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
Board of Peace Publishes Roadmap for Gaza Peace Plan
Palestinians walk among piles of rubble and damaged buildings in Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip, Nov. 24, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ramadan Abed
The US-led Board of Peace has unveiled an ambitious roadmap aimed at bringing the Gaza war to an end, dismantling Hamas’s military capabilities, and replacing its rule with a new governance structure backed by international oversight and Palestinian technocrats.
The plan, presented by the Board of Peace’s director-general and high representative for Gaza, Nickolay Mladenov, marks the most comprehensive effort yet to convert a fragile ceasefire into a durable post-war agreement, one that requires Hamas’s disarmament as a necessary component for any political or economic future for the enclave.
Calling Hamas’s refusal to lay down its arms and relinquish control the “principal obstacle” to implementation, Mladenov told the UN Security Council in New York on Thursday that “reconstruction financing [for Gaza] will not follow where weapons have not been laid down. No investment, no movement, no horizon.”
US President Donald Trump set up the Board of Peace to oversee his plan to end the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza, a conflict started by the Palestinian terrorist group’s Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of and massacre across the Jewish state. The UN has recognized the board, although several countries opted not to join despite being invited to do so.
After Israel and Hamas agreed to a ceasefire in October, Israeli forces partially withdrew and now control at least 53 percent of Gazan territory, with Hamas ruling the rest of the Palestinian enclave and the vast majority of its residents. Talks to further the peace plan have stalled since then, with Hamas tightening its control over its part of Gaza, largely through a brutal crackdown, and working to rebuild its military capabilities.
“The risk is that the deteriorating status quo becomes permanent – a divided Gaza, Hamas holding military and administrative control over 2 million people across less than half the territory,” Mladenov told the Security Council.
His proposal calls for a strict sequencing of steps that conditions reconstruction and political transition on Hamas giving up its weapons and military infrastructure.
According to Mladenov’s presentation and supporters of the plan, rebuilding efforts cannot credibly proceed while an armed terrorist organization retaining control over territory, borders, and civilian life. Earlier this month, for example, Hamas members blocked international efforts to begin reconstruction work in Rafah, a city in southern Gaza, threatening contractors who were set to enter an area under Israeli control in coordination with Israeli and American forces to begin reconstruction work funded by the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
Mladenov contended that efforts to rebuild the infrastructure of Gaza will commence when “commitments to stop internal killings, prohibit reprisals, ban armed demonstrations, and end displays of armed force.”
“The faster implementation progresses, the faster Gaza can begin rebuilding homes, schools, hospitals, infrastructure, and economic life at scale,” he said.
Under the roadmap, Hamas would be required to surrender its heavy weapons, dismantle its tunnel networks, and withdraw from any governing role in Gaza. Security responsibilities would gradually shift toward vetted local Palestinian forces supported by international partners, in what is designed as a phased transition rather than an immediate power vacuum. Israeli officials and supporters of the framework have emphasized that this sequencing is essential to prevent a repeat of past cycles in which reconstruction and governance reforms were ultimately overtaken by renewed militarization.
The governance model outlined by the Board of Peace envisions Gaza being administered through a hybrid structure combining a Palestinian technocratic committee responsible for day-to-day civil affairs with an international supervisory body tasked with overseeing reconstruction funding, security benchmarks, and implementation of the broader transition plan. The aim, according to officials involved in the effort, is to bypass Hamas entirely while also avoiding a return to full Israeli administrative control, instead placing long-term coordination under an internationally backed framework.
Reconstruction itself would be tightly tied to compliance with security conditions, meaning that large-scale rebuilding of housing, infrastructure, and utilities would only accelerate once demilitarization milestones are met. The board has also been pressing donor countries to follow through on approximately $17 billion in pledged reconstruction funding, warning that only a small portion of those commitments has been disbursed so far, leaving early recovery efforts stalled despite widespread international promises.
That funding gap has emerged as one of the central obstacles to implementation. While donor states signaled major financial support during earlier conferences, officials say the lack of actual disbursement has left the plan underpowered at a critical moment, effectively freezing reconstruction on paper while humanitarian needs continue to persist on the ground.
