Connect with us
Everlasting Memorials

Uncategorized

A law professor worries Israel could become the next Hungary

(JTA) — Israel’s new governing coalition has been called the “most right-wing” in the nation’s history. That’s heartening to supporters who want the country to get tough on crime and secure Jewish rights to live in the West Bank, and dismaying to critics who see a government bent on denying rights to Israel’s minorities and undermining any hope for a peaceful solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

While the far-right politics of new government ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir have drawn much of the world’s attention, a series of proposed changes to Israel’s judicial system has also been raising hopes and alarms. On Wednesday, new Justice Minister Yariv Levin announced an overhaul that would limit the authority of the High Court of Justice, Israel’s Supreme Court. It would put more politicians on the selection committee that picks judges, restrict the High Court’s ability to strike down laws and government decisions and enact an “override clause” enabling the Knesset to rewrite court decisions with a simple majority.

Levin and his supporters on the right justify these changes as a way to restore balance to a system that he says puts too much control in the hands of (lately) left-leaning judges: “We go to the polls, vote, elect, and time after time, people we didn’t elect choose for us. Many sectors of the public look to the judicial system and do not find their voices heard,” he asserted. “That is not democracy.”

Critics of the changes call them a power grab, one that will hand more leverage to the haredi Orthodox parties, remove checks on the settlement movement and limit civil society groups’ ability to litigate on behalf of Israeli minorities. 

To help me make sense of the claims on both sides, I turned to Tom Ginsburg of the University of Chicago, where he is the Leo Spitz Distinguished Service Professor of International Law and co-directs the Comparative Constitutions Project, which gathers and analyzes the constitutions of all independent nation-states. He’s also a Jew who has transformed a former synagogue on the South Side of Chicago into a cutting-edge arts space, and says what’s happening with Israel’s new governing coalition “raises my complicated relationship with the country.”

We spoke on Friday. Our conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

Jewish Telegraphic Agency: You have written about law in Israel, which lacks a constitution but relies on a series of “basic laws” to define its fundamental institutions. You’ve written that the Israeli judiciary had become “extremely powerful” — maybe too powerful — in imbuing the basic laws with a constitutional character, but worry that the current reforms will politicize the court in ways that will undermine Israeli democracy.

Tom Ginsburg: The proposed reforms were a campaign promise of certain elements of this coalition who have had longstanding grievances against the Israeli judiciary. The Israeli judiciary over the last decades has indeed become extremely powerful and important in writing or rewriting a constitution for Israel, promoting human rights and serving as a check and balance in a unicameral parliamentary system where the legislature can do anything it wants as a formal matter. A lot of people have had problems with that at the level of theory and practice. So there have been some reforms, and the court has, in my view, cut back on its activism in recent decades and in some sense has been more responsive to the center of the country. But there’s longstanding grievances from the political right, and that’s the context of these proposals.

A lot of the concerns about the new government in Israel are coming from the American Jewish left. But in an American context, the American Jewish left also has a big problem with the United States Supreme Court, because they see it as being too activist on the right. So in some ways isn’t the new Israeli government looking to do what American Jewish liberals dream of doing in this country?

Isn’t that funny? But the context is really different. The basic point is that judicial independence is a really good thing. Judicial accountability is a really good thing. And if you study high courts around the world, as I do, you see that there’s kind of a calibration, a balancing of institutional factors which lead towards more independence or more accountability and sometimes things switch around over time. 

Israeli Justice Minister Yariv Levin holds a press conference at the Knesset, the Israeli parliament in Jerusalem, Jan. 4, 2023. (Olivier Fitoussi/Flash90)

You mean “accountability” in the sense that courts should be accountable to the public. 

Right. The Israeli promoters of these plans are pointing to the United States, in particular, for the proposals for more political involvement in the appointment process. On the other hand, in the United States once you’re appointed politically, you’re serving for life. There’s literally no check on your power. And so maybe some people think we have too much independence. If these proposals go through in Israel, there will be a front-end politicization of the court [in terms of the selection commission], but also back-end checks on the court [with the override clause that would allow a simple majority to reinstate laws struck down by the Supreme Court]. So in some sense, it moves the pendulum very far away from independence and very much towards accountability to the point of possible politicization.

