President Donald Trump on Thursday praised a federal court decision rejecting a lawsuit that sought to block construction of a new ballroom at the White House, describing the outcome as “great news for America.”
In a message posted on social media, Trump wrote that the judge had “thrown out, and completely erased, the effort to stop its construction” of what he called “the most beautiful Ballroom anywhere in the World.”
The president stressed that “not one dollar of Taxpayer money is being spent,” saying the initiative is financed solely by “Patriot Donors and Contributors.”
Trump added that the planned ballroom — which he has previously floated as a venue for future inaugurations and large-scale state functions — is “ahead of schedule, and under budget,” and said it would stand “as a symbol to the Greatness of America.”
Since it was first announced, the proposal has drawn debate. Opponents, including historic preservation advocates and ethics groups, have raised concerns that erecting a substantial new addition within the White House grounds could affect the historic nature of the executive residence, which is subject to federal preservation protections.
Backers of the project contend that constructing a permanent ballroom would eliminate the recurring need for temporary tents and off-site locations for major gatherings, enhance the White House’s ability to host official events and do so using private funding rather than public dollars.
{Matzav.com}
Three years after the passing of the longtime rov of Meron, Rav Elazar Stern has now been formally appointed as the official rav of Meron, succeeding his father, Rav Meir Zev Stern zt”l, who led the community for decades.
Rav Elazar was confirmed in the role today in an official capacity, solidifying what had already been his practical leadership in recent years.
For many years, Rav Stern has served as a respected posek and dayan, recognized for his clear rulings and depth in Torah scholarship. He is the author of the widely regarded seforim Gan Na’eh and the responsa work Birkas Elazar.
While residing in Ashdod, he served as rav of the Ma’orei Or community. Following his father’s passing, and in accordance with his father’s wishes, he relocated to Meron, where he continued serving in rabbinic leadership and halachic guidance for residents and visitors alike.
With today’s decision, the appointment has now received formal confirmation from the Meron Moshav committee, granting official status to Rav Stern’s role as rav of the sacred site.
{Matzav.com}
The Knesset’s legal department issued a sharp warning Thursday that a proposed amendment to Basic Law: The Government — dubbed the “Ben Gvir Law” — could be invalidated by the High Court of Justice if enacted in its current form.
In a preparatory document circulated to members of the special committee reviewing amendments to the Basic Law, the Knesset’s legal adviser wrote that the bill’s attempt to bar judicial review over the appointment and dismissal of ministers may exceed constitutional boundaries set by the Supreme Court. The adviser cautioned that the proposal could be viewed as personal legislation and potentially deemed an abuse of the Knesset’s constituent authority under standards established in recent rulings.
According to the draft under consideration, courts would be prohibited from exercising judicial review over the appointment or removal of ministers, aside from verifying compliance with formal eligibility requirements set by law. In practical terms, this would eliminate judicial scrutiny of the prime minister’s discretion and remove from the court’s authority the precedent established in the Deri-Pinhasi ruling, which laid the groundwork for intervention in appointments considered extremely unreasonable.
The legal opinion states that a sweeping elimination of judicial oversight would conflict with warnings expressed in recent Supreme Court decisions, particularly the January 2024 ruling that struck down the amendment canceling the reasonableness doctrine. In that case, a majority of justices held that the court retains authority to intervene in exceptional cases involving misuse of constituent power. The document notes that several senior justices indicated that a narrower amendment — for example, one that limits application of the reasonableness doctrine specifically in the context of ministerial appointments — might have been considered differently than a broad measure barring all forms of review.
The legal department warned that the current wording could undermine foundational principles of separation of powers and the rule of law because it “leaves entire areas without effective judicial review” and hampers the protection of important public interests, including public trust and governmental integrity.
Beyond the substantive concerns, the legal office also pointed to constitutional and political timing issues. Renewed efforts to advance the bill could place it in direct tension with the Supreme Court’s doctrine of “abuse of constituent authority,” as articulated in the ruling on incapacity legislation. The document highlights that in light of Justice Stein’s ruling regarding Aryeh Deri, as well as the conditional order issued in a petition asking the court to instruct the prime minister to dismiss National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, there is heightened concern that the amendment may be aimed at producing immediate consequences for specific political figures. Under the framework set by the court, such circumstances could support a claim that the Knesset is not acting as a general constituent authority but rather tailoring a Basic Law to address a present political need.
Among the alternatives suggested by the legal department is adopting a more limited model that would restrict judicial review only with respect to the reasonableness doctrine, particularly in cases where appointments have also been approved by the Knesset, while preserving the possibility of review on other legal grounds. Another option under consideration is prospective application — delaying the amendment’s effect until the next Knesset — a step that could mitigate claims of personal legislation and avoid the appearance of altering constitutional rules midstream.
