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
US May Ask Israel to Put Palestinian Tax Money Toward Trump’s Gaza Plan, Sources Say
US President Donald Trump takes part in a charter announcement for his Board of Peace initiative aimed at resolving global conflicts, alongside the 56th annual World Economic Forum (WEF), in Davos, Switzerland, Jan. 22, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Denis Balibouse
The US is considering asking Israel to give some tax money it is withholding from the Palestinian Authority to Donald Trump’s Board of Peace to fund the US president’s post-war plan for Gaza, five sources familiar with the matter said.
The Trump administration has not yet decided whether to make a formal request to Israel, said three of the sources, officials with knowledge of US deliberations with Israel.
The two other sources, Palestinians with knowledge of the deliberations, said that under the proposal a portion of the tax money would go to a US-backed transitional government for Gaza and other funds to the PA if it makes reforms.
The PA puts the amount of tax being withheld at $5 billion.
The prospect of the Palestinians’ own tax money being repurposed toward Trump’s Gaza rebuilding plan, over which their government has had no input, could further sideline the Western-backed PA even as Israel‘s withholding of the funds begets a financial crisis in the West Bank.
The PA exercises limited self-rule in the West Bank but has not had any sway over Gaza since it was exiled from the territory after a brief civil war with terrorist group Hamas in 2007.
Trump’s plan for Gaza, shattered after more than two years of war, has been held up by a refusal by Hamas to lay down their weapons.
‘MONEY HELD IN A BANK DOES NOTHING’
The Board of Peace declined to comment on whether a proposal to use Palestinian tax money was under consideration.
A Board official said it had asked all parties to leverage resources to support Trump’s rebuild plan, estimated to cost $70 billion.
“That includes the Palestinian Authority and Israel. There is no doubt that money held in a bank does nothing to further the President’s 20-Point Plan,” the official said.
That appeared to refer to the PA tax revenue that Israel has withheld from the body in a long-running dispute over payments it makes to Palestinians and their families for carrying out terrorist attacks against Israelis.
Under this policy, official payments are made to Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails, the families of “martyrs” killed in attacks on Israelis, and Palestinians injured in terrorist attacks.
Reports estimate that approximately 8 percent of the PA’s budget has been allocated to paying stipends to convicted terrorists and their families.
Israel collects taxes on imported goods on behalf of the PA and is meant to transfer the revenue under a longstanding arrangement. The PA is supposed to use the funds to pay civil servants and fund public services.
The sources did not say how much of the tax money Washington was considering asking Israel to transfer to the Board.
The US State Department, Israeli government, and PA did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The US and Israel have long pressured the PA to abolish payments to Palestinian prisoners and families of those killed by Israeli forces, arguing it encourages violence.
In response to US pressure, the PA in February 2025 said it was reforming the payment system, but the US said those changes did not go far enough. As punishment, Israel has withheld taxes it collects on the PA’s behalf, an amount that Palestinian officials say has reached $5 billion – well over half of the PA’s annual budget.
That has set off a financial crisis in the West Bank, with the PA slashing salaries of thousands of civil servants.
Israel accepted a US invitation to join the Board of Peace. The PA was not invited.
Under Trump’s plan, a group of Palestinian technocrats dubbed the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza would take control of Gaza from Hamas as the terrorists lay down their weapons.
Nickolay Mladenov, Trump’s Board of Peace envoy for Gaza, said during a press conference in Jerusalem on Wednesday that reconstruction planning was in advanced stages.
“We’re doing it sector by sector. We’re costing things. We’re coordinating with donors and we’re ready to begin in earnest once the conditions allow it,” Mladenov said, without mentioning the tax issue.
Uncategorized
UK Man Appears in Court Over Stabbing of Two Jewish Men in London
A police officer stands by a cordon at the scene, after a man was arrested following a stabbing incident in the Golders Green area, which is home to a large Jewish population, in London, Britain. Photo: REUTERS/Hannah McKay
The trial of a 45-year-old man charged with attempted murder over a knife attack during which two Jewish men were stabbed will take place next March, a London court heard on Friday.
Essa Suleiman, a British national who was born in Somalia, is alleged to have tried to kill two Jewish men on April 29 in north London‘s Golders Green area, which is home to a large Jewish population.
The incident was the latest in a spate of attacks targeting Jewish premises in the area, which have left Jewish communities fearing for their safety, prompting British Prime Minister Keir Starmer to vow stronger action.
Suleiman is also charged with a third count of attempted murder, relating to an unconnected incident at the home of a former acquaintance earlier the same day, and with possession of a bladed article.
He appeared at London‘s Old Bailey court on Friday and was not asked to enter pleas to any of the four charges he faces. A date of March 1, 2027, was set for his trial, and he remains in custody.
Uncategorized
Trump Leaves Beijing With No Major Breakthroughs on Iran, Trade
Chinese President Xi Jinping inspects an honor guard with US President Donald Trump during a welcome ceremony at the Great Hall of the People, in Beijing, China, May 14, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Maxim Shemetov/Pool
US President Donald Trump left China on Friday with no major breakthroughs on trade or tangible help from Beijing to end the Iran war, despite two days spent heaping praise on his host, Xi Jinping.
