Uncategorized
‘The gun is on the table’: Both sides of Israel’s debate say that a constitutional crisis is coming
(JTA) — In a country that is deeply divided, where attending anti-government protests has become a weekly ritual for many, at least one idea still unites the right and left: Israel appears to be hurtling toward a constitutional crisis.
The crisis — which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu termed a “governmental breakdown” during a recent visit to Germany — would flow from legislation Netanyahu is pushing that would overhaul Israel’s judiciary. The proposal — which critics say threatens Israel’s democratic character — would increase the coalition’s control over the appointment of Supreme Court judges, and would enable Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, to override court decisions with a simple majority.
A constitutional crisis occurs when a country faces an unsolvable dispute between competing branches of government. Countries have recovered from constitutional crises in the past — the United States has had several over the centuries, including multiple ones related to the leadup to the Civil War and its aftermath — but the process can be difficult, and mistrust long-lasting.
In Israel’s case, what happens if the Knesset passes the judicial legislation, the Supreme Court strikes it down, and the Knesset doesn’t abide by that decision? Does the court or Knesset hold final authority?
However that question is answered, just getting to that point would represent a dramatic breakdown in a 75-year-old democracy. “The very idea that the government might not comply, might ignore the Supreme Court’s decision, would be an unprecedented crisis,” said Michal Saliternik, a law professor at Netanya Academic College.
In that dangerous moment, some Israelis see opportunity. In a perhaps ironic twist, Israel is on the precipice of a constitutional crisis but doesn’t actually have a constitution. It’s a risky bet, but a battle between the court and the coalition, said international law scholar Tamar Megiddo, might just force Israel into the long and arduous process of writing a governing document and figuring out how to balance the country’s competing authorities.
“The entire constitutional system here is held together by duct tape,” said Megiddo, who teaches at the College of Law and Business outside Tel Aviv. “It’s ridiculous. We have no protection of our constitutional regime, no protection of our separation of powers, no protection of checks and balances and no protection of human rights. The only reason this functioned for the past 75 years is because there was good faith.”
She added, “I think a lot of people view the current constitutional moment, or the realistically likely constitutional crisis, as also an opportunity for fixing everything that’s broken in the system.”
When asked how a clash between the government and courts could come to a head, those scholars and others all individually sketched out versions of the same scenario: The government passes a law giving itself control over judicial appointments, the court strikes down the law — and the government appoints new judges anyway. When those judges arrive for their first day of work, should the security guards let them in? Who should the guards obey — the government that appointed the judges, or the courts that declared their appointment illegal?
While that question is being debated, the courts may not be able to hear cases at all.
“At the end of the day, the state needs to function,” Saliternik said. “The courts have work to do. If the judges can’t enter their chambers, it will definitely impact everyone. It’ll be like a third world country in which institutions don’t function.”
The law on judicial appointments may be passed next week, and for rank-and-file Israelis, both Saliternik and Megiddo said, this question would hardly be theoretical. If Israel’s system of government descends into crisis, it could lead to a downgrade in the country’s credit rating and an economic downturn that ordinary citizens feel in their pockets. And given how invested Israelis have become in the face of the judicial reform — protesting in the streets by the hundreds of thousands — it’s unlikely they’ll ignore what ensues if and when it passes. Israeli President Isaac Herzog, who has a reputation for congeniality, gave a pained speech last week warning of the potential for civil war.
“If the court issues a ruling and the government does not comply, then the Israeli public will say, ‘This is the ultimate proof that this is not a democracy anymore,’” Saliternik said. “I say this with trepidation, but if there’s an open battle between the Supreme Court and the Knesset, it could result in street violence.”
Megiddo said that even the possibility of such a crisis has normalized tactics that were once on the fringe, such as refusal to perform military service, a duty seen as sacrosanct across much of Jewish Israeli society. Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant reportedly warned that the possibility of mass refusal to serve could cause him to leave his post. On Tuesday, a group of military reservists said they plan to recruit tens of thousands more who will pledge to shirk reserve duty if the legislation goes through.