The legal adviser further recommended strengthening parliamentary oversight mechanisms to prevent the creation of unchecked executive authority. Proposed measures include expanding the Knesset’s ability to hold individual votes on certain ministerial appointments during the swearing-in of a government; requiring presentation to the plenum of the circumstances surrounding a new minister’s appointment upon the request of 40 members of Knesset; and even establishing a structured process allowing the Knesset to remove a minister by majority vote after due proceedings and the opportunity for the minister to present arguments.
Deliberations on the proposal resumed after the Knesset Committee voted to reconstitute the special committee under Section 89 of the Knesset bylaws, enabling it to revisit language that had previously been prepared for second and third readings but never brought to a final vote. The legal department emphasized that nearly three years have passed since that draft was formulated and that significant constitutional rulings have since been issued, warranting a renewed review of the bill’s language and its compliance with judicial standards.
At the center of the debate is whether lawmakers will insist on advancing a sweeping amendment that would largely remove High Court involvement in ministerial appointments and dismissals, or instead adopt a more measured revision designed to reduce constitutional friction and increase the likelihood that the legislation would withstand judicial scrutiny if challenged.
{Matzav.com}The United States and Iran signaled meaningful movement on Thursday in negotiations aimed at resolving their long-running nuclear standoff and preventing potential American military action, with mediator Oman pointing to tangible progress even as Washington continues a major force buildup in the Middle East.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told state television that the discussions “made very good progress and entered into the elements of an agreement very seriously, both in the nuclear field and in the sanctions field.”
He indicated that another round of talks could be held in “perhaps less than a week,” and said technical-level meetings at the UN’s nuclear agency are expected to begin in Vienna on Monday.
A US official characterized the atmosphere of the negotiations to Axios as “positive.”
Those optimistic descriptions stood in contrast to earlier accounts suggesting American frustration with Tehran’s stance, as well as anonymous comments from senior Israeli officials to Hebrew-language media asserting that the divide between the parties appeared to be widening and that the prospect of a US strike was increasing.
At the same time, The Wall Street Journal offered a more cautious interpretation Thursday evening, reporting that the two sides remained “still far apart on key issues.”
The reason for the differing portrayals was not immediately evident.
Following the conclusion of the meetings in Switzerland, Omani Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Albusaidi wrote on X that both delegations intend to reconvene after consultations in their respective capitals, with expert-level sessions slated for Vienna next week.
Albusaidi’s remarks came after indirect negotiations in Geneva between Araghchi and US envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, with one round held in the morning and another in the afternoon.
“We have finished the day after significant progress in the negotiation between the United States and Iran,” Badr Albusaidi said.
Araghchi, describing the exchange as among the most substantive contacts between Tehran and Washington in recent years, told Iranian state television: “We reached agreement on some issues, and there are differences regarding some other issues.”
“It was decided that the next round of negotiations will take place soon, in less than a week,” he said, adding that Tehran had made clear its demand for relief from sanctions.
The US negotiating team did not immediately issue a public statement on the outcome.
Axios had earlier reported that Witkoff and Kushner were “disappointed” with Iran’s posture after the morning session, but by day’s end, a source told the outlet that the overall tenor was “positive.”
According to Axios and other reports, the talks — facilitated by Albusaidi and attended by UN nuclear watchdog chief Rafael Grossi — extended for several hours and involved a mix of direct and indirect communication.
Israel’s Channel 12 reported that Iran proposed limiting uranium enrichment to medical purposes, halting broader nuclear activity for a set period, and later resuming enrichment under a regulated regional framework.
The US position, according to the same report, calls for an agreement with no expiration date.
Channel 12 further reported that Washington would allow low-level enrichment at a research reactor in Tehran but is demanding the dismantling of Iran’s other nuclear facilities and the removal of all enriched uranium from the country.
That description of American demands closely aligned with The Wall Street Journal’s account.
The renewed diplomatic push comes amid mounting anxiety over a possible regional escalation. President Donald Trump has repeatedly warned that failure to secure a deal could trigger military action, and US forces have been deployed in significant numbers to nearby waters.
The decision to set another negotiating session suggests that both sides see sufficient progress to continue talks, potentially delaying previously threatened strikes. However, a similar round of discussions scheduled by Omani mediators in June 2025 never occurred after Jerusalem, with American backing, initiated operations targeting Iran’s nuclear and missile infrastructure.
Thursday’s meetings marked the third round of US-Iran nuclear discussions in recent weeks.
The delegations first met for roughly three hours before breaking. During the initial session, Iranian representatives presented a draft framework for an agreement, Axios reported.
During the recess, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei told state television that “both delegations needed to carry out consultations with their respective capitals.”
An Iranian official speaking to Al Jazeera during the pause said Tehran’s negotiators had rejected demands for complete dismantlement of the nuclear program and the export of all enriched uranium.
