewish conservatives. To the Washington Post, he reiterated what he said before when asked about Carlson and the antisemitism rift — that he believes the Republican Party should be an open marketplace of ideas.
He said he was pleased that the right has stoked “a real exchange of ideas,” even when it includes “the people that I find annoying on our side,” whom he did not specify. That exchange, he said, was also essential for electoral success.
“If you think of the Trump coalition in 2024 — and the way that I put it is, you had Joe Rogan, Mark Levin, Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson and JD Vance and a coalition of people — but to do that, you have to be willing to tolerate debate and disagreement,” Vance said. “And I just think that it’s a good thing.”
Vance is seen as likely to run for president in 2028.
The post JD Vance praises Tucker Carlson-Mike Huckabee interview as ‘a really good conversation’ appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Amid Iran tensions, Huckabee tells US embassy staff in Israel they should leave ‘TODAY’ if they wish
(JTA) — Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee has told U.S. government employees and their families that they may leave the country and should do so expediently, amid mounting signs of a possible U.S. attack on Iran.
Huckabee emailed embassy staff on Friday morning saying that if they want to leave, they should do so “TODAY,” according to a letter first reported by The New York Times. He noted that commercial flights could become scarce and urged them to accept passage to any country before returning to Washington, D.C.
“There is no need to panic, but for those desiring to leave, it’s important to make plans to depart sooner rather than later,” he wrote.
The letter comes a day after U.S.-Iran talks in Geneva ended without public breakthroughs. Iranian officials, as well as the Omani mediators, said additional conversations were planned for next week; the United States did not comment. Steve Witkoff and Jared Kusher, two Jewish advisors to President Donald Trump who successfully brokered a ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas war last year, are leading the U.S. delegation.
Trump has been threatening to attack Iran for weeks over its nuclear program and has built up U.S. military forces in the Middle East to levels not seen in decades. In recent days, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance have both said military intervention could be needed while saying the president continued to prefer diplomacy.
Vance’s comments were particularly notable because he typically opposes U.S. intervention overseas. He told the Washington Post in comments published Friday morning that there was “no chance” that the United States would get involved in an extended Middle East campaign.
Iran has said it would consider Israel a valid target in the event of a U.S. attack. Last year, Iranian missiles killed more than two dozen people in Israel during a 12-day war initiated by Israeli strikes on Iran’s military program. Now, Israelis have been living in limbo for weeks while waiting to learn whether a new war, expected to be more destructive, will begin.
In the past, when expecting Iranian retaliation, the embassy has warned staff against leaving population centers in Israel. Now, the Department of State has updated its Jerusalem embassy website to reflect “the authorized departure of non-emergency U.S. government personnel and family members of U.S. government personnel to leave Israel,” setting a status that means flights will be paid for by the U.S. government.
While El Al, Israel’s national carrier, does not fly during Shabbat, other airlines typically do run some flights to and from Ben Gurion Airport on Friday nights and Saturdays. Many of those are budget European airlines that have only recently resumed flying to Israel after last year’s Iran war; some airlines, including KLM, have already suspended Israel flights in anticipation of another conflict.
The post Amid Iran tensions, Huckabee tells US embassy staff in Israel they should leave ‘TODAY’ if they wish appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Pro-Palestinian activist Nerdeen Kiswani sues Betar USA, alleging far-right Zionist group violated her civil rights
(JTA) — The founder of radical pro-Palestinian group Within Our Lifetime has sued the right-wing militant Zionist group Betar USA, alleging that it violated her civil rights by putting out social media “bounties” on her and harassing her with beepers.
Nerdeen Kiswani announced she had filed the lawsuit Wednesday evening, She accused the revamped historic Revisionist Zionist group of violating the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, which makes conspiring against an ethnic minority a federal crime.
The lawsuit comes more than a month after Betar USA agreed to cease its operations in New York following a settlement with the state’s attorney general — which Kiswani’s lawsuit notes. The office of AG Letitia James found that Betar USA had engaged in a “campaign of violence, harassment, and intimidation against Arab, Muslim, and Jewish New Yorkers.”
