As of today, dozens of federal judicial positions in Israel, including 4 Supreme Court positions, remain vacant. This comes as a result of Justice Minister Yariv Levin’s continued refusal to convene the Judicial Selection Committee, heavily impairing the functionality of the court system. The High Court of Justice has scheduled a pivotal hearing for later this month to address Levin’s actions, although he has refused to say whether he would comply with a court order to convene the committee to appoint new justices.

This standoff is part of a broader tension between prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s ruling coalition and the judiciary. Since Levin took office in 2022, he has undertaken an effort to reduce judicial power and increase political control over the courts while simultaneously refusing to cooperate with them in their unreformed state. 

The regime’s hostility toward the judiciary dangerously erodes the democracy of Israel by reducing the court’s ability to check executive and legislative power, compromising the independence of the judicial branch, and degrading democratic norms and trust in democratic institutions.

History of Judicial Conflict

In 2023, Levin introduced a highly controversial set of judicial reform bills that would have granted the ruling coalition full control over judicial appointments, allowed the Knesset (Israel’s parliament) to overturn Supreme Court rulings with a simple majority, and politicized key ministerial legal adviser positions. Due to major resistance, the Knesset only passed a bill that prevented the court from striking down laws on the grounds of “unreasonableness.” The Supreme Court later overturned this law, however, due to the principle’s key role in upholding rights in Israel.

In 2025, the Knesset succeeded in passing legislation that increases political influence in judicial appointments by altering the makeup of the Judicial Selection Committee, replacing the two representatives of the Israel Bar Association with political appointees from the coalition and opposition. This reform will only take effect after the inauguration of the next Knesset in 2026.

Due to the limited success of the legislative judicial overhaul, Justice Minister Levin has continually withheld cooperation with the judicial branch. Following repeated orders by the High Court of Justice, Levin was forced to allow a vote on the new president of the High Court, which elected Isaac Amit. Both Levin and Netanyahu boycotted this meeting and have since refused to acknowledge the legitimacy of President Amit or cooperate with him. 

Erosion of Democracy

The judicial reforms advanced by the ruling coalition represent a clear attempt to weaken the ability of Israel’s institutions to check executive power, a process identified by Nancy Bermeo as executive aggrandizement. Already, Israel’s executive and legislature are closely institutionally aligned, leaving the judiciary as the primary constraint on government overreach. Under the proposed legal reforms, judiciary discretion would be greatly reduced by eliminating the court’s ability to strike down unreasonable laws. Additionally, if the Knesset could override court decisions with a simple majority, the government could practice nearly unbounded exercise of power, leaving minimal institutional barriers to enacting unjust or undemocratic law. 

The attempts to politicize positions within the Judicial Selection Committee further reduce the independence and integrity of the judicial system. By replacing nonpartisan, merit-based positions in the committee with political appointees, political considerations are prioritized over professional considerations. In effect, this both expands executive influence over judicial appointments and simultaneously erodes public trust in the judiciary’s neutral application of law. The ruling coalition has thus taken steps toward eroding Israel’s democracy through these legal avenues, attempting to diminish judicial power to hold the government accountable.

The ruling coalition has also undermined democracy through its continued erosion of democratic norms. In How Democracies Die, Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt explain that norms of mutual toleration, the acceptance of rivals as legitimate, and forbearance, restraint in exercising full legal rights, are essential to sustaining democracy. Justice Minister Yevin’s actions continually break these norms. Yevin refuses to recognize the legitimacy of Supreme Court President Amit despite his lawful appointment under existing rules. He even attempted to limit Amit’s ability to compete for power by refusing to convene the Judicial Selection Committee that would vote on the nomination. This showcases a breakdown in mutual respect and institutional norms that may encourage parties to take more drastic, undemocratic measures to prevent the growth of opposition power.

In his opposition to the judiciary, Levin has also pushed the limits of his lawful prerogatives as the justice minister. Although he legally holds the sole power to convene the Judicial Selection Committee, his outright refusal to do so despite proliferating vacancies effectively grants himself an unintended veto power. In doing so, he has incapacitated the justice system, showcasing a prioritization of political goals over democratic institutions. Levin’s actions place a strain on the democratic structures that constitute Israel’s government and showcase an erosion in democratic norms that uphold good-faith cooperation into the future. 

Conclusion

It is important that we continue to monitor democracy within Israel as the current administration’s attacks against the judiciary persist. Through legal avenues, the government is seeking to expand its power and erode the democratic norms that sustain trust in democratic institutions. Despite these actions that threaten democracy, it is important to note that both court and public resistance have successfully pushed back against many of these attempts at erosion. As the hearing for Levin approaches, it is important that we retain hope and trust in the strength of Israel’s democratic institutions.