And accountability in that case is too much of a good thing.

Again, you don’t want courts that can just make up rules. They should be responsive to society. On the other hand, you don’t want judges who are so responsive to society that there’s no protection for the basic rights of unpopular minorities. 

What makes Israel either unique or different from some of the other countries you study, and certainly the United States? Part of it, I would guess, is the fact that it does not have a constitution. Is that a useful distinction?

They couldn’t agree on a single written constitution at the outset of the country, but they have built one through what you might call a “common law method”: norms and practices over time as well as the system of “basic laws,” which are passed by an absolute majority of the Knesset, where a majority of 61 votes can change any of those. But while they’re not formally entrenched, they have a kind of political status because of that term: basic law. 

By the way, the Germans are in the same boat. The German constitution is called the Basic Law. And it was always meant to be a provisional constitution until they got together and reunified.

If you don’t have a written constitution, what’s the source of the legitimacy of judicial power? What is to prevent a Knesset from just passing literally any law, including ones that violate all kinds of rights, or installing a dictator? It has been political norms. And because Israel has relied on political norms, that means that this current conflict is going to have extremely high stakes for Israeli governance for many decades to come.

Can you give me a couple of examples? What are the high stakes in terms of democratic governance?

First of all, let me just say in principle that I don’t oppose reforms to make the judiciary more independent or accountable in any particular country. But then you obviously have to look at the local context. What’s a little worrying about this particular example is that several members of this coalition are themselves about to be subject to judicial proceedings. 

Including the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.

Right. And for example, they need to change the rules so that [Shas Party chairman] Aryeh Deri can sit in the cabinet despite his prior convictions. That indicates to me that maybe this isn’t a good-faith argument about the proper structure of the Israeli, uncodified constitution, but instead a mechanism of expediency.

Any one of these reforms might look okay, and you can find other countries that have done them. The combination, however, renders the judiciary extremely weak. Right now, it’s a multi-stakeholder commission that nominates and appoints judges in Israel, and the new coalition wants to propose that the commission be made up of a majority of politicians. We know that when you change the appointments mechanism to put more politicians on those committees, the more politicized they become.

Think about the United States process of appointing our Supreme Court judges: It’s highly politicized, and obviously the legitimacy of the court has taken a big hit in recent years. In Israel, you’d have politicized appointments under these reforms, but then you also have the ability of the Knesset to override any particular ruling that it wanted. Again, you can find countries which have that. It’s called the “new commonwealth model” of constitutionalism, in which courts don’t have the final say on constitutional matters, and the legislature can overrule them on particular rulings. But I think the combination is very dangerous because you could have a situation where the Knesset — which currently has a role in protecting human rights — can pick out and override specific cases, which really to me goes against the idea of the rule of law.  

You mentioned other countries. Are there other countries where these kinds of changes were enacted and we saw how the experiment turned out?

The two most prominent recently are Hungary and Poland, which are not necessarily countries that you want to compare yourself to.

Certainly not if you are Israel.

Right. There’s so much irony here. When the new Polish government came in in 2015, they immediately manipulated the appointment system for the Constitutional Court and appointed their own majority, which then allowed them to pass legislation which probably would have been ruled unconstitutional. They basically set up a system where they were going to replace lower judges and so they were going to grow themselves into a majority of the court. And that’s led to controversy and rulings outside the mainstream that have led to protests, while the European Union is withholding funds and such from Poland because of this manipulation of the court.

In Hungary, Victor Orban was a really radical leader, and when he had a bare majority to change the constitution he wiped out all the previous jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court. I don’t think the Israeli government would do that. But still there is this kind of worrying sense that they’re able to manipulate interpretation of law for their own particular political interest. 

Another thing I want to raise is the potential for a constitutional crisis now. Suppose they pass these laws and the Israeli Supreme Court says, “Well, wait a minute, that interferes with our common law rules that we are bound by, going back to the British Mandate.” It conflicts with the basic law and they invoke what legal scholars call the “doctrine of unconstitutional constitutional amendments,” which is basically saying that an amendment goes against the core of our democratic system and violates, for example, Israel’s character as a Jewish and democratic society. Israel has never done this, but it is a kind of tool that one sees deployed around the world in these crises. And if that happened, then I think you would have a full constitutional crisis on your hands in Israel.  

