Connect with us

News

Israeli hostage families protest as Benjamin Netanyahu rejects Gaza truce

Published

on

Israeli hostage families protest as Benjamin Netanyahu rejects Gaza truce

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Relatives of Israeli hostages held in Gaza have protested and pitched their tents outside Benjamin Netanyahu’s house in Jerusalem after the Israeli prime minister rejected Hamas’s latest terms for their release.

On Sunday night, demonstrators holding placards and wearing T-shirts with messages including “Bring them home now!” called for the return of the roughly 130 hostages still held by Hamas, before camping outside Netanyahu’s residence.

The demonstration shows the mounting frustration among families of the hostages — who have now been held in Gaza for 108 days — and came shortly after Netanyahu issued a video in which he said he “utterly” rejected Hamas’s latest demands for freeing them.

Advertisement

“Hamas is demanding, in exchange for the release of our hostages, the end of the war, the withdrawal of our forces from Gaza, the release of the murders and rapists of the Nukhba [the Hamas unit that led the October 7 attack on Israel] and leaving Hamas in place,” Netanyahu said.

“Were we to agree to this, our soldiers would have fallen in vain.”

According to Israeli officials, Hamas captured about 250 hostages during their October 7 attack on Israel that killed 1,200 people and triggered the war.

In November, Hamas released 110 of the hostages as part of a deal mediated by Qatar, under which Israel and Hamas also agreed to a temporary ceasefire. In return, Israel allowed more aid into Gaza and freed 240 Palestinian women and children held in Israeli prisons.

However, the fragile truce collapsed on December 2, and Israel resumed its offensive in Gaza, which has now killed more than 25,000 people, according to Palestinian officials, and displaced 1.9mn of the enclave’s 2.3mn inhabitants.

Advertisement

The latest effort to revive the hostage talks, led by Qatar, the US and Egypt, has focused on negotiating a “multiphase” agreement between Israel and Hamas that would include a longer truce, the release of all the hostages, and increased humanitarian aid into the devastated Gaza Strip.

The aim would be to use the truce to negotiate a permanent ceasefire, which Hamas is insisting on as part of any deal, according to a person familiar with the talks. The militant group had agreed to a multi-month temporary truce, but Israel was demanding a shorter timeframe, the person said. “It’s a back and forth between the parties,” the person said. 

Israel’s war cabinet, which has overall responsibility for its campaign in Gaza, is split over the best way to bring home the hostages.

In a television interview broadcast last week, Gadi Eisenkot, one of the war cabinet’s five members, said it was time to “say bravely that it is impossible to return the hostages alive in the near future without an agreement [with Hamas]”, and that Israel should consider halting the fighting for a “significant” period of time as part of any such deal.

However, Netanyahu and defence minister Yoav Gallant have repeatedly argued that they believe the only way to bring the hostages home is by maintaining intense military pressure on Hamas.

Advertisement

Netanyahu reiterated this stance on Sunday, saying that “only total victory will ensure the elimination of Hamas and the return of all our hostages”.

He also insisted that once the war in Gaza was over he would demand “full Israeli security control of all territory west of the Jordan River” and would continue to resist the establishment of a Palestinian state, despite mounting international pressure for a two-state solution to the conflict.

“My insistence is what has prevented — over the years — the establishment of a Palestinian state that would have constituted an existential danger to Israel,” he said. “As long as I am prime minister, I will continue to strongly insist on this.”

News

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

Published

on

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

The Supreme Court

Win McNamee/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Win McNamee/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.    
  
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.  
  
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.  
  
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.   
 
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits. 
  
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices  summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.” 
 
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced. 
 
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor  said that  if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.” 

Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.  
  
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow.  Earlier last month  the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map.  California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.     
   
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district.  Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.    
     
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?    
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.   

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Published

on

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown.  All times on the map are Pacific time. The New York Times

A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.

As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.

Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

Published

on

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

The U.S. and Israel have been conducting strikes against targets in Iran since Saturday morning, with the aim of toppling Tehran’s clerical regime. Iran has fired back, with retaliatory assaults featuring missiles and drones targeting several Gulf countries and American bases in the Middle East.

“All six aircrew ejected safely, have been safely recovered, and are in stable condition. Kuwait has acknowledged this incident, and we are grateful for the efforts of the Kuwaiti defense forces and their support in this ongoing operation,” Central Command said.

“The cause of the incident is under investigation. Additional information will be released as it becomes available,” it added.

In a separate statement later Monday, Central Command said that American forces had been killed during combat since the strikes began.

“As of 7:30 am ET, March 2, four U.S. service members have been killed in action. The fourth service member, who was seriously wounded during Iran’s initial attacks, eventually succumbed to their injuries,” it said.

Advertisement

Major combat operations continue and our response effort is ongoing. The identities of the fallen are being withheld until 24 hours after next of kin notification,” Central Command added.

This story has been updated.

Continue Reading

Trending