The streets of Israel breathe with ongoing protests. Yet the day does not end quietly. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu signaled a plan to soften the controversial judicial reform in response to massive public demonstrations that began with the plan’s rollout. The far-right government’s agenda has sparked sustained debate and opposition from many quarters, and not all changes have been implemented as quickly as promised. Citizens from the center-left remain dissatisfied and continue to express their concerns in public settings about the government’s direction.
At a Sunday briefing, opposition leader Yair Lapid urged dialogue with anyone who genuinely cares about national unity and a path to agreement. In statements broadcast across major outlets, he characterized the government’s approach to judicial reform as a potential takeover of the justice system. After more than eleven weeks of mobilization, with the unusual and notable support of hundreds of reservists who ordinarily stay apolitical, Israel faces one of its deepest internal crises in decades. The country has witnessed broad street pressure that has forced leaders to acknowledge the scale of public sentiment.
Social media and political commentary have captured tensions around the coalition’s plans. A post from a parliamentary channel on March 20, 2023, highlighted the ongoing struggle over how reform proposals are framed and advanced in the Knesset.
Changes in the bill have drawn attention from international partners as well. Following a phone conversation with the President of the United States, Joe Biden, Netanyahu agreed to delay several proposed measures. The discussions also touched on legislation related to Israel’s system for appointing judges. The prime minister has reiterated the aim to ratify the reform before the upcoming parliamentary recess around Passover, with the Knesset planning to review the package ahead of that break. A Knesset review panel subsequently decided to remove most coalition members from the committee that screens Supreme Court appointments.
Changes in the appointment process were outlined as follows: previously, the executive proposal had envisioned a panel composed of three cabinet ministers elected by the government, two coalition lawmakers, and two public figures, with a majority voting requirement of seven to four. In its amended form, the bill proposes a commission with three cabinet ministers, three coalition lawmakers, three judges, and two opposition lawmakers, potentially creating a 6-5 government majority. The revised arrangement would also restrict ordinary voting inside the Knesset for certain appointments and cap the number of Supreme Court justices.
Not all controversial elements were altered. Provisions remain in place that allow adjustments to the Basic Laws, which function as Israel’s constitutional framework, without altering foundational protections. Even with a parliamentary majority supporting the reform, the ongoing protests and concerns voiced by Western allies have created obstacles that complicate the legislative process. In conversations with his counterpart, President Biden expressed support for finding a consensus on judicial reform and emphasized the importance of a robust judicial system with checks and balances, alongside a broader effort to craft a comprehensive settlement, according to official statements.
Civil society groups have voiced strong opposition to the amended proposal. Simcha Rothman, chair of the Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee where the draft reform is being developed, has framed the debate as a matter of public accountability: many Israelis believe the Supreme Court should belong to the people and not be leveraged for political ends. Critics argue that the changes could enable excessive political influence over the judiciary, sparking a debate about the balance between legislative power and judicial independence. The public mood remains wary as the government plans to resume voting at the end of the parliamentary recess, with opponents urging a pause to negotiate and seek broader agreement. Activist organizations have warned that protests will intensify if the government presses ahead without meaningful dialogue, while supporters argue that reforms are necessary to modernize governance.
In the weeks ahead, observers will watch how the government addresses public concern, how international partners frame their responses, and whether a negotiated path can be found that preserves judicial independence while delivering a reform package acceptable to a broad cross-section of Israeli society. The situation continues to evolve as lawmakers readjust timelines and strategies in response to the sustained protest movement and international diplomacy, with outcomes likely to shape the country’s political landscape for years to come.