“People who refuse service were considered, in the Israeli public, to be a very extreme minority, and now it’s mainstream to say that people won’t serve the military for a dictatorship,” Megiddo said. “It’s unbelievable how mainstream saying that at the moment is, and that has long-term impact.”
Both supporters and opponents of the legislation in the Knesset are treating a constitutional crisis as a real possibility. The only thing they disagree about is who will be to blame — and both sides appear to be raising the stakes, vowing either to disobey government decisions, or disregard the court.
“The security situation is troubling,” said former Defense Minister Benny Gantz, an opponent of Netanyahu, in a speech last week referencing escalating violence between Israelis and Palestinians, and urging Netanyahu to pause the court legislation. “Don’t drag us into an irresponsible constitutional crisis during a security crisis.”
Netanyahu’s allies, unsurprisingly, say it is the opponents of the reform — and the justices of the court themselves — who would be responsible for a constitutional crisis, should the court strike down the law.
Striking down the reform legislation would be a “doomsday weapon,” wrote Dror Eydar, a columnist for the pro-Netanyahu tabloid Israel Hayom, in a piece titled “Inviting a constitutional crisis.” “This striking down would constitute a coup d’etat.”
(Another column four days later in the same publication, however, urged a compromise on the judicial reform in order to avert a constitutional crisis. That piece was written by Miriam Adelson, whose husband Sheldon — the late billionaire philanthropist — founded and funded the paper.)
Netanyahu’s coalition members are still worried enough about the prospect of a constitutional crisis that they’ve agreed to what they refer to as a “softening” of one piece of the legislation. Instead of giving the coalition total control over Supreme Court appointments, the new text of the bill would let the coalition control its first two judicial appointments.
“There’s no doubt that the change we made prevents any real claim that can create a constitutional crisis,” said Justice Minister Yariv Levin, who is spearheading the legislation, on an Israeli news show on Monday.
A view of the Israeli Supreme Court in Jerusalem. (Eddie Gerald via Getty Images)
But then he threw down the gauntlet: If the court still overturns the law, Levin said, “That would cross every red line. We definitely wouldn’t accept it.”
Responding to that claim, Yair Lapid, the leader of the parliamentary opposition, said that if the government disobeys the court, citizens should disobey the government.
“That’s it, the masks are off. The gun is on the table,” Lapid tweeted. “The real prime minister, Yariv Levin, is drawing us into total chaos and a constitutional crisis we won’t be able to come back from. If the justice minister is calling on the government not to obey the law, why should the citizens of Israel obey the government?”
Another Likud lawmaker, Economy Minister Nir Barkat, said he would respect the court’s ruling if it struck the law down. But in any case, the Likud bill doesn’t appear to be a promising avenue toward compromise. “This isn’t softening and compromise, this is Hungary and Poland on steroids,” Labor Party Chair Merav Michaeli said on a radio program on Monday, referring to countries where the government has increased its control over the court system. “From the start, I said we can’t negotiate with them.”
A predecessor of Michaeli’s in the Labor Party has also taken a hard line and — unlike the many voices who worry about a clash of government authorities — has suggested that he would prefer a constitutional crisis to compromise. Ehud Barak, a former Israeli prime minister, said that a constitutional crisis would force senior Israeli military commanders to take sides — and expressed confidence that they would choose to obey the courts.
“It would be a severe constitutional crisis,” Barak said in a speech last month. “That’s when the test of the gatekeepers and defenders of sovereignty would arrive: The head of the Shin Bet, the police commissioner, the chief of staff and the head of the Mossad. I’m convinced that they understand that in a democracy, the only choice is to recognize the supremacy of law and the Supreme Court.”
The mounting threats by military reservists, and comments by former military commanders opposing the court reform, may indicate that the military will opt to follow the court. But Saliternik hopes that’s a choice Israeli forces won’t have to confront.