Supreme Court President Aharon Barak speaks with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during a ceremony in the Supreme Court marking 50 years of law, Sept. 15, 1998. (Avi Ohayon)

What does a constitutional crisis look like? 

Suppose you have sitting justices in Israel who say, “You know, this Knesset law violates the basic law and therefore it’s invalid.” And then, would the Knesset try to impeach those judges? Would they cut the budget of the judiciary? Would they back down?

When you compare Israel’s judicial system to other countries’ over the years, how does it stack up? Is it up there among the very strong systems or is it known for flaws that might have maybe hobbled its effectiveness?

It’s always been seen around the world as a very strong judiciary. Under the leadership of Aharon Barak [president of Israel’s Supreme Court from 1995 to 2006] it became extremely activist. And this provoked backlash in Israeli politics. That led to a kind of recalibration of the court where it is still doing its traditional role of defending fundamental rights and ensuring the integrity of the political process, but it’s not making up norms left and right, in the way that it used to. This is my perception. But it’s certainly seen as one of the leading courts around the world, its decisions are cited by others, and because of the quality of the judges and the complex issues that Israel faces it’s seen as a strong court and an effective court and to me a balanced court.

But, you know, I’m not in Israel, and ultimately, they’re going to figure out the question how balanced it is or where it’s going to go. I do worry that an unchecked majoritarian system, especially with a pure proportional representation model like Israel, has the potential for the capture of government by some minorities to wield power against other minorities. And that’s a problem for democracies — to some degree, that’s a problem we face in the United States.

How correctable are these reforms? I am thinking of someone who says, “These are democratically elected representatives who now want to change a system. If you want to change the system, elect your own majority.” Is the ship of state like this really hard to turn around once you go in a certain direction?

This is an area in which I think Israel and the United States have a lot of similarities. For several decades now, the judiciary has been a major issue for those on the political right. They thought the Warren Court was too left-leaning and they started the Federalist Society to create a whole cadre of people to staff the courts. They’ve done that and now the federal courts are certainly much more conservative than the country probably. But the left didn’t really have a theory of judicial power in the United States. And I think that’s kind of true in Israel: It’s a big issue for the political right, but the political left, besides just being not very cohesive at the moment, isn’t able to articulate what’s good about having an independent judiciary. It is correctable in theory, but that would require the rule of law to become a politically salient issue, which it generally isn’t in that many countries. 

How do you relate to what is happening in Israel as a Jew, and not just a legal scholar?  

That’s a great question, because it really raises my complicated relationship with the country. You know, I find it to be a very interesting democracy. I like going to Israel because it’s a society in which there’s a lot of argument, a lot of good court cases and a lot of good legal scholars. On one level, I connect with my colleagues and friends there who seem very demoralized about this current moment. And I honestly worry about whether this society will remain a Jewish and democratic one with the current coalition. 

The rule of law is a part of democracy. You need the rule of law in order to have democracy function. And I know others would respond and say, “Oh, you’re just being hysterical.” And, “This isn’t Sweden, it’s the Middle East.” But the ethno-nationalist direction of the country bothers me as a Jew, and I hope that the court remains there to prevent it from deepening further.

—
The post A law professor worries Israel could become the next Hungary appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

Post Views: 919
Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Iran Faces Nationwide Protests Amid Economic Collapse as Israel Voices Support for Demonstrators

Protesters demonstrate against poor economic conditions in Tehran, Iran, with some shopkeepers closing their stores on Dec. 29, 2025, in response to ongoing hardships and fluctuations in the national currency. Photo: ZUMA Press Wire via Reuters Connect

Iran on Monday experienced a second straight day of expanding nationwide anti-government protests, with violent clashes between demonstrators and security forces escalating as the country grapples with unprecedented domestic crises amid Israel’s open support for the protesters.

On Sunday, thousands of people joined protests across Tehran as shopkeepers closed their stores and went on strike over the country’s deepening economic crisis and the rial — the nation’s currency — plummeting to record lows, Iranian media reported.

Demonstrators are now calling to extend strikes into a third day on Tuesday, with closures reported across key markets and protests spreading nationwide amid mounting economic pressure and growing calls for regime change.