“Our proposal in Geneva is politically serious, technically creative, and includes everything required to reach an agreement immediately,” the Iranian official told the Qatari network.
Iran, which denies pursuing nuclear weapons but has enriched uranium to levels exceeding civilian requirements and limited inspections of its facilities, has consistently opposed calls to end enrichment altogether.
Tehran has also insisted that discussions be confined to its nuclear activities and sanctions relief. The United States, however, has sought to broaden the agenda to include Iran’s ballistic missile development and its backing of armed groups across the region.
A senior Iranian official told Reuters before the talks that progress toward a framework agreement would be possible if Washington separated “nuclear and non-nuclear issues,” though he cautioned that significant gaps would still need to be addressed during this third round.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Wednesday that Iran’s unwillingness to negotiate over its missile program presents a “big problem” that ultimately must be resolved. The missiles, he said, were “designed solely to strike America” and threaten stability in the region.
{Matzav.com}
Pro-Palestinian groups, working together with a range of civil society organizations, have unveiled plans for a new maritime convoy bound for the Gaza Strip, describing it as a major effort to challenge Israel’s naval blockade and deliver humanitarian supplies.
Organizers say the flotilla is set to leave on April 12 from multiple Mediterranean ports in Spain, Italy, and Tunisia. Its stated objective is to breach the blockade imposed on Gaza and transport assistance directly to the coastal enclave.
According to a report by Al-Arabi Al-Jadid, more than 200 boats are expected to take part in the initiative. The effort is being backed by the “Mavi Marmara” Freedom and Solidarity Association as well as the Turkish İHH Foundation, a humanitarian group that says it is dedicated to safeguarding freedoms, defending human rights, and providing relief aid.
Bülent Yıldırım, president of the İHH Foundation, told the newspaper that the ships designated for the flotilla will be acquired through donated funds. He indicated that organizers intend to assemble a substantial number of vessels in an effort to complicate any attempt by Israel to block their arrival along the Gaza shoreline.
Yıldırım further stated that participants from 150 countries — numbering in the thousands — are expected to join the mission. In addition to carrying supplies, the flotilla aims to bring medical professionals, educators, infrastructure and environmental development teams, attorneys, and investigators focused on alleged war crimes.
A similar attempt last October ended when the Israeli Navy intercepted vessels linked to the “Freedom Coalition” flotilla that sought to reach Gaza. Approximately 150 individuals aboard those ships were detained without incident and taken to the port of Ashdod, where they underwent questioning before being deported.
At the time, Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a statement declaring, “Another futile attempt to break the maritime blockade and enter a combat zone has ended in nothing.”
{Matzav.com}
President Donald Trump met Thursday at the White House with New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, in an unannounced session that centered on housing policy and, later, the detention of a Columbia University student by federal immigration authorities.
Mamdani disclosed the meeting in a social media post, writing, “I had a productive meeting with President Trump this afternoon,” and sharing a photograph of himself beside the president in the Oval Office.
In the image, Trump is seen holding a mock-up of a Daily News front page bearing the headline: “Trump to City: Let’s Rebuild.” Mamdani added in his post, “I’m looking forward to building more housing in New York City.”
Hours after the sit-down, Mamdani said he and Trump also spoke by phone about a Columbia University student who had been taken into custody earlier in the day. According to university officials, federal immigration agents allegedly misrepresented themselves in order to gain access to a campus residential building before detaining the student, identified as Elaina Aghayeva.
Mamdani wrote, “In our meeting earlier, I shared my concerns about Columbia student Elaina Aghayeva, who was detained by ICE this morning. He has just informed me that she will be released imminently.” Aghayeva later confirmed on social media that she had been freed.
The Oval Office meeting followed Trump’s remarks earlier in the week during his State of the Union address, when he referenced Mamdani as a “nice guy” with “bad policies” and said the two speak “a lot”. The mayor responded the next day at a press conference, saying that when they communicate, their discussions center on ensuring the city continues to move forward.
Neither the White House nor City Hall publicly previewed Thursday’s meeting. Earlier in the day, CNN reported that the president and mayor were expected to meet, citing two individuals familiar with the arrangements. Housing was anticipated to be a central issue, as it had been during their prior White House meeting in November.
At that earlier session, Trump commended Mamdani and suggested that despite having branded him a “communist” during the mayoral race, they shared areas of agreement. Their conversation reportedly covered real estate development, adjustments to zoning regulations, and strategies aimed at lowering electricity costs, among other matters.
Following that encounter, Axios reported that the two leaders had begun communicating by text message — a surprising development given their previous sharp public exchanges.
During the mayoral campaign, Trump cautioned voters that choosing Mamdani would “ruin the city, while Mamdani had called Trump a fascist. Once face to face, however, their interactions took on a markedly different tone.
