Uncategorized
‘Two Israels’: What’s really behind the judicial reform protests
(JTA) — When Benjamin Netanyahu put his controversial calls for judicial reform on pause two weeks ago, many thought the protesters in Israel and abroad might declare victory and take a break. And yet a week ago Saturday some 200,000 people demonstrated in Tel Aviv, and pro-democracy protests continued among Diaspora Jews and Israeli expats, including those who gather each Sunday in New York’s Washington Square Park.
On its face, the weeks of protest have been about proposed legislation that critics said would sap power from the Israeli Supreme Court and give legislators — in this case, led by Netanyahu’s recently elected far-right coalition — unchecked and unprecedented power. Protesters said that, in the absence of an Israeli constitution establishing basic rights and norms, they were fighting for democracy. The government too says the changes are about democracy, claiming under the current system unelected judges too often overrule elected lawmakers and the will of Israel’s diverse electorate.
But the political dynamics in Israel are complex, and the proposals and the backlash are also about deeper cracks in Israeli society. Yehuda Kurtzer, president of the Shalom Hartman Institute of North America, recently said in a podcast that the crisis in Israel represents “six linked but separate stories unfolding at the same time.” Beyond the judicial reform itself, these stories include the Palestinians and the occupation, a resurgent patriotism among the center and the left, chaos within Netanyahu’s camp, a Diaspora emboldened to weigh in on the future of Zionism and the rejection on the part of the public of a reform that failed the “reasonableness test.”
“If these protests are effective in the long run, it will be, I think, because they will have succeeded at reorganizing and mobilizing the Israeli electorate to think and behave differently than before,” said Kurtzer.
I recently asked observers, here and in Israel, what they feel is really mobilizing the electorate, and what kind of Israel will emerge as a result of the showdown. The respondents included organizers of the protests, supporters of their aims and those skeptical of the protesters’ motivations. They discussed a slew of issues just below the surface of the protest, including the simmering Israeli-Palestinian conflict, divisions over the increasing strength of Israel’s haredi Orthodox sector, and a lingering divide between Ashkenazi Jews with roots in Europe and Mizrahi Jews whose ancestry is Middle Eastern and North African.
Conservatives, meanwhile, insist that Israeli “elites” — the highly educated, the tech sector, the military leadership, for starters — don’t respect the will of the majority who brought Netanyahu and his coalition partners to power.
Here are the emerging themes of weeks of protest:
Defending democracy
Whatever their long-term concerns about Israel’s future, the protests are being held under the banner of “democracy.”
For Alon-Lee Green, one of the organizers of the protests, the issues are equality and fairness. “People in Israel,” said Green, national co-director of Standing Together, a grassroots movement in Israel, “hundreds of thousands of them, are going out to the streets for months now not only because of the judicial reform, but also — and mainly — because of the fundamental question of what is the society we want to live in: Will we keep living in a society that is unequal, unfair and that is moving away from our basic needs and desires, or will it be an equal society for everyone who lives in our land?”
Shany Granot-Lubaton, who has been organizing pro-democracy rallies among Israelis living in New York City, says Netanyahu, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and the coalition’s haredi Orthodox parties “are waging a war against democracy and the freedoms of citizens.”
“They seek to exert control over the Knesset and the judicial system, appoint judges in their favor and legalize corruption,” she said. “If this legal coup is allowed to proceed, minorities will be in serious danger, and democracy itself will be threatened.”
Two researchers at the Institute for Liberty and Responsibility at Herzliya’s Reichman University, psychology student Benjamin Amram and research associate Keren L.G. Snider, said Netanyahu’s proposed judicial reform “undermines the integrity of Israel’s democracy by consolidating power.”
“How can citizens trust a government that ultimately has no limitations set upon them?” they asked in a joint email. “At a time when political trust and political representation are at the lowest points, this legislation can only create instability and call into question the intentions of the current ruling party. When one coalition holds all the power, laws and policies can be swiftly overturned, causing instability and volatility.”
A struggle between two Israels
Other commentators said the protests revealed fractures within Israeli society that long predated the conflict over judicial reform. “The split is between those that believe Israel should be a more religious country, with less democracy, and see democracy as only a system of elections and not a set of values, and those who want Israel to remain a Jewish and democratic state,” Tzipi Livni, who served in the cabinets of right-wing prime ministers Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert before tacking to the center in recent years, recently told Haaretz.