With public unrest sweeping the nation and disrupting commercial districts, security forces have escalated their crackdown, clashing violently with protesters while firing tear gas at shopkeepers.

In widely circulated social media videos, protesters can be heard chanting slogans such as “Death to the dictator” and “[Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei] will be toppled this year,” while also calling for Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian to step down.

On Monday, Pezeshkian made his first official response to the protests, announcing that government officials had been instructed to engage in talks with community leaders.

“I have instructed the interior minister to hear the legitimate demands of the protesters by engaging in dialogue with their representatives, so the government can fully address the issues and respond responsibly,” the Iranian leader said in a televised speech.

According to Iranian media, Pezeshkian also appointed former economy minister Abdolnaser Hemmati as the new head of the central bank, announcing a leadership change amid growing criticism over the rial’s historic decline and accelerating inflation.

Meanwhile, Israel has openly expressed support for the protests, denouncing the Islamist regime’s ongoing oppression and pointing to the country’s dire economic and social conditions.

“People in Iran are exhausted with the regime and the collapsed economy,” Israel’s Foreign Ministry wrote in a post on its Persian-language X account.

Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett also voiced his support for the protesters, saying they deserve a better future and affirming that the international community stands with them.

​”The Iranian people have a glorious past, and they can have an even more glorious future. That future depends on every one of you,” Bennett said in a video posted on X. 

“So, to all the brave men and women now rising up across your country, all the nations of the free world stand with you in your just struggle. Change is possible, there will be a better Middle East,” he continued.

Meanwhile, the Mossad — Israel’s national intelligence agency — used its X account in Farsi to urge the Iranian people to stand up to the regime, indicating agents would join them in support.

“Let’s come out to the streets together,” the Mossad wrote. “The time has come. We are with you. Not just from afar and verbally. We are with you in the field as well.”

Iranian authorities warned that anyone accused of disrupting the country’s economic system would face punishment, calling such acts part of a “foreign-backed effort to destabilize the country.”

The Iranian Interior Ministry blamed the growing unrest on “hostile psychological operations,” claiming that foreign exchange fluctuations were driven by “enemy inducements” rather than economic factors, while urging the public to resist outside propaganda.

Iran has been facing a brutal economic and ecological crisis, with crippling pressure on its water and energy resources, forcing the government to take steps to relocate its capital amid mounting economic and foreign sanctions.

As the country’s domestic crises deepen, the government has also intensified its internal crackdown.

According to Iran Human Rights Monitor (IHR), a Norway-based NGO that tracks the death penalty in the country, at least 1,791 people have been executed this year, marking a staggering rise from the 993 executions recorded in 2024.

Most of those executed were accused of collaborating with Mossad and aiding covert operations in Iran, such as assassinations and sabotage targeting the country’s nuclear program.

With at least 61 women among those executed, Iran remains the world’s leading executioner on a per capita basis, using capital punishment as a tool of repression, fear, and ideological control.

Post Views: 54
Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Trump Warns Iran of Possible Strike, Urges Hamas to Disarm After Meeting Netanyahu

US President Donald Trump greets Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu upon arrival for meetings at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, US, Dec. 29, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

US President Donald Trump said on Monday the United States could support another major strike on Iran were it to resume rebuilding its ballistic missile or nuclear weapons programs and warned Hamas of severe consequences if it does not disarm.

Speaking beside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu following a meeting at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, Trump suggested Tehran may be working to restore its weapons programs after a massive US strike in June.

“I’ve been reading that they’re building up weapons and other things, and if they are, they’re not using the sites we obliterated, but possibly different sites,” Trump told reporters during a press conference.

“We know exactly where they’re going, what they’re doing, and I hope they’re not doing it because we don’t want to waste fuel on a B-2,” he added, referring to the bomber used in the earlier strike. “It’s a 37-hour trip both ways. I don’t want to waste a lot of fuel.”

Trump, who has broached a potential nuclear deal with Tehran in recent months, said his talks with Netanyahu focused on advancing the fragile Gaza peace deal he brokered and addressing Israeli concerns over Iran and over Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Iran, which fought a 12-day war with Israel in June, said last week that it had conducted missile exercises for the second time this month.