“This is something that has never happened in Israel,” she said. “It’s so very hard to think about. I very much hope that that government will get a hold of itself and act responsibly.”
—
The post ‘The gun is on the table’: Both sides of Israel’s debate say that a constitutional crisis is coming appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Trump Says US Considering ‘Winding Down’ Iran War; Natanz Nuclear Facility Attacked
People attend Eid al-Fitr prayers, marking the end of Muslim holy fasting month of Ramadan, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Tehran, Iran, March 21, 2026. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
President Donald Trump said the US was considering “winding down” its military operation against Iran, as Iran and Israel traded attacks on Saturday and Iranian media said the nuclear enrichment facility in Natanz had been attacked.
In a social media post, Trump said the US was close to meeting its goals but insisted that other countries should take the lead in policing the vital shipping lane of the Strait of Hormuz, whose near-closure threatens a global energy shock.
Trump and his administration have sent mixed messages about US goals throughout the war, now entering its fourth week, leaving traditional US allies struggling to respond.
Trump has suggested the war could wind down as the Iranian threat was being eliminated, while at the same time US Marines and heavy landing craft head to the region on a mission whose goals are not immediately clear.
IRAN REPORTS ATTACK ON NATANZ NUCLEAR ENRICHMENT PLANT
“We are getting very close to meeting our objectives as we consider winding down our great Military efforts in the Middle East with respect to the Terrorist Regime of Iran,” Trump said on Truth Social.
“The Hormuz Strait will have to be guarded and policed, as necessary, by other Nations who use it — The United States does not!” he added. “If asked, we will help these Countries in their Hormuz efforts, but it shouldn’t be necessary once Iran’s threat is eradicated.”
More than 2,000 people have been killed in Iran since the US and Israel attacked on February 28, while American voters appear increasingly concerned at signs the war could expand further.
Vital energy infrastructure in Iran and neighboring Gulf states has been attacked, sending oil prices up 50 percent.
Energy price shocks are also fueling inflation, hitting consumers and businesses hard – a major political liability for Trump as he seeks to justify the war to the US public before November elections in which he could lose control of Congress.
Trump had also accused NATO allies, which have not been consulted about the war, of cowardice over their reluctance to help open the strait.
Iranian gas supplies to Iraq reportedly resumed after flows were halted by an Israeli attack on Iran’s main gas field, South Pars, on Wednesday.
As the fighting continued, Iranian media said US-Israeli forces had attacked the Shahid Ahmadi-Roshan Natanz enrichment complex on Saturday morning. Technical experts found that no radioactive leaks had occurred and nearby residents were not at risk.
Israel said it was unaware of such a strike while the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said it was investigating.
Russia called it “a blatant violation of international law.”
Israel also attacked Beirut, saying it was targeting the Iran-backed Lebanese Hezbollah militia, in the deadliest spillover from the war on Iran since Hezbollah fired on Israel in support of Tehran on March 2.
Defense Minister Israel Katz said Israel was “determined to continue leading the attack against the Iranian terrorist regime, to behead its commanders and to thwart its strategic capabilities until any security threats to Israel and US interests in the region are removed.”
Israel also said it had attacked Tehran, Karaj, west of the capital, and the central city of Isfahan. Three members of a family were killed in a strike on a residential building in the city of Ramsar, Iranian media reported.
Air raid sirens in Israel warned of incoming missiles from early morning, sending millions to shelters as the blasts of interceptions rang out from above. There were no immediate reports of casualties.
Iran fired two ballistic missiles towards the US-British military airport on the island of Diego Garcia, 3,800 km (2,400 miles) away in the Indian Ocean but did not hit the base, the Wall Street Journal reported.
A source at Britain’s defense ministry said the attack had occurred before the government gave specific authorization on Friday for the US to use British military bases to carry out strikes on Iranian missile sites.
