Full Breakdown
Israeli Government Refuses to Recognize Supreme Court Ruling on Media Regulator, Prompting Constitutional Crisis
7/5/2026, 9:37:05 PM
The Government’s Defiant Declaration
On 28 October 2025 the Israeli cabinet voted unanimously to refuse recognition of any decision, appointment, or approval issued by the Second Authority Council for Television and Radio while the council lacks the two-thirds statutory quorum. The declaration, presented by Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi and Justice Minister Yariv Levin, states that the rule of law applies to every branch of government, including the courts, and that a court order cannot create powers not granted by legislation.
Legal and Institutional Background
The dispute stems from a June 2025 High Court of Justice order that reinstated the previous council despite a shortfall in its membership. Israeli law requires at least two-thirds of council members to be present for the body to act. The court argued that “unique and exceptional circumstances” justified allowing the council to continue, while the government maintains that the statutory quorum is a non-negotiable legal threshold. The issue follows earlier clashes, notably the court’s invalidation of the Knesset’s appointment of Michael Rabello as state comptroller.
Key Actors in the Dispute
- Shlomo Karhi – Communications Minister, author of the cabinet proposal.
- Yariv Levin – Justice Minister, co-author of the declaration.
- Benjamin Netanyahu – Prime Minister, publicly backed the cabinet vote.
- Chief Justice Yitzhak Amit, Justice Alex Stein and Justice Ruth Ronen – authors of the June ruling.
- Deputy Attorney General Gil Limon – warned the cabinet that the move would “normalize systematic violation of the law.”
- Opposition figures – Yair Golan (The Democrats), Yair Lapid (Opposition leader), Naftali Bennett (Beyachad), Gadi Eisenkot (Yashar Party).
- Union of Journalists of Israel – condemned the decision as an assault on media freedom.
Numbers and Legal Thresholds
- Statutory quorum: two-thirds of council members (exact count not disclosed).
- Council composition: fell below the quorum after several resignations.
- Cabinet vote: unanimous (all 120 ministers).
- Potential commercial impact: the dispute could affect the proposed sale of Reshet 13 to a high-tech consortium.
Stakes for Media and Democracy
The Second Authority oversees Israel’s commercial television and radio broadcasters. By refusing to recognize its actions, the government threatens the regulator’s ability to approve licences, content standards, and market transactions. The standoff also amplifies a broader power struggle between the executive and judiciary ahead of national elections, raising concerns about the enforceability of court decisions and the stability of democratic institutions.
Government’s Official Position
The cabinet’s statement asserts that “the rule of law binds all branches of government, including the court” and that “a court ruling cannot create powers not granted by law.” Karhi emphasized that “judges cannot ignore clear legal requirements passed by the Knesset,” while Levin added that “the law, and only the law, is the source of governmental authority.” The government pledged to pursue “every lawful means” to restore its interpretation of the rule of law.
Opposition and Civil-Society Critique
Opposition leaders described the move as “the operational order ahead of Election Day” (Golan) and warned that a government refusing court rulings “immediately becomes an illegal government” (Lapid). Former prime minister Bennett warned that “disobedience to a court ruling brings anarchy to the streets and the dismantling of our state.” The Union of Journalists called the decision “an unprecedented assault on the Supreme Court” and warned of a “dismantling of the media and democracy.”
Conflicting Legal Interpretations
The High Court maintains that the council may continue operating despite the quorum shortfall, citing “exceptional circumstances.” The government argues that the statutory two-thirds requirement is mandatory and that the court’s order “oversteps its authority.” No precise figure for the current number of council members is provided, leaving a factual gap in assessing compliance with the law.
Verbatim Quotes
- “The citizens of Israel deserve a government that unites the people, not a government that works to divide them,” — Gadi Eisenkot, Yashar Party leader
- “High Court justices are not the Knesset, and intoxication with power does not give them authority to erase an explicit legal threshold just because it is inconvenient for them,” — Shlomo Karhi, Communications Minister
- “the rule of law means the law binds everyone, including the court.” — Yariv Levin, Justice Minister
- “When a court ruling directly contradicts the wording of the law, it harms the principle of separation of powers,” — Yariv Levin, Justice Minister
- “Disobedience to a court ruling brings anarchy to the streets and the dismantling of our state,” — Naftali Bennett, former prime minister, Beyachad party chairman
- “a government that does not accept a High Court ruling immediately becomes an illegal government whose rulings and decisions we will not accept.” — Yair Lapid, opposition leader
Outlook and Next Steps
The government announced it will continue challenging the High Court decision through legal channels and hinted at reviving an “override clause” after the upcoming elections. Legal scholars anticipate further petitions to the Supreme Court, while the media sector awaits clarification on the regulator’s authority, especially regarding the pending Reshet 13 transaction. The evolving standoff is poised to shape Israel’s constitutional balance and its democratic trajectory.