Trump‘s visit to America’s main strategic and economic rival, the first by a US president since his last trip in 2017, had aimed for tangible results to lift his sagging approval ratings before midterm elections in November. Xi will visit the US in the fall at Trump‘s invitation, China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi said.
The summit was filled with pageantry, from goose-stepping soldiers to tours of a secret garden. But behind closed doors, Xi issued a stark warning to Trump that any mishandling of China’s top concern, Taiwan, could spiral into conflict.
During a huddle with reporters on the way back to the US, Trump said Xi told him he opposed Taiwan’s independence.
“I heard him out. I didn’t make a comment … I made no commitment either way,” said Trump. He added that he will decide on a pending arms sale to Taiwan shortly, after speaking to “the person that right now is … running Taiwan.”
It was unclear if Trump was referring to Taiwan’s president, Lai Ching-te.
A direct conversation between a sitting US president and Taiwan’s leader would be unprecedented in the period since Washington shifted diplomatic recognition to Beijing from Taipei in 1979, and would likely anger China, which sees the democratically governed island as its own territory.
These were the first freewheeling remarks after two days in Beijing during which Trump stayed unusually restrained, with his off-the-cuff comments mainly focused on feting Xi‘s warmth and stature.
“It’s been an incredible visit. I think a lot of good has come of it,” Trump told Xi at their final meeting at the Zhongnanhai complex, a former imperial garden.
While Trump searched for immediate business wins, such as a deal to sell Boeing jets that did not impress investors, Xi talked up a long-term reset and pact to maintain stable trade ties with Washington, underscoring their differing priorities.
Xi pushed a new term by describing the relationship as “constructive strategic stability” – a sharp departure from the framing of “strategic competition” used by former US President Joe Biden, which Beijing disliked.
“Until now, China hasn’t proposed an alternative – now they have – if the US side agrees, that is progress,” said Da Wei, director of the Center for International Security and Strategy at Tsinghua University in Beijing.
NO HELP ON IRAN
A brief US summary of Thursday’s talks highlighted what the White House called the leaders’ shared desire to reopen the Strait of Hormuz off Iran, and Xi‘s interest in American oil purchases to pare its dependence on the Middle East.
But just before the leaders met for tea on Friday, China’s foreign ministry issued a blunt statement outlining its frustration with the war.
“This conflict, which should never have happened, has no reason to continue,” the ministry said, adding that China supported efforts to reach a peace deal in a war that had disrupted energy supplies and the global economy.
At Zhongnanhai, Trump said the leaders had discussed Iran and felt “very similar,” though Xi did not comment. On the flight back home, Trump added that he wasn’t “asking for any favors” on Iran.
Still, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent had urged Beijing to use its leverage with Tehran to make a deal. But analysts doubt Xi will be willing to push Tehran hard or end support for its military, given Iran’s value to Beijing as a strategic counterweight to the US.
“What’s notable is that there’s no Chinese commitment to do anything specific with regards to Iran,” said Patricia Kim, a foreign policy fellow at the Brookings Institution.
BOEING SHARES SLIDE ON UNDERWHELMING DEAL
In another sign of a diminished scale of the summit, Trump’s readout did not mention the broad structural reforms on which previous presidents pressed Xi.
Unlike his previous trip in 2017, Trump did not discuss “structural reforms,” “global economic governance,” or the “international trading system” with Xi, according to the readout.
Even the deal touted as the biggest single deliverable from the meetings underwhelmed. Boeing stock fell 4% when Trump said on Thursday that China would buy 200 Boeing jets, significantly fewer than the roughly 500 that sources told Reuters had been under discussion.
He later added that the order could go up to 750 planes “if they do a good job with the 200.”
US officials said they had agreed deals to sell farm goods and made progress on mechanisms to manage future trade, with both sides expected to identify $30 billion of non-sensitive goods.
There were scant details of the deals, however, and no signs of a breakthrough on selling Nvidia’s advanced H200 AI chips to China, despite CEO Jensen Huang’s dramatic last-minute addition to the trip.
Trump also left without official resolution to the rare earths supply problem that has dogged ties since China imposed export controls on the vital minerals in response to Trump‘s tariff barrage in April 2025.
While the leaders struck a truce last October for Washington to lower tariffs in exchange for China keeping rare earths flowing, Beijing‘s controls have caused shortages for US chipmakers and aerospace companies.
When asked if the two sides extended the truce beyond later this year, Trump said he and Xi “did not discuss tariffs.”
Such an extension would be “the most basic benchmark” for the success of the summit, said Brookings’ Kim.
Xi‘s remarks to Trump that mishandling Taiwan, the democratically governed island Beijing claims, could lead to conflict, delivered a sharp warning during a summit that otherwise appeared friendly and relaxed.
Taiwan, 50 miles (80 km) off China’s coast, has long been a flashpoint in ties, with Beijing refusing to rule out use of military force to gain control of the island and the US bound by law to provide it the means of self-defense.
“US policy on the issue of Taiwan is unchanged as of today,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio told NBC News. Taiwan Foreign Minister Lin Chia-lung said Taiwan would continue to deepen ties with the US and like-minded countries in the Indo-Pacific, adding that China was increasing regional “risks.”