Author and translator David Hazony called this “a struggle between two Israels” — one that sees Israel’s founding vision as a European-style, rights-based democracy, and the other that sees that vision as the return of the Jews to their ancient homeland.
“Those on the first side believe that the judiciary has always been Israel’s protector of rights and therefore of democracy, against the rapaciousness and lawlessness of politicians in general and especially those on the right. Therefore an assault on its supremacy is an assault on democracy itself. They accuse the other side of being barbaric, antidemocratic and violent,” said Hazony, editor of the forthcoming anthology “Jewish Priorities.”
As for the other side, he said, they see an activist judiciary as an attempt by Ashkenazi elites to force their minority view on the majority. Supporters of the government think it is entirely unreasonable “for judges to think they can choose their successors, strike down constitutional legislation and rule according to ‘that which is reasonable in the eyes of the enlightened community in Israel,’” said Hazony, quoting Aharon Barak, the former president of the Supreme Court of Israel and bane of Israel’s right.
(Naveh Dromi, a right-wing columnist for Yediot Achronot, puts this more bluntly: “The problem,” she writes, “lies in the fact that the left has no faith in its chance to win an election, so it relies on the high court to represent it.”)
Daniel Tauber, an attorney and Likud Central Committee member, agrees that those who voted for Netanyahu and his coalition have their own concerns about a democracy — one dominated by “elites,” which in the Israeli context means old-guard Ashkenazi Jews, powerful labor unions and highly educated secular Jews. “The more this process is subject to veto by non-democratic institutions, whether it be the Court chosen as it is, elite military units, the Histadrut [labor union], or others, the more people will lose faith in democracy,” said Tauber.
Green also said there is “a war waging now between two elites in Israel” — the “old and more established liberal elite, who consist of the financial, high-tech army and industry people,” and the “new emerging elite of the settlers and the political far-right parties.”
Israelis protest against the government’s planned judicial overhaul, outside the Supreme Court in Jerusalem, March 27, 2023. (Jamal Awad/Flash90)
And yet, he said, “I think we will lose if one of these elites wins. The real victory of this historic political moment in Israel will be if we achieve true equality, both to the people who are not represented by the Jewish supremacists, such as the Palestinian citizens of Israel, and to the people who are not represented by the ‘old Israel,’ such as the haredi and Mizrahi people on the peripheries.”
The crises behind the crisis
Although the protests were ignited by Netanyahu’s calls for judicial reform, they also represented pushback against the most right-wing government in Israeli history — which means at some level the protests were also about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the role of religion in Israeli society. “The unspoken motivation driving the architects and supporters of the [judicial] ‘reform,’ as well as the protest leaders, is umbilically connected to the occupation,” writes Carolina Landsmann, a Haaretz columnist. If Netanyahu has his way, she writes, “There will be no more two-state solution, and there will be no territorial compromises. The new diplomatic horizon will be a single state, with the Palestinians as subjects deprived of citizenship.”
Nimrod Novik, the Israel Fellow at the Israel Policy Forum, said that “once awakened, the simmering resentment of those liberal Israelis about other issues was brought to the surface.” The Palestinian issue, for example, is at an “explosive moment,” said Novik: The Palestinian Authority is weakened and ineffective, Palestinian youth lack hope for a better future, and Israeli settlers feel emboldened by supporters in the ruling coalition. “The Israeli security establishment took this all into account when warning the government to change course before it is too late,” said Novik.
Kurtzer too noted that the Palestinians “also stand to be extremely victimized following the passage of judicial reform, both in Israel and in the West Bank.” And yet, he said, most Israelis aren’t ready to upend the current status quo between Israelis and Palestinians. “It can also be true that the Israeli public can only build the kind of coalition that it’s building right now because it is patently not a referendum on the issue of Palestinian rights,” he said.
Religion and state
Novik spoke about another barely subterranean theme of the protests: the growing power of the haredi, or ultra-Orthodox, parties. Secular Israelis especially resent that the haredim disproportionately seek exemption from military service and that non-haredi Israelis contribute some 90% of all taxes collected. One fear of those opposing the judicial reform legislation is that the religious parties will “forever secure state funding to the haredi Orthodox school system while exempting it from teaching the subjects required for ever joining the workforce. It is to secure for them an exemption from any military or other national service. And it is to expand the imposition of their lifestyle on non-Orthodox Israelis.”
What’s next
Predictions for the future range from warnings of a civil war (by Israel’s president, Isaac Herzog, among others) to an eventual compromise on Netanyahu’s part to the emergence of a new center electorate that will reject extremists on both ends of the political spectrum.