Hamas, for its part, has rejected the framework’s core premise, insisting that disarmament cannot be separated from a full Israeli withdrawal and broader political guarantees. The group has accused international mediators of advancing a process that ignores what it describes as unresolved core issues of sovereignty and ceasefire enforcement, deepening the diplomatic deadlock that has defined previous attempts to stabilize Gaza.
Israel has said it will not withdraw its forces any further until Hamas, which openly seeks the Jewish state’s destruction, disarms.
Despite the ceasefire framework that underpins the Board of Peace initiative, the situation on the ground remains fragile, with sporadic violence, unresolved security disputes, and widespread displacement continuing to strain civilian life. Humanitarian conditions remain severe, and reconstruction has yet to meaningfully begin at scale, reinforcing the sense that the political framework and the realities in Gaza are still far apart.
In statements to the UN Security Council, Mladenov warned that intermittent violence in Gaza risks “unraveling” the unstable ceasefire.
“There is no third option,” he stressed. “There never was, and the people of Gaza should not be made to wait while some pretend there is.”
Uncategorized
Giuliani Says Mamdani Has ‘Hatred’ for Jews for Declining to Attend Israel Day Parade in New York City
Former Donald Trump lawyer and former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani arrives at US federal court in New York City, US, Nov. 26, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Brendan McDermid
Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani has lambasted the city’s current mayor, Zohran Mamdani, for the latter’s decision not to attend the annual Israel Day parade, which is set to take place later this month.
“Mamdani’s decision to snub the Israel Day Parade demonstrates his deep disdain and hatred of the Jewish community,” Giuliani, a Republican, told the New York Post on Wednesday. “When you combine this with his failure to attend the investiture of the new Catholic Archbishop [Ronald Hicks], a pattern emerges, revealing a man on a mission to tear down the foundations of Western civilization.”
Mamdani, a far-left democratic socialist, has made fierce anti-Israel activism a cornerstone of his political career, leading many Jewish leaders and other critics to accuse him of antisemitism.
“Have New Yorkers awakened to the fact that they made a disastrous decision in November 2025 by electing this man?” added Giuliani, who served as New York City’s mayor from 1994 through 2001.
Mamdani confirmed earlier this month that he will skip this year’s Israel Day Parade. However, the avowed anti-Zionist first indicated that he would not attend the event in October 2025, the month before his election. At the time, he told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that he looked forward “to joining — and hosting — many community events celebrating Jewish life in New York and the rich Jewish history and culture of our city,” but not including the parade.
“While I will not be attending the Israel Day Parade, my lack of attendance should not be mistaken for a refusal to provide security or the necessary permits for its safety,” Mamdani said last year. “I’ve been very clear: I believe in equal rights for all people — everywhere. That principle guides me consistently.”
Mamdani is reportedly the first mayor of New York City to skip the Israel Day Parade, which has been held annually since 1964. The parade takes place along Manhattan’s Fifth Avenue and is set this year for May 31 under the theme, “Proud Americans, Proud Zionists.”
For what is believed to be the first time in history, a Muslim group will march in the parade. Supporters of the nonprofit American Muslim & Multifaith Women’s Empowerment Council will participate and be led by Anila Ali, the organization’s board chair and president.
As a supporter of the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel, Mamdani has been highly critical of the country and has refused to recognize it as a Jewish state. New York City is home to the world’s largest population of Jews outside of Israel.
“Since the very first Israel Parade in 1964, every single sitting mayor of New York City has joined in the festive celebrations. New York has historically been proud of its deep relationship with Israel. Not joining the parade is an affront to the history of New York City,” Moshe Davis – former executive director of the Mayor’s Office to Combat Antisemitism, a body formed by Mamdani’s predecessor, Mayor Eric Adams – told Fox News Digital.
Adams told the news outlet that the Israel Day Parade “is a testament to one of New York City’s most important relationships.”
