
Israeli Parliament Votes for Making Apartheid Official. Fetterman: 'I Haven't Been Following It.'
'I haven't been following it closely,' said Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., who's made defending Israel a key part of his political career.
The response was one of a mixed bag among both Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill interviewed by The Intercept, but Fetterman's tone was the most strident in its lack of regard.
Despite its most powerful ally and arms dealer's stated preference for a two-state solution, Israel's Parliament voted overwhelmingly in favor of a symbolic measure to annex the occupied West Bank on Wednesday.
The nonbinding resolution, which was advanced by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's coalition and passed 71-13 in the Knesset, won't legally change the reality in the West Bank — but it marks an escalation in the Israeli government's efforts to annex the territory.
Four Democrats in the Senate and House who spoke to The Intercept condemned the Israeli government's vote. Others said they hadn't been following the issue. Fetterman was one of three senators who told The Intercept on Thursday they were unaware of the Knesset vote. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, declined to comment.
The resolution in the Knesset, or Parliament, called to apply 'Israeli sovereignty, law, judgment and administration to all the areas of Jewish settlement of all kinds in Judea, Samaria and the Jordan Valley' — which is how most Israelis refer to the West Bank.
Currently, 3 million Palestinians reside in the West Bank, alongside over 500,000 Israeli settlers, who've established settlements in the occupied territory in violation of international law.
Annexation of the West Bank would be at odds with the U.S. official policy goal for two states — one for Palestinians in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, and one state for Israel comprising its pre-1967 borders.
The two-state solution has won official backing from successive presidents dating back to the late 1990s — except for Donald Trump — to assuage concerns over Israel having permanent control over millions of Palestinians without full civil rights.
Though the conditions already exist — there is a growing consensus that Israel in an apartheid state — making this control officially permanent would make apartheid indisputable.
Both Democratic and Republican administrations have repeatedly undermined the possibility of a two-state solution by arming Israel as it continues to attack Palestinian people and seize their territory, which lawmakers in Congress have made excuses for.
As public sentiment turns against Israel, however, with voters increasingly opposing the Netanyahu government's genocide in Gaza, some members of Congress have been more willing to criticize the Israeli regime.
Read our complete coverage
Though President Joe Biden claimed to be interested in a two-state solution, his administration continued policies such as keeping the U.S. Embassy in occupied Jerusalem, which experts view as undermining the possibility of an independent Palestinian state that includes the West Bank.
In his second term, Trump escalated his efforts to thwart the possibility of a sovereign Palestinian state. On Thursday, State Department deputy spokesperson Tommy Pigott told reporters during a press briefing that the U.S. would not be attending a United Nations conference on a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine. And Trump has repeatedly called for Palestinians in Gaza to be relocated and for the region to be turned into a luxury resort.
Fetterman's response to the vote stood in stark contrast to the four other Democratic members of Congress.
'The Knesset's vote to symbolically annex the West Bank is not just reckless — it's a betrayal of the values that have long underpinned America's support for Israel. I've visited the West Bank. I've spoken with people whose lives are shaped by fear and violence,' wrote Rep. Mark Takano, D-Calif., in a statement. 'A negotiated two‑state solution is the only path to lasting peace and true security for both Israelis and Palestinians. This vote rejects that path.'
Sen. Bernie Sanders I-Vt., on the other hand, told The Intercept that now is the time for the U.S. to push back on Netanyahu's government's 'racist, reactionary' policies.
'Israel is now run by right-wing extremists who are in Gaza starving children and shooting people lining up for food, and now in the West Bank, we've seen vigilantism,' said Sanders. 'I think the time is now for the United States government to make clear that we are not going to continue to support these racist, reactionary policies of the Netanyahu government.'
Sen. Tim Kaine. D-Va., argued that this would harm peace talks and threaten long-term regional stability.
'It's going to hurt Israel in the long run,' said Kaine. 'You got a peace discussion that's going on right now where Arab nations are saying we want to be peaceful partners with our neighbor, Israel. But this also means that we need to have a future for Palestine as was promised to Palestinians in the U.N. resolution in 1947, and we're not willing to find this regional peace unless you agree to do that.'
Kaine argued that the Knesset vote further isolates Israel in the region.