EUROPEAN GAS PRICES SURGE
Natural gas prices in Europe surged as much as 35 percent this week as Iran and Israel hit some of the region’s most important gas infrastructure. The European Union urged members to lower gas-storage targets and start refilling reserves gradually to curb demand, the Financial Times reported on Saturday.
The Strait of Hormuz, conduit for around a fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas supplies, has been effectively closed to most shipping.
Leading allies of the US from Europe as well as Japan and Canada have pledged to join “appropriate efforts” to ensure safe passage through the strait, but Germany and France have spelled out that fighting must stop first.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi told Kyodo news agency that Iran was ready to let Japan-related vessels pass through the strait, which carries around 90 percent of Japan’s oil imports.
Muslims celebrated Eid al-Fitr on Friday to end the fasting month of Ramadan and Iranians marked Nowruz, the Persian New Year. Iran’s new supreme leader, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, marked the occasion with a message of defiance.
Khamenei – who did not appear at Eid prayers and has not been seen in public since the initial Israeli attack, which killed his father and predecessor, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei – said in his statement that Iranians had responded with unity and resistance and “dealt a disorienting blow to the enemy.”
Uncategorized
UK Approves US Use of British Bases to Strike Iran Missile Sites Targeting Ships
People use their cameras as a USAF B-1 bomber approaches to land at RAF Fairford airbase, used by United States Air Force (USAF) personnel, amid the US–Israeli conflict with Iran, in Fairford, Gloucestershire, Britain, March 17, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Toby Melville
The British government gave authorization on Friday for the US to use military bases in Britain to carry out strikes on Iranian missile sites that are attacking ships in the Strait of Hormuz.
British ministers met on Friday to discuss the war with Iran and Iran‘s blocking of the Strait of Hormuz, according to a Downing Street statement.
“They confirmed that the agreement for the US to use UK bases in the collective self-defence of the region includes US defensive operations to degrade the missile sites and capabilities being used to attack ships in the Strait of Hormuz,” the statement said.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said in a post on X that Starmer was “putting British lives in danger by allowing UK bases to be used for aggression against Iran,” adding “Iran will exercise its right to self-defense.”
Starmer said this week Britain would not be drawn into a war over Iran. He initially rejected a US request to use British bases for the strikes on Iran, saying he needed to be satisfied that any military action was legal.
But the prime minister modified his stance after Iran conducted strikes on British allies across the Middle East, saying that the United States could use RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia, a joint US-UK base in the Indian Ocean.
President Donald Trump has repeatedly attacked Starmer since the conflict started, complaining he was not doing enough to help him.
On Monday, Trump said there were “some countries that greatly disappointed me” before he singled out Britain, which he said had once been considered “the Rolls-Royce of allies.”
The Downing Street statement on Friday called for “urgent de-escalation and a swift resolution to the war.”
Opinion polls in Britain suggest widespread skepticism about the war, with 59% of those surveyed by YouGov saying that they were opposed to the US-Israeli attacks.
Uncategorized
French Appeals Court Rules Vandalism of Memorial for Murdered Jew Not Antisemitic
A crowd gathers at the Jardin Ilan Halimi in Paris on Feb. 14, 2021, to commemorate the 15th anniversary of Halimi’s kidnapping and murder. Photo: Reuters/Xose Bouzas/Hans Lucas
A French appeals court has acquitted Tunisian twin brothers of antisemitism charges after they cut down an olive tree planted to honor Ilan Halimi, a young French Jewish man tortured to death two decades ago, in what appears to be yet another instance of France’s legal system brushing aside antisemitism as a potential motive for crime.
On Wednesday, the Paris Court of Appeal upheld the decision from the initial trial in October to dismiss the charge that the crime was motivated by antisemitism, which would have increased the punishments for the two brothers. The judges found no evidence that the assailants knew of Halimi’s identity or history or acted with the intent to target his memory because of his religious affiliation.
The court’s ruling this week upheld the original convictions, sentencing both men to eight months in prison — one with a suspended sentence, meaning he will only serve time if he reoffends or violates certain conditions, and who has since been deported to Tunisia. Both men are also barred from entering France for five years.