David E. Bernstein, a law professor at the George Mason University School of Law who writes frequently about Israel, imagines a future without extremists. “One can definitely easily imagine the business, academic and legal elite using their newfound political voice to insist that future governments not align with extremists, that haredi authority over national life be limited, and, perhaps most important, that Israel create a formal constitution that protects certain basic rights,” he said. “Perhaps there will also be demand to counter such long-festering problems as corruption, disproportionate influence over export markets by a few influential families, burgeoning lawlessness in the Arab sector and a massive shortage of affordable housing.”
Elie Bennett, director of International Strategy at the Israel Democracy Institute, also sees an opportunity in the crisis.
In the aftermath of the disastrous 1973 Yom Kippur war, he said, Israel “rebuilt its military and eventually laid the foundations for today’s ‘startup nation.’ In this current crisis, we do not need a call-up of our reserves forces, or a massive airlift of American weaponry to prevail. What we need is goodwill among fellow Israelis and a commitment to work together to strengthen our society and reach an agreed-upon constitutional framework. If we are able to achieve such an agreement, it will protect our rights, better define the relationships between the branches of government, and result in an Israel that is more stable and prosperous than ever as we celebrate 75 years of independence.”
—
The post ‘Two Israels’: What’s really behind the judicial reform protests appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Texas Joins Legal Action Against American Muslims for Palestine as Move to ‘Counter Hamas Terrorism’
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton speaks during AmericaFest, the first Turning Point USA summit since the death of Charlie Kirk, in Phoenix, Arizona, US, Dec. 20, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Cheney Orr
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on Tuesday announced the state would join Virginia and Iowa in the filing of a legal brief against the nonprofit activist group American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) and other organizations which he characterized as “radical” in order “to combat Hamas terrorism.”
“Radical Islamic terrorist groups like Hamas must be decimated and dismantled, and that includes their domestic supporting branches,” Paxton posted on the social media platform X.
“Terrorism relies on complex networks and intermediaries, and the law must be enforced against those who knowingly provide material support,” Texas’s top legal officer added in a statement. “My office will continue to defend Americans who have been brutally affected by terrorism and ensure accountability under the law.”
In November, Texas began more aggressive legal efforts against organizations long alleged by researchers and law enforcement to be part of a domestic Hamas support network in the United States. Gov. Greg Abbott announced on Nov. 18, the designation of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as terrorist organizations.
A month later, Paxton filed a motion defending the designation in court, countering a suit by the Dallas-Fort Worth and Austin chapters of CAIR. “My office will continue to defend the governor’s lawful, accurate declaration that CAIR is an FTO [foreign terrorist organization], as well as Texas’s right to protect itself from organizations with documented ties to foreign extremist movements,” Paxton said at the time.
In its latest statement, Paxton’s office described how on Oct. 8, 2023, one day after Hamas’s invasion of and massacre across southern Israel, the groups AMP and National Students for Justice in Palestine (NSJP) “declared that they were ‘part of’ a ‘Unity Intifada’ under Hamas’s ‘unified command.’”
“Those who have been victimized by Hamas’s terrorism brought claims against the radical groups under the federal Anti-Terrorism Act,” the statement continued. “Attorney General Paxton’s brief is in support of the victims and was filed to ensure terrorist supporters are brought to justice.”
The legal brief references the “unity intifada” and “unified command” sentiments before stating, “They should be taken at their word. And just like their predecessor organizations — convicted or admitted material supporters of Hamas — they should be held accountable.”
The brief charges, “Defendants here are alleged to have provided material support for Hamas, the brutal terrorist regime that not only oppresses millions in Gaza but that also murdered more than a thousand innocents and kidnapped hundreds more. States have an interest in ensuring that valid claims brought under material support statutes are allowed to be litigated in court and that any violators are held accountable.”
Last year, Virginia’s Attorney General Jason Miyares — whose name appears at the lead of the brief — sought to press AMP to reveal its funding sources, which a judge ruled it needed to do May 9, 2025.
The latest brief provides a history lesson about how AMP and NSJP “did not begin their material support for Hamas on Oct. 8, 2023; rather, their material support has been going on for decades — both as the current organizations and through predecessor entities. Indeed, AMP was founded after a predecessor organization and five of its board members were convicted of providing material support for Hamas.” The brief describes the network beginning when “first, the Muslim Brotherhood founded the ‘Palestine Committee’ in 1988 to fund the terrorist organization Hamas.”