Netanyahu said last week that Israel was not seeking a confrontation with Iran, but was aware of the reports, and said he would raise Tehran’s activities with Trump.

A SECOND PHASE IN GAZA?

Trump said he wanted to move to the second phase of the ceasefire deal between Israel and the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas reached in October after two years of fighting in Gaza, a progression that entails international peacekeeping forces deployed in the Palestinian enclave.

Israel and Hamas accuse each other of major breaches of the deal and look no closer to accepting the much more difficult steps envisaged for the next phase. Hamas, which has refused to disarm, has been reasserting its control as Israeli troops remain entrenched in about half the territory.

Israel has indicated that if Hamas is not disarmed peacefully, it will resume military action to make it do so.

During his Monday comments, Trump heaped the blame on the terrorist group for not disarming more promptly, arguing that Israel had lived up to its side of the deal and warning that Hamas was inviting grave consequences.

“There will be hell to pay,” Trump warned when asked what he will do if Hamas does not lay down its arms. He has made similar statements at previous intervals during the fighting.

Netanyahu said this month that Trump had invited him for the talks, as Washington pushes to establish transitional governance for the Palestinian enclave amid Israeli reluctance to move forward.

The deployment of the international security force was mandated by a Nov. 17 UN Security Council resolution.

While Washington has brokered three ceasefires involving its longtime ally – between Israel and Hamas, Israel and Iran, and Israel and Lebanon – Netanyahu is wary of Israel‘s foes rebuilding their forces after they were considerably weakened in multiple wars.

Overall, Trump’s comments suggested he remains firmly in Netanyahu’s camp, even as some aides have privately questioned the Israeli leader’s commitment to the Gaza ceasefire. His comments also suggested he is willing to risk additional hostilities related to Gaza and Iran, even as Trump has taken credit for resolving Israel‘s wars in both places.

Trump struck a warm tone as he greeted Netanyahu before their meeting, going so far as to say that Israeli President Isaac Herzog had told him he planned to pardon Netanyahu of corruption-related charges – a conversation Herzog’s office immediately denied took place.

Netanyahu reciprocated, telling reporters after the meeting that he was gifting Trump the country’s Israel Prize, which he said has historically been reserved for Israelis.

NEXT STEPS IN GAZA CEASEFIRE PLAN

Trump’s plan to end the Gaza war ultimately calls for Israel to withdraw from the Palestinian territory and Hamas to give up its weapons and forgo a governing role.

The first phase of the ceasefire included a partial Israeli withdrawal, an increase in aid and the exchange of Israeli hostages kidnapped by Hamas for Palestinian detainees and prisoners.

An Israeli official in Netanyahu’s circle said that the prime minister would demand that the first phase of the ceasefire be completed by Hamas returning the remains of the last Israeli hostage left in Gaza, before moving ahead to the next stages. The family of the deceased hostage, Ran Gvili, joined the prime minister’s visiting entourage.

Israel has yet to open the Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt, also a condition of Trump’s plan, saying it will only do so once Gvili’s remains are returned.

Trump said that he and Netanyahu did not agree fully on the issue of the West Bank but the Republican leader did not lay out what the disagreement was.

TURKEY, SYRIA ALSO DISCUSSED

Before the meeting, Trump told reporters he would talk to Netanyahu about the possibility of stationing Turkish peacekeepers in Gaza. That is a fraught subject – while Trump has frequently praised Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan, Israel and Turkey have a much more circumspect relationship.

While the fighting in Gaza has abated, it has not stopped entirely. Although the ceasefire officially began in October, Israeli strikes have killed more than 400 Palestinians — according to Hamas-controlled Gaza health officials — and Palestinian terrorists have killed three Israeli soldiers.

Netanyahu said on Monday that Israel was keen to ensure a peaceful border with Syria, and Trump said he was sure Israel would get along with President Ahmed al-Sharaa, who took power after longtime strongman Bashar al-Assad was deposed last year.

But Israel has been suspicious of the new leader, who was once a member of al-Qaeda, going so far as to bomb government buildings in Damascus this July.

