Supreme Court President Isaac Amit warned on Monday that public discourse surrounding Israel’s judiciary had reached an “unprecedented low,” saying that incitement, fake news, and personal attacks on judges were being normalized and had begun to threaten the court system’s ability to function.
Speaking at the Israel Bar Association’s annual conference in Eilat, Amit said the danger was not only in individual statements against judges, but in a broader process in which language and conduct that once would have been seen as extreme were becoming routine.
“The public discourse regarding the judicial system is at an unprecedented low point,” Amit said. “We are witnessing a dangerous process of normalization - normalization of incitement, of defamation, of the spread of fake news, and of personal attacks on judges.”
He said that the situation had reached the point where some judges were afraid to answer phone calls from unknown numbers out of fear of threats and harassment.
“This is not only harm to judges as individuals,” he said. “It is a direct blow to the judicial system’s ability to fulfill its role and to public trust in the rule of law.”
The speech came amid one of the sharpest clashes in years between the judiciary and Justice Minister Yariv Levin, a day after the High Court of Justice unanimously ordered Levin to convene the Judicial Selection Committee to fill vacancies in district courts, with priority given to Beersheba and Haifa. The court said that Levin’s refusal to convene the committee for approximately a year and a half, absent broad agreement on candidates, had contributed to a severe shortage of judges across the system.
Levin rejected the ruling as illegal and accused the justices of creating an unprecedented constitutional crisis. The court ordered him to publish candidate lists in the government’s official gazette by June 8 to allow the required 45-day period before the committee can vote.
Erosion of line between fact, falsehood
Against that backdrop, Amit focused his remarks on what he called the erosion of the boundary between fact and falsehood, warning that false claims about the courts could become a direct threat to democratic institutions.
“When judges are afraid to answer the phone for fear of threats and harassment, that is a warning light for Israeli democracy,” Amit said. “The incitement, fake news, and personal attacks on the judicial system no longer remain in the public sphere - they seep into the personal lives of judges and threaten their independence and the rule of law as a whole.”
Amit cited several examples of what he described as false claims repeatedly directed at the judiciary, focusing in particular on the claim that the High Court intervened in IDF open-fire rules near the Gaza border.
The claim, which has resurfaced in recent public debate, refers to High Court petitions filed in 2018 against the IDF’s rules of engagement during mass violent disturbances along the Gaza border fence. Amit said the claim that the court had restricted the IDF’s open-fire rules was false.
“The court did not order the IDF to change even a comma in the open-fire regulations,” Amit said. “The court accepted the IDF’s position in full, and determined that the open-fire regulations properly address the danger of violent incidents, and that the implementation of those regulations is subject to the discretion of commanders in the field.”
The 2018 petitions, filed by human rights organizations, challenged the legality of the IDF’s rules of engagement during the Gaza border protests. The High Court unanimously rejected the petitions, leaving operational implementation to commanders, while the rules themselves remained classified.
Amit addresses 'self-appointment' claim
Amit also addressed the claim that he “chose himself” to become Supreme Court president, saying that his appointment was made by the Judicial Selection Committee under its legal authority and that he did not participate in the vote.
“The truth is simple,” Amit said. “My election to the position of president was made by the Judicial Selection Committee, which was adopted pursuant to its authority.”
Amit said Levin knew about the committee meeting and agreed to its convening, but chose not to attend and later denied responsibility for the result.
“The minister chose to hold the stick at both ends: not to attend the meeting himself, and afterward to deny any involvement in the election of the president of the Supreme Court,” Amit said.
Levin rejected Amit’s remarks, saying, “Someone who was elected lawfully does not need to explain so much that this was the case.”
“Only someone who knows that his ‘election’ was done unlawfully needs endless explanations and excuses,” Levin said.
He accused Amit of showing “deep contempt for enormous segments of the public” and said that Amit, “with arrogance, tramples the people’s decision and the status of the government and the Knesset.”
“But he, too, knows there is one thing that cannot be forced on the public by any order - trust,” Levin said. “The public does not believe him and does not recognize him.”
Levin has refused to recognize Amit as Supreme Court president since the committee selected him in January 2025, following a separate High Court ruling that required Levin to convene the committee to choose a permanent president.
Amit said the broader danger was that fake claims about courts and other democratic institutions could create grounds for refusal to obey binding rulings and, eventually, violence.
“Many of those who use fake news do not do so by mistake, but with the purpose of eroding the value of truth,” Amit said. “In the language of our time: gentlemen, this is not a bug, it is a feature.”
From there, he said, the road is short to denial of binding judgments, disregard for legal obligations, and, potentially, the use of force to resolve disputes.
“The fake prepares the ground; incitement sows the seeds; and violence grows wild,” Amit said.
Still, Amit said the judiciary would not be deterred.
“We will not fear, we will not be intimidated, and we will not be cowed by anyone,” he said. “We will continue to stand guard over the rule of law and the values of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state.”