“From health care to technology to innovation, Israel and New York City are partners in building a better future,” he explained. “I want every New Yorker to join the Parade on Fifth Avenue because celebrating this bond isn’t just for the Jewish community; it’s for our entire city.”
Last week, Mamdani posted a video on social media in honor of “Nakba Day.” The word “nakba” is Arabic for “catastrophe” and used by Palestinians to describe Israel’s founding and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Arabs during Israel’s 1948 War of Independence.
Many Arabs left for varied reasons, including that they were encouraged by Arab leaders to flee their homes to make way for the invading armies to destroy the nascent Jewish state. At the same time, about 850,000 Jews were forced to flee or expelled from Middle Eastern and North African countries in the 20th century, primarily in the aftermath of Israel’s declaring independence.
Several pro-Israel Jewish groups found the video posted by Mamdani offensive, and as a result, some Jewish leaders decided not to attend a pre-Shavuot event Mamdani hosted at Gracie Mansion in honor of Jewish Heritage Month.
The UJA Federation of New York and the Jewish Community Relations Council of New York, both of which are organizing the Israel Day Parade, declined to attend the gathering. They told the New York Post they made the decision because the event’s host is a mayor who “denies the core pillar of our heritage, the State of Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people.” At the event, Mamdani announced that his administration will allocate $26 million annually to expand efforts made by the city’s Office for the Prevention of Hate Crimes.
Since Mamdani assumed office, Jews have been targeted in the majority of all hate crimes committed in New York City, continuing a troubling trend of rising antisemitism following Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel.
Uncategorized
Vermont Police Investigate Anti-Israel Vandalism of Jewish-Owned Store as Possible Hate Crime
Graffiti is seen on the windows of DG Bodyworks in Cavendish on Wednesday, May 20, 2026. The Vermont State Police has partially redacted profanity that appears on the window to the right. Photo: Vermont State Police
A Jewish woman’s store in Vermont was vandalized early Wednesday morning with anti-Israel graffiti in an incident that police are investigating as a possible hate crime.
“Free Palestine” and “F–k Israel” were spray-painted on the windows of DG Bodyworks, where Israeli flags were on display.
Vermont State Police said they are investigating the vandalism in the Windsor County town of Cavendish as a possible hate crime and will inform the Attorney General’s Office of the incident. Officers who responded to the crime scene reviewed security footage and saw an individual vandalizing the store with purple spray paint during the early hours of Wednesday morning. Police released a photo of the suspect, a white male who wore a cap and covered his face while spray-painting the messages.
Shop owner Denise Gebroe said that her store was targeted because she is Jewish and that while she was “shaken” to discover the graffiti, “I am OK and will not be broken.”
“This was an act of intimidation directed at me because I am Jewish,” she added, in a statement shared with The Algemeiner by Vermont Friends of Israel. “I made Vermont my home because I love it here, but it does not feel the same as it once did. Incidents like this are happening more than many people realize, and most go unreported. I fear for the future of the Jewish community here, and Jewish friends of mine have already left.”
In a statement given to The Algemeiner, Mark Treinkman, president of Vermont Friends of Israel, also called the vandalism an anti-Jewish hate crime and said such an incident “is the predictable consequence of a political campaign in Vermont that demonizes Israel and pressures local communities to treat Jews and Zionists as equivalent to Nazis.” He referenced an Apartheid Free Community campaign active in Vermont, promoted by the Palestine Solidarity Coalition, that is marketed locally as “grassroots activism.”
“When anti-Zionist activists tell people that Jews with deep spiritual, cultural, and familial ties to Israel are ‘baby killers’ and ‘genocide supporters,’ it sends a dangerous signal that intimidation against them is understandable, deserved, or even justified,” Treinkman noted. “History teaches us where this goes. First come campaigns of dehumanization, slogans, pledges, and public shaming. Now a Jewish woman’s storefront has been vandalized in rural Vermont.”
“Synagogues in Vermont have been sent death threats. Swastikas are found on Vermont school walls,” he added, referring to threatening letters sent to several local synagogues and antisemitism graffiti discovered at an elementary school last year. “Jewish students are bullied. What comes next if this is not confronted?”