This network included “several organizations providing Hamas financial, informational, and political support,” the legal document explained. “Among those organizations were the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development and the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), organizations founded and controlled by senior members of Hamas leadership.”
Uncategorized
Trump Slams Rep. Thomas Massie as ‘Hater of Israel,’ Praises Republican Primary Challenger Ed Gallrein
US Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) leaves a meeting of the House Republican Conference in the US Capitol on Wednesday, June 4, 2025. Photo: Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
US President Donald Trump on Monday lambasted Rep. Thomas Massie, a fellow Republican, as a “hater of Israel” and “totally ineffective loser,” calling on voters to support Massie’s challenger, retired Navy SEAL officer Ed Gallrein, in the GOP primary in Kentucky.
In a social media post, Trump formally endorsed Gallrein, a political newcomer who has officially filed to run in Kentucky’s 4th Congressional District. Trump praised Gallrein as a US military veteran, farmer, and businessman, describing him as a candidate who embraces a foreign policy of “peace through strength” and his policy agenda on a range of issues such as energy, gun rights, and immigration. The president asked his supporters to “rally behind” the insurgent in a bid to topple Massie.
At the same time, Trump launched a scathing attack on Massie, calling him the “worst’ ‘Republican’ congressman” and accusing him of consistently voting against Republican priorities. Trump singled out Massie’s views on Israel, labeling him “a true hater of Israel” and arguing that his record has undermined both the party and a key US ally.
“Unlike ‘lightweight’ Congressman Massie,” Trump wrote, Gallrein is a “WINNER” who is best positioned to defeat the incumbent in a Republican primary.
Trump’s endorsement places Israel at the center of the race, elevating what had long been a policy disagreement into a defining issue for Republican voters in the district.
Massie has emerged as one of the most vocal Republican skeptics of US military assistance to Israel, voting against multiple Israel-related measures that passed Congress with overwhelming bipartisan support. Those votes have drawn increasing criticism from pro-Israel lawmakers and advocacy groups, particularly as Israel continues to face regional threats and remains engaged in active conflict.
By contrast, Trump portrayed Gallrein as a candidate aligned with his approach to foreign policy and as a reliable supporter of Israel at a moment Trump described as critical for US leadership abroad.
The president also highlighted Gallrein’s military background as evidence that he would prioritize national security, support the US military, and stand firmly with allies like Israel.
Kentucky’s 4th District is a solidly Republican seat, making the winner GOP primary all but guaranteed to win the general election. Trump urged his supporters to back Gallrein and discouraged other potential challengers from entering the race, signaling an effort to consolidate opposition to Massie early.
Trump has clashed with Massie over foreign policy, spending, and executive authority. The explicit focus on Israel suggests that support for the Jewish state is increasingly being treated as a litmus test within parts of the Republican Party.
Massie has previously defended his votes as rooted in constitutional restraint and fiscal conservatism, arguing that opposition to foreign aid packages does not equate to opposition to Israel itself. However, in the two years following Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel, Massie has sharpened his criticisms of Israel’s conduct.
During an appearance on the podcast of anti-Israel political commentator Tucker Carlson, Massie criticized the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) — the foremost pro-Israel lobbying group in the US — accusing the organization of deploying “AIPAC babysitters” to steer congressional votes.
In a post on X/Twitter, Massie said, “Blind support for foreign governments, including Israel, has cost this country dearly. Congress must put America first.”
Massie has also suggested that Israel deliberately targets civilian infrastructure during its military campaigns, an unfounded accusation which enraged many supporters of the Jewish state.
Massie responded to Trump’s post, accusing the president of targeting him over his refusal to vote in favor of foreign aid and warfare.
“It happened again today! Why do I get attacked weekly? Because I’m the only Republican who refuses to rubber stamp foreign aid, endless deficits, and unnecessary wars. I’m also exposing sex traffickers. My primary is in May. Please help if you can,” Massie posted.
Uncategorized
Virginia AG Calls for K-12 Schools to Adopt IHRA Definition of Antisemitism Ahead of New Governor Taking Office
Virginia Governor-elect Abigail Spanberger (center), former Gov. Ralph Northam (left), and Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-VA) attend a statue unveiling ceremony for Barbara Rose Johns in Emancipation Hall on Dec. 16, 2025. Photo: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
Virginia’s outgoing attorney general on Monday implored the commonwealth’s K-12 schools to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, citing a dramatic increase in antisemitic hate crimes occurring in 2024 alongside an overall reduction in crime.
