Netanyahu Under Pressure as Ultra-Orthodox Parties Threaten to Dissolve Parliament
Israel's opposition parties said they would bring a motion to dissolve Parliament to a vote on Wednesday, presenting the most serious challenge yet to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's right-wing government and raising the specter of early elections.
If the motion passes, it is unlikely that the government will fall immediately. The parliamentary process before any final vote could take months, giving the prime minister time to shore up his increasingly fractious governing coalition or set his own agenda for a return to the ballot box. But it would deal a heavy blow to his political credibility.
The opposition parties are exploiting a crisis within the governing coalition over the contentious, decades-old policy that exempts ultra-Orthodox men who are studying religion in seminaries from compulsory military service.
Mr. Netanyahu's ultra-Orthodox coalition partners, the United Torah Judaism and Shas parties, have been locked in dispute with other members of the government over proposals to limit exemptions. The issue has taken on more urgency, and spurred growing public anger and scrutiny, since the Hamas-led attack on Oct. 7, 2023, ignited Israel's war in Gaza.
United Torah Judaism has threatened to vote with the opposition, saying that it cannot accept the principle of drafting seminary students. If Shas also votes with the opposition, it could provide the majority needed to dissolve Parliament.
Mr. Netanyahu's coalition commands a majority of 68 seats in the 120-seat Knesset. Shas and United Torah Judaism hold 18 seats between them, giving them strong leverage.
The split inside the coalition has given the main opposition parties a political opportunity to challenge the government. While they support the move to enlist ultra-Orthodox religious students, they say their priority is to bring down Mr. Netanyahu's government and force new elections.
The government, which was formed in late 2022, is the most right-wing and religiously conservative in Israel's history. The next election would take place in October 2026 if it were to reach full term.
If the motion is passed on Wednesday, the bill would need to go to a parliamentary committee for review before returning to the assembly for further votes, and Mr. Netanyahu and his political allies could stall that process for months.
But analysts say that even preliminary approval to dissolve Parliament could further destabilize his government.
'The whole system would go into a different mode — election mode,' said Aviv Bushinsky, a political analyst and a former media adviser to Mr. Netanyahu. Losing a vote would indicate a lack of leadership on Mr. Netanyahu's part, he added, and an inability to control his coalition.
Gabby Sobelman contributed reporting from Rehovot, Israel.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
25 minutes ago
- Politico
Trump revokes California's nation-leading electric vehicle mandate
President Donald Trump moved Thursday to eliminate California's nation-leading vehicle emissions standards, upending strict rules that had become a template for states across the nation to realize their greenhouse gas ambitions. Trump signed three Congressional Review Act resolutions rolling back a trio of California's rules at a White House signing ceremony, delivering on his Day 1 executive order to quickly roll back electric vehicle mandates around the country. 'We officially rescue the US auto industry from destruction by terminating California's electric vehicle mandate, once and for all,' Trump said at a Oval Office signing alongside House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, Energy Secretary Chris Wright and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin. The president, in a wide-ranging speech before the signing, used the moment to hit on a range of issues, including inflation, his disdain for windmills and his recent fallout with Tesla CEO Elon Musk. 'Now we know why Elon doesn't like me so much,' Trump quipped, before saying that Musk never asked him to save EV rules and that their break was over other 'smaller things.' While the Trump administration has also gone on the offensive against federal vehicle standards, California's regulations aimed at phasing out gas-powered passenger vehicles and heavy-duty diesel trucks — which are followed by a dozen other states — have drawn the stiffest opposition from the auto and fossil fuel industries. 'Worse than unachievable, these EV mandates were going to be harmful,' said John Bozzella, president and CEO of the Alliance for Automotive Innovation. 'Harmful to auto affordability, to consumer choice, to industry competitiveness and to economic activity.' The move takes place against the backdrop of worsening relations between Trump and Gov, Gavin Newsom, with the president ordering the military to quell unrest in Los Angeles over immigration raids. It also comes as Tesla CEO and former White House adviser Elon Musk clashed with Trump last week over electric vehicle policies. Trump's signature revokes the Golden State's unique permission to exceed federal vehicle pollution standards, which it's used for decades to set nation-leading rules. A dozen other Democrat-led states have opted to follow California's rules, representing one-third of the U.S. auto market. California's regulations aim to require automakers to sell increasing percentages of zero-emission vehicles, culminating in a 2035 target of all new-car sales being electric or otherwise carbon-free. Trump had targeted California's rules in his first term and on the campaign trail for his second term. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin asked Congress to revoke them using the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to overturn rules passed in the waning days of the previous administration. The request triggered a debate among Republicans about whether to stretch congressional norms by using the CRA to roll back California's rules, which Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough and the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office have said aren't subject to the law. In addition to the rules for passenger vehicles, Thursday's signings roll back California's authority to enforce zero-emission sales targets for commercial trucks and higher standards for heavy-duty diesel engines. The fight over whether Congress acted lawfully will now head to the courts. California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta said last month they would sue immediately after Trump signs the resolutions. The outcome of that court case will have widespread implications, as Democratic leaders seek to wean drivers and industry off fossil fuels and hit lofty greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals. But the question is especially acute for California, which has struggled for decades to reduce the nation's worst smog in the Los Angeles area and Central Valley and comply with federal air quality standards under the Clean Air Act. Failure to reach those standards could result in sanctions and withholding of federal highway funds, which both Republican and Democratic administrations have floated in the past. Trump's EPA threatened sanctions against the state in 2019, just days after the agency revoked an earlier version of its electric vehicle rules. 