Full Breakdown
Israel Swears in 79 Judges Amid Ongoing Judicial Selection Dispute
By Drooid · · How we work
Mass Appointment After 18-Month Freeze
On September 15, 2026, President Isaac Herzog presided over a ceremony at the President’s Residence in Jerusalem where 79 judges and senior court registrars took the oath required by Israeli Basic Law. The roster comprised 62 judges and 17 registrars, including six district-court judges, 44 magistrate, family and juvenile judges, and 12 traffic-court judges. Despite the influx, 14 judicial posts remain vacant, and the Supreme Court continues to operate with 11 of its 15 authorized justices.
Political Tension Over the Selection Process
Justice Minister Yariv Levin presented the appointments as evidence that the Judicial Selection Committee can achieve broad agreement and diversify the bench. Levin defended legislation passed in March 2025 that alters the committee’s composition and voting rules, arguing it will increase diversity and prevent any single side from controlling appointments.
Amit warned that judges would be tested when issuing difficult or unpopular decisions, citing the strain on courts after the October 7 massacre and the need to handle urgent personal applications.
High Court Intervention and Remaining Gaps
The High Court of Justice unanimously ruled on May 31 that Levin could not keep the committee inactive, ordering him to fill district-court vacancies, especially in Beersheba and Haifa. The court rejected Levin’s claim that appointments could not be completed before the election, attributing the delay to his prolonged refusal. A subsequent June ruling required Levin to cooperate with Amit on senior-court appointments, though the court stopped short of mandating action on the four Supreme Court seats, which require a super-majority of seven of nine committee members.
Outlook for the Judiciary
While the recent cohort expands lower-court capacity, the judiciary still faces staffing shortfalls at the Supreme Court level and ongoing political friction over appointment authority. The High Court’s orders aim to alleviate district-court shortages, but the broader dispute over the selection committee’s structure and the pending Supreme Court vacancies remain unresolved.