'It looks like the Knesset is just shutting the door in the face of Arab partners who want to try to work together to promote regional stability,' he said. 'There is a credible opportunity for Israel to be less isolated in the neighborhood, but a vote like this makes it harder, not easier.'
Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Ill., told The Intercept that the vote speaks to the broader 'endgame' for the Netanyahu administration.
'For Netanyahu and his administration, annexation and control have always been the endgame,' said Ramirez, in a statement. 'We must end the U.S.'s complicity in the Netanyahu Administration's regime of terror. Congress must do its oversight job, demand an end to the blockade and pass Block the Bombs.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Politico
9 minutes ago
- Politico
Texas AG Paxton will try to expel Texas Democrats if they don't return by Friday
The legal process to remove the lawmakers will likely take time. First, Paxton must file a case against each individual absent Democrat in various district courts, a process that would surely lead to appeals and could drag out long beyond the end of the special session on Aug. 19. Even if Paxton succeeds in getting them removed, Gov. Greg Abbott would need to call for special elections to fill the seats, according to Texas law, which says that 'an unexpired term in office may be filled only by a special election.' Paxton issued a nonbinding legal opinion in 2021 during Democrats' last quorum break, which Republican Gov. Greg Abbott cited on Monday while also accusing the lawmakers 'absconded from their responsibility.' In that opinion, Paxton took no position on whether breaking quorum is constitutional. He also declined to say whether fleeing Democrats could or should be removed from office. Rather, he called it a 'fact question for a court' that he said was beyond the scope of his office to decide. He noted instead that he could file what are known as 'quo warranto actions' in court, asking a judge to determine whether the missing lawmakers had officially vacated their seats. When Abbott made the same argument on Monday, Democrats responded simply: 'Come and take it.' Democrats have fled Texas to blue strongholds like Illinois, New York and Massachusetts in order to prevent the legislature from voting on a recently-drawn congressional map — pushed by President Donald Trump — that would give the GOP five more friendly seats ahead of next year's midterms. 'Democrats are going to fight this tooth and nail and until the will of the voters is respected,' Democratic National Committee chair Ken Martin said during a press conference on Tuesday. 'This is not the Democratic Party of your grandfather, which would bring a pencil to the knife fight. This is a new Democratic Party. We're bringing a knife to a knife fight.' The Texas Constitution allows for quorum-breaking, and lawmakers and legal experts alike were quick to dismiss Paxton's claims that Democrats had abandoned their positions. Kyle Cheney and Shia Kapos contributed to this report.


New York Post
10 minutes ago
- New York Post
Mayor Adams' misguided answer to gun violence: Letters to the Editor — Aug. 6, 2025
The Issue: Mayor Adams' Post column on gun availability and violence after the Midtown shooting. Mayor Adams says the problem is the availability of illegal guns to those that want them, but the gun that was used in the shooting last week was purchased legally ('Combating gun violence in the wake of tragedy,' Aug. 3). I agree with the mayor that we need to get criminals and illegal guns off the street. I also recognize that his hands are tied. But the problem is a result of the ridiculous bail laws and criminal-justice reforms, which starts with Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie and the rest in Albany. Advertisement Also, useless Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg allows a turnstile of recidivism for criminals to avoid going to jail. Until these people are voted out, the insane cycle will continue. Rob Cerone Manhattan Advertisement Hey Mayor Adams: Look no further than your Democratic allies in Albany for the continuing gun violence in New York City. Gov. Hochul, Speaker Heastie and others refuse to fix bail reform. The governor's Parole Board continues to release cop-killers, child rapists and murderers. Just as Adams refused to blame then-President Joe Biden for the open-border fiasco, he refuses to blame his fellow Dems for continued violence. Mike Lapinga Advertisement Staten Island An armed, law-abiding citizen is an asset to the community. That's why we have the right to bear arms. In his essay, Mayor Adams makes the argument that lax gun laws in states like mine are responsible for gun violence in states like his. Therefore, in his mind, we must have stricter gun laws on a national basis. However, a little research will show that the correlation between strict gun laws and violent crime is not a particularly strong one — whereas the correlation between high crime and Democrat-run cities is strikingly good. Advertisement