Trump wants to control the Israeli judiciary. Uh, good luck
Here’s what the president has wrong about the case against Netanyahu
President Donald Trump delivers remarks in the Oval Office at the White House on June 27. Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images
Columnist Dan Perry June 29, 2025
Dear President Trump,
In your weekend Truth Social posts about the trial of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, you described the case as “insanity” and a “political witch hunt.” You mocked the charges against Netanyahu, which involve serious allegations of corruption, and warned that the United States “won’t stand for this,” linking the trial to the U.S. aid to Israel and called for it to end.
Respectfully, your understanding of the case is wrong. The many charges against Netanyahu include bribery, fraud and breach of public trust. In Case 4000, the most serious, Netanyahu is accused of granting regulatory favors worth hundreds of millions of dollars to the telecom giant Bezeq in exchange for favorable coverage on its news site, Walla.
This is not a triviality, as you suggest. It’s systemic abuse of power — an alleged fusion of media manipulation and corporate favoritism to serve personal and political goals. Beyond the misbehavior detailed in Case 4000, the gifts Netanyahu is alleged to have received — and demanded — are worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.
When the charges were filed in 2019, there was an intense national debate about whether a criminal defendant could serve as prime minister. Cabinet ministers and mayors cannot do so under Israeli law. The question reached the Supreme Court, where Netanyahu successfully argued that he could both serve as prime minister and appear in court when required.
That commitment — his own argument — is part of why the court permitted his appointment as prime minister. It is now deeply hypocritical to suggest, as you do, that he should not be expected to show up for his own trial. And if, in fact, he cannot fulfill both obligations, the solution is not to cancel the trial, but rather for Netanyahu to step down, as the majority of the Israeli public would like. That’s called equality before the law.
You may believe that the U.S. president is above the law. But in Israel — as in all functioning democracies — the head of government is not.
That’s why Netanyahu aims to make Israel less democratic. Many feared that, as an inveterate schemer, he would attempt to gut the judiciary in order to escape prosecution. In 2020, to reassure the public and the courts, and to gain the court’s approval to hold office, Netanyahu submitted a sworn affidavit promising to recuse himself from any involvement in judicial matters while his trial was ongoing.
That promise didn’t last.
On Jan. 4, 2023, just days after Netanyahu successfully formed a governing coalition after a brief period in the opposition, his justice minister, Yariv Levin, unveiled a so-called “judicial reform” plan that would have placed the judiciary under near-total control of the executive branch. It would have enabled the coalition to appoint judges, override Supreme Court rulings with a bare majority, and strip the courts of their power to review government actions.
It would certainly have made it possible to cancel Netanyahu’s trial — a reshaping of the justice system to serve one man’s political survival.
Given your own posture toward the American judiciary, you might think there’s nothing wrong with that. But to Israelis, who understand their Supreme Court is the country’s only meaningful check on government power, Netanyahu’s attempt to dismantle it while on trial for bribery was scandalizing.
As to your threat that the U.S. might withhold aid over the trial — well, that’s blackmail. It sounds more like a mafia tactic than a legitimate use of foreign policy. It’s only right to remind you that U.S. aid to Israel is designed to advance shared strategic and security interests, and the U.S. will suffer if Israel is not able to uphold its side of that bargain.
But here’s the fundamental issue: No matter how much aid the U.S. gives Israel, its judiciary owes no loyalty to Washington, and it should not be swayed by pressure, threats, or personal loyalty tests.
Now, you’re right about one thing: the trial, approaching five years with more to go, has taken far too long. But that’s in large part due to Netanyahu’s own delay tactics. His legal team has filed endless procedural motions, challenged evidence repeatedly, inflated witness lists, and sought every possible postponement. It’s a deliberate strategy to wear down the system, confuse the public, and deflate momentum. Rather than cancelling the trial, no further chicaneries should be allowed.
There’s speculation that your sudden interest in Netanyahu’s legal troubles is tied to a broader plan — that you’re trying to gain leverage to push him into ending the war in Gaza. If that’s so, let me offer some free advice: You don’t need to “give” Netanyahu anything to make that happen. Israel cannot continue the war without American support. If you want peace, you already have the tools — without messing with Israel’s rule of law.
You obviously relish being a global disruptor. But violating the norm of democratic leaders not interfering in the judicial processes of allied democracies damages America’s credibility as a champion of democratic values — a credibility that is already not what it formerly was.
So, to sum it all up: Thank you for striking Iran’s nuclear program, good luck getting Netanyahu to end the currently useless war in Gaza — and please leave Israeli democracy alone.