'It is hard to imagine that they will not threaten sanctions,' said Ann Carlson, who was head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration under former President Joe Biden. 'The president clearly has it out for California, and Los Angeles is obviously in his sights.' EPA said in a statement when asked about the possibility of sanctions that it will enforce the Clean Air Act. 'EPA will continue to implement the Clean Air Act as provided in law and will continue to hope that California can get into attainment after decades of nonattainment,' the agency said. EPA could develop its own plan for California to meet federal standards, though air quality experts say that's unlikely because the agency would have to take unpopular steps like restricting driving. California Air Resources Board spokesperson Lindsay Buckley said in a statement that without the waivers, the state will need to find an alternative to reach compliance. CARB chair Liane Randolph told state lawmakers during a hearing last month that she's 'confident California will prevail in litigation,' but that could take years, during which the rules are not enforceable. Randolph suggested that the state could consider approaches like district emissions rules for 'indirect sources' like warehouses that attract commercial trucks, incentives to encourage EV purchases and putting more funding towards public transit.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Trump administration sues New York over law blocking immigration arrests at courthouses
The Trump administration sued New York on Thursday over a law that seeks to shield migrants from immigration arrests when they go to court proceedings. The lawsuit asks to invalidate the law and two state executive orders over claims they obstruct the execution of federal immigration authorities. 'These laws pose intolerable obstacles to federal immigration enforcement and directly regulate and discriminate against the Federal Government, in contravention of the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution,' the 17-page complaint reads. The lawsuit came as New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) was testifying on Capitol Hill about the state's sanctuary city policies. The Hill has reached out for comment to the offices of Hochul and New York Attorney General Letitia James (D), who are both named as defendants. Passed in 2020 in response to the first Trump administration, the Protect Our Courts Act bans civil immigration arrests while an individual is attending or traveling to or from New York court proceedings. Immigration arrests at courthouses have become a flashpoint in the Trump administration's sweeping crackdown. The issue particularly gained prominence after federal prosecutors indicted a Wisconsin judge for allegedly helping a migrant evade immigration officers at the judge's courthouse. 'Conducting an arrest at or near a courthouse often reduces the risk of flight and safety risks to the public, law enforcement officers, and targets themselves, in part because individuals are usually screened for weapons or other contraband before entering a courthouse,' the new lawsuit states. The new lawsuit, filed in federal court in Albany, N.Y., also challenges two executive orders signed by then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D). They prohibit civil immigration arrests within a broader set of state facilities and prevent New York government employees from sharing certain information with federal immigration authorities. The suit marks the Trump administration's latest effort to push back on Democratic-led states and localities that have opposed the administration's immigration efforts. The Justice Department previously sued Colorado and Illinois as well as Chicago, Denver, Newark and several other New Jersey localities over their sanctuary city policies.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Israel Considering Military Attack On Iran Amid Stalled Nuclear Bomb Talks: Reports
Israel is reportedly planning to take potential military action against Iran amid unsuccessful efforts by the U.S. to strike a deal with Iran to halt its nuclear weapons-making capabilities. An Israeli strike, independent of the U.S., could happen within the next few days, NBC News,CBS News and The New York Times reported Thursday, citing sources close to the situation. A senior Iranian official told Reuters on Thursday that the country will not abandon its right to uranium enrichment. Iran's Revolutionary Guards commander Hossein Salami also told state media on Thursday that any aggression by Israel will be 'more forceful and destructive' than those seen in the past. Both countries engaged in a series of exchanges of fire last year. Out of precaution, the U.S. withdrew diplomats from Iraq on Wednesday and authorized the voluntary departure of U.S. military families from the Middle East should such an attack occur and prompt retaliation by Iran, the Times and CBS News reported. 'They are being moved out because it could be a dangerous place, we'll see what happens,' President Donald Trump told reporters Wednesday night. '[Iran] can't have a nuclear weapon. We're not going to allow it.' Israel had reportedly proposed attacking Iranian nuclear sites back in April, but was dissuaded by Trump over his insistence on trying to negotiate a deal with Tehran instead that would limit its nuclear program. Weeks later, a United Nations nuclear watchdog determined that Iran has been carrying out secret nuclear activities at three locations where traces of uranium were found. Iran is not complying with its nuclear obligations, the International Atomic Energy Agency's board of governors concluded. Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei has called the proposed negotiations by the U.S. regarding its nuclear program 'not acceptable to us.' 'We will present our own proposal to the other side via [Omani mediators] after it is finalized,' Baghaei said following talks Monday between both sides. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei also publicly criticized America's proposals last week, saying: 'Our response to the U.S.' nonsense is clear: They cannot do a damn thing in this matter.' A new round of talks has been planned for Sunday between Tehran and Washington. Israeli Forces Accused Of Threatening And Abusing Detained Flotilla Activists More Than 55,000 Palestinians Have Been Killed In The Israel-Hamas War, Gaza Health Officials Say At Least 5 Countries Sanction Far-Right Israeli Officials For Inciting West Bank Violence Trump Threatens Sanctions On Iranian Oil Buyers After Nuclear Talks Delayed Iran And U.S. Envoys Hold 1st Negotiation Over Tehran's Nuclear Program, Talk Face-To-Face