“Every student has the right to learn in an environment free from fear,” Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares, whose tenure ends on Jan. 17, wrote in an open letter to superintendents and school boards. “The IHRA definition provides schools with a clear framework to recognize and respond to antisemitic conduct and distinguish protected speech from unlawful discrimination, intimidation, and harassment.”
He added, “Pushing back against antisemitism requires clarity, consistency, and courage. We cannot fight something we fail to define. By adopting this resolution, schools can meet their legal obligations while upholding constitutional principles and ensuring equal access to education for every student.”
IHRA — an intergovernmental organization comprising dozens of countries including the US and Israel — adopted the “working definition” of antisemitism in 2016. Since then, the definition has been widely accepted by Jewish groups and lawmakers across the political spectrum, and it is now used by hundreds of governing institutions, including the US State Department, European Union, and United Nations.
According to the definition, antisemitism “is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” It provides 11 specific, contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere. Beyond classic antisemitic behavior associated with the likes of the medieval period and Nazi Germany, the examples include denial of the Holocaust and newer forms of antisemitism targeting Israel such as demonizing the Jewish state, denying its right to exist, and holding it to standards not expected of any other democratic state.
Virginia’s state government first adopted the IHRA definition of antisemitism in 2023, responding to a series of antisemitic incidents which included the graffitiing of a swastika on a Jewish family’s home in Burke and an Arlington student’s airdropping an image of a swastika to his entire class and proceeding to play an online quiz game “using a swastika and a racial slur.” Most notable, however, was the Unite the Right Rally, which took place in Charlottesville in 2017 and led to death of 32-year-old Heather Heyer, who was killed when a white supremacist attending the rally intentionally crashed into dozens of counter-protesters.
Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a Republican, enthusiastically signed a bill which called for the IHRA adoption, saying during a signing ceremony, “When we acknowledge that we live in a world where there is hate and where that hate is translated into despicable actions, we can stand up together and say there is no room for that.”
Monday’s letter comes as Virginia prepares to turn the reins of government over to Gov.-elect Abigail Spanberger, who beat Youngkin’s lieutenant and chosen successor Winsome Earle-Sears by 15 points in a general election contest held in November. A moderate Democrat with a history of condemning Hamas and advocating pro-Israel policies, Spanberger is on record supporting the IHRA definition of antisemitism, having voted in favor of it twice as a member of the state’s House of Representatives.
However, the month of January has already seen a local government’s commitment to IHRA be overturned by a newly sworn in administration. In New York City, Mayor Zohran Mamdani, a far-left Democrat, dropped the IHRA definition on his first day of office last week and revoked an executive order that opposed the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel. Citing these developments, lawyer and civil rights nonprofit founder Kenneth Marcus commended Miyares for stressing the importance of using the IHRA definition as a tool for combating antisemitic hatred amid a surge of antisemitism in Virginia’s own K-12 schools.
“Antisemitism in Virginia public schools has become a major national issue in recent months, as we’ve seen with the opening of a congressional investigation into Fairfax County public schools, where there have been multiple high-profile issues surrounding antisemitic activity,” Marcus, who leads the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, said in a statement on Monday. “This definition is the gold standard across the globe … to this new administration and to Gov.-elect Spanberger: Virginia must not follow New York City’s example. We call on you to follow the lead of Presidents Obama, Trump, and Biden, whose administrations similarly embraced the IHRA working definition of antisemitism.”
Antisemitism is also present in Virginia’s private schools, as was recently alleged in a lawsuit settled in November.
As previously reported by The Algemeiner, Nysmith School for the Gifted in Fairfax County, Virginia, agreed to pay $100,000, plus attorneys’ fees and other costs after parents came forward to accuse it of expelling three Jewish students for reporting antisemitism.
In addition to paying the victim’s family what amounts to nearly $150,000, the school has said it will adopt the IHRA definition of antisemitism, which is used by governments across the world, and submit to monitoring by a third-party watchdog for a minimum five-year period. That monitor will oversee the conclusion of Nysmith’s investigation of the bullying allegations and determine whether school officials did not intentionally violate the law.
“I want to take this opportunity to acknowledge that there are things I could have done differently in this particular situation, and for that, I am truly sorry,” Nysmith’s headmaster, Ken Nysmith, wrote in a letter to parents. “For the 40 years I have been at Nysmith, I have always tried to do my personal best, guided by our commitment to our students, families, and staff. In this instance, I will use this experience to reflect, to learn, and to continue improving as a leader.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.