“For years, Betar USA stalked & harassed me even offering $1,800 for someone to hand me a beeper while I was pregnant,” Kiswani wrote on X. “Last month, the NY AG found they engaged in bias-motivated harassment and threats. Still they faced no real consequences. So I’m filing a lawsuit.” She included a crowdfunding link for the suit, which has raised $4,000 in the first 16 hours.
In a statement, Betar USA called Kiswani a “terror supporter” and called the suit “an attack on Zionism itself” that “represents a serious danger to American and diaspora Jewry.” In a follow-up post on X, the group also said it welcomed a deposition against Kiswani and Within Our Lifetime, adding, “Let’s see where the money is coming from and how much you’ve cost NYC.”
Kiswani, an ethnic Palestinian born in Jordan who came to the United States as a refugee at 1 year old, has sparked outrage and accusations of antisemitism in New York and beyond with her pro-Palestinian activism and aggressive attitude toward Zionists.
“We don’t want zionists in Palestine, NYC, our schools, on the train, ANYWHERE,” she tweeted after a man was arrested for allegedly calling to eject Zionists from a subway car.
Within Our Lifetime originated as a branch of Students for Justice in Palestine before splintering off from the national group, accusing SJP of being insufficiently radical. Since then, Kiswani’s group has protested at exhibits honoring the victims of the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks; university Hillels; synagogues holding Israel real-estate events; and gatherings where speakers have praised Hamas and/or where Jews have been assaulted.
Kiswani’s prominence and activities within the pro-Palestinian movement have led to clashes with many ardent pro-Israel activists. In recent weeks a tweet of hers also prompted far-right Jewish pro-Israel Rep. Randy Fine, of Florida, to make disparaging remarks about Muslims that have led to rising Democratic calls for his censure.
But it’s Betar USA, whose members engage in similarly radical activity on the pro-Israel side, that is now facing a direct lawsuit from Kiswani. Her attorneys said Betar and its leadership, including founder Ronn Torossian and former executive director Ross Glick, had “conspired” against her “by subjecting her to a coordinated and sustained campaign of racial violence, and interference with her rights to use public accommodations to intrastate travel.”
Kiswani’s suit hones in on several of Betar USA’s common rhetoric, including the group’s use of beepers as a meme, a reference to Israel’s 2024 pager operation against Hezbollah militants in Lebanon. The suit also says Betar members “privately and publicly agreed to track Ms. Kiswani’s whereabouts, follow her, and threaten, intimidate, and attempt to assault her.”
In tweets directed at Kiswani that are still visible, Betar USA threatened to “denaturalize” the activist (after she criticized New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s condemnation of pro-Hamas chants at protests) and wrote, “We will send many more of you to meet Allah” (in reference to Kiswani calling for “the abolition of Israel by any means necessary”).
Responding to the lawsuit, Betar USA spokesperson Jonathan Levy called the group “a mainstream Zionist movement that has played a central role in Jewish and Israeli history.” Betar traces its lineage back to Ze’ev Jabotinsky, the pre-state Revisionist Zionist revolutionary, and has insisted its actions are in line with mainstream Zionist and Israeli viewpoints.
Levy added, “Calling Betar a terror group akin to the KKK is the same accusations we’ve heard calling the IDF a criminal army and labeling Zionism as genocide.”
Glick did not mention the suit when speaking to a Jewish Telegraphic Agency reporter at a different New York protest Wednesday evening before Kiswani’s lawsuit went public. He disparaged the AG’s settlement as “a lot of lies,” adding, “My position and Betar’s position is, look, we were reborn for self-defensive reasons, we weren’t on the offense.”
The Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 was also successfully used, by a group of progressive Jewish attorneys, to prosecute the neo-Nazi marchers in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017. That case’s legal victory earned broad praise for finding a creative way to hold hateful actions to account without violating First Amendment rights.
Joseph Strauss contributed reporting.
The post Pro-Palestinian activist Nerdeen Kiswani sues Betar USA, alleging far-right Zionist group violated her civil rights appeared first on The Forward.