It seems to me that the best way to decrease all violence is to make an effort to eliminate Democrats in government. We're doing our part in Oklahoma. How about you, New York? Lonnie Kennedy Oklahoma City, Okla. Why did you publish Mayor Adams' gun-violence essay? I'll be snapping a picture and posting it for President Donald Trump to see. Maybe if he sees it and calls The Post out, it'll quit using the term gun violence. It's all violence — whether it's a knife, a baseball bat or fists. James Schwartz Summit, NJ The Issue: A rise in marijuana-addicted treatment patients since New York legalized weed. Advertisement The CEO of Camelot Counseling proved himself an imbecile by uttering that legalizing cannabis is one of the stupidest things our society has done ('Weed addicts are growing,' Aug. 4). First: People would be consuming it anyway. Second: When buying from a licensed dispensary, you know what you're getting, purity-wise. It's not a 'gateway drug' for anyone with willpower. Joseph Cesare Advertisement Copiague Just what New York City needs: More high people with very little purpose in life. Marijuana is a gateway drug, with users always looking for a stronger high. The legalization of pot is another progressive policy hurting everyday citizens. J.R. Cummings Advertisement Manhattan Did the morons who passed the law to legalize marijuana not know there were scores of people just waiting for this so they could buy it as if they were buying candy? We are destroying humans because certain politicians wanted to be loved and voted for again. I hope they're hanging their heads in shame because of what they have done to people. Bunny Abraham Advertisement Manhattan Want to weigh in on today's stories? Send your thoughts (along with your full name and city of residence) to letters@ Letters are subject to editing for clarity, length, accuracy, and style.


Buzz Feed
10 minutes ago
- Buzz Feed
Rachel Maddow Calls Out Trump's Authoritarian Moves
Hot Topic 🔥 Full coverage and conversation on Politics MSNBC's Rachel Maddow says Americans no longer have to fear potential authoritarianism in their own country, because 'we are there' already — and cited President Donald Trump 's widespread immigration raids, detainments without probable cause, and use of military force. 'We have crossed a line,' she said on The Rachel Maddow Show, Monday. 'We are in a place we did not want to be, but we are there. The thing we were all warning about for the last few years is not coming, it is here. We are in it. This is what [it's] like, it turns out.' Maddow argued that large swaths of the country might easily overlook this downward slide, as movies are still being produced, sports continue to be played, and families are still discussing the same old issues they always have around their kitchen table each night. 'But also, at the same time, life in the United States is profoundly changing,' Maddow added Monday. 'It's profoundly different than it was even six months ago, because we do now live in a country that has an authoritarian leader in charge.' She then put it even more bluntly: 'We have a consolidating dictatorship in our country.' While the MSNBC host went on to acknowledge that this might sound 'melodramatic,' Maddow noted the US now seems to have its own 'secret police,' which is commonplace across dictatorships, in the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency under Trump. 'A massive, anonymous, unbadged — literally masked — totally unaccountable internal police force that apparently has infinite funding but no identifiable leadership,' said Maddow. 'And they act in ways designed to instill maximum fear and use maximum force.' Maddow continued: 'I mean, when you imagine an authoritarian country, what you imagine is masked secret police breaking people's car windows and snatching people off the streets and out of church parking lots and courtroom hallways and taking them away with no charges, no notice, no paperwork, no explanation, not letting them see lawyers and then moving them secretly to what are effectively black site prisons where they won't tell you who's there and where no one's allowed in to see what's going on.' Experts have already warned that one such prison, Florida's immigrant detention camp that Republicans have dubbed ' Alligator Alcatraz,' is 'a human rights disaster waiting to happen.' Democratic lawmakers initially blocked from visiting were finally granted access last month and confirmed its horrid conditions. The president has justified nationwide crackdowns on undocumented workers, as well as the detainment, arrest, and deportation of college students and professors across the US, as necessary protection against supposedly violent and anti-American immigrants. Maddow argued it won't stop there, however, and that the US military in multiple states has already 'extended the legal boundaries of nearby military bases' by hundreds of miles 'so they can give active duty US troops the power to arrest and search people on US soil.' 'We are not heading toward something like this,' Maddow said Monday. 'We are there. It