Post Views: 35
Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Global Antisemitism Sparks Surge in Aliyah From Western Countries as Jews Leave US, UK, France for Israel

New olim disembark at Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion Airport on the first charter aliyah flight after he Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks, arriving to begin new lives in Israel. Photo: The Algemeiner

As global antisemitism continues to skyrocket, Israel recorded a surge in Jewish immigration from Western nations specifically in 2025, despite an overall decline in Jews abroad moving to their ancient homeland.

Israel welcomed over 21,900 Jews from more than 100 countries this year amid ongoing hostility abroad. The figure represented a drop of about one-third from last year’s numbers, due largely to a steep dip in Russian emigration.

However, aliyah – the process of Jews immigrating to Israel – from the United States, France, the United Kingdom, and other Western countries surged sharply this year, according to data released Monday by Israel’s Immigration and Absorption Ministry.

This growing migration pattern comes as Jewish communities around the world, especially in Europe, have faced a troubling surge in antisemitic incidents and anti-Israel sentiment since the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.

Jewish leaders have consistently called on authorities to take swift action against the rising wave of targeted attacks and anti-Jewish hate crimes, ranging from the vandalism of murals and businesses to violent physical assaults, that their communities continue to face. 

“Aliyah to Israel in 2025 is a moving testament to Jewish resilience and the strength of the Zionist spirit, even amid security and national challenges,” Jewish Agency chairman Maj. Gen. (res.) Doron Almog said in a statement.

“In the shadow of the war, thousands of young people and families chose to bind their fate with Israel and build a shared future here,” he continued. “Aliyah is Israel’s growth engine, demographically, socially, economically, and morally.”

Continuing a steady upward trend, arrivals from France jumped 45 percent this year to 3,300, up from 2,200 in 2024, while immigration from the UK rose almost 20 percent to 840 immigrants. 

Ministry data also showed 420 newcomers from Canada, 220 from South Africa, and 180 from Australia.

These latest figures come as Jewish communities worldwide warn of escalating threats in the wake of a deadly attack on a Hanukkah celebration at Sydney’s Bondi Beach that left 15 dead and at least 40 injured.

Earlier this year, a string of deadly terrorist attacks also targeted Jewish communities abroad, including the Yom Kippur assault in Manchester that killed two Jewish men, the firebombing of a march for Israeli hostages in Boulder, Colorado – which killed one and injured 13 – and the murder of two Israeli Embassy staffers in Washington, DC.

According to Nefesh B’Nefesh (NBN), a nonprofit that promotes and facilitates aliyah from the US and Canada, overall North American immigration rose about 12 percent this year to 4,150 new arrivals, the highest annual total the organization has seen in four years.

“These olim [or new immigrants] underscore that aliyah is not solely a personal milestone, but a national and historic endeavor,” NBN executive director Rabbi Yehoshua Fass said in a statement.

“Together, these new olim are already helping to address Israel’s national needs and strengthen its future, and we recognize the significance of their decision to establish their lives in the State of Israel at this pivotal moment in the country’s history,” he continued.

Among all countries, Russia accounted for the largest number of immigrants in 2025, with about 8,300 arriving, continuing a trend seen every year since the 1990s. Yet, this figure represents nearly a 60 percent decline from 19,500 last year and is only a fraction of the 74,000 immigrants who arrived in 2022 following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

The ministry also showed that about a third of all new immigrants during the year were aged 18–35, highlighting a continued trend of younger Jews making aliyah.

Since the start of the war in Gaza, the Israeli government has been working to boost the country’s capacity to attract and absorb rising numbers of new arrivals, introducing initiatives such as partnering with Israeli companies to provide immediate employment and offering a zero percent income tax rate for immigrants arriving in 2026.

Earlier this year, the government also unveiled a $46.4 million program to support immigrant integration and attract skilled Jewish candidates with in-demand expertise, including a reform to expedite professional licensing for new arrivals.

According to Jewish Agency data, roughly 30,000 Jews worldwide began the immigration process in 2025, with particularly significant increases seen in the UK and Australia.

Despite these figures, Israel still faces a net migration deficit, with more people leaving than arriving — a trend experts warn is expected to continue next year.

In 2024, approximately 80,000 Israelis left the country while only 24,000 returned, creating an unprecedented negative migration balance of almost 58,000 people, according to the Israeli Bureau of Statistics.

Post Views: 39
Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News