The two 19-year-old undocumented men with prior convictions for theft and violence were arrested in August for vandalizing Halimi’s memorial in the northern Paris suburb of Épinay-sur-Seine.
During the initial trial in Bobigny, in northeastern France, the brothers faced charges of “aggravated destruction of property” and “desecration of a monument dedicated to the memory of the dead on the basis of race, ethnicity, nationality, or religion,” offenses carrying sentences of up to two years in prison.
The court acquitted them of committing an antisemitic hate crime, ruling that they were unaware they had desecrated Halimi’s memorial.
Even though they admitted to being in the garden on the night of the incident, the brothers denied cutting down the tree and claimed they were unaware of Halimi’s story, leading the court to rule that the act was not antisemitic in nature.
Halimi was abducted, held captive, and tortured in January 2006 by a gang of about 20 people in a low-income housing estate in the Paris suburb of Bagneux.
Three weeks later, Halimi was found in Essonne, south of Paris, naked, gagged, and handcuffed, with clear signs of torture and burns. The 23-year-old died on the way to the hospital.
In 2011, an olive tree was planted in Halimi’s memory. Last year, in one of the latest attacks on his memory, the memorial in the northern Paris suburb of Épinay-sur-Seine was found felled — probably with a chainsaw.
Since the attack, French authorities have been working to replant olive trees to honor Halimi’s memory.
This latest case is by no means the first in France to raise alarm bells among the Jewish community, as courts have repeatedly overturned or reduced sentences for individuals accused of antisemitic crimes, fueling public outrage over what many see as excessive leniency.
In February, a French court tossed out antisemitic-motivated charges against a 55-year-old man convicted of murdering his 89-year-old Jewish neighbor in 2022.
According to French media, the magistrate of the public prosecutor’s office refused to consider the defendant’s prior antisemitic behavior, including online posts spreading hateful content and promoting conspiracy theories about Jews and Israelis, arguing that it was not directly related to the incident itself.
In May 2022, Rachid Kheniche threw his neighbor, René Hadjadj, from the 17th floor of his building, an act to which he later admitted.
At the time, Kheniche told investigators that while having a discussion, he tried to strangle Hadjadj without realizing what he was doing, as he was experiencing a paranoid episode caused by prior drug use.
After several psychiatric evaluations, the court concluded that the defendant was mentally impaired at the time of the crime, reducing his criminal responsibility and lowering the maximum sentence for murder to 20 years.
Kheniche was ultimately sentenced to 18 years in prison and six years of “socio-judicial monitoring.”
Last year, the public prosecutor’s office in Nanterre, just west of Paris, appealed a criminal court ruling that cleared a nanny of antisemitism-aggravated charges after she poisoned the food and drinks of the Jewish family she worked for.
Residing illegally in France, the nanny had worked as a live-in caregiver for the family and their three children — aged two, five, and seven — since November 2023.
The 42-year-old Algerian woman was sentenced to two and a half years in prison for “administering a harmful substance that caused incapacitation for more than eight days.”
Even though the nanny initially denied the charges against her, she later confessed to police that she had poured a soapy lotion into the family’’ food as a warning because “they were disrespecting her.”
“They have money and power, so I should never have worked for a Jewish woman — it only brought me trouble,” the nanny told the police. “I knew I could hurt them, but not enough to kill them.”
The French court declined to uphold any antisemitism charges against the defendant, noting that her incriminating statements were made several weeks after the incident and recorded by a police officer without a lawyer present
In another shocking case last year, a local court in France dramatically reduced the sentence of one of the two teenagers convicted of the brutal gang rape of a 12-year-old Jewish girl, citing his “need to prepare for future reintegration.”
More than a year after the attack, the Versailles Court of Appeal retried one of the convicted boys — the only one to challenge his sentence — behind closed doors, ultimately reducing his term from nine to seven years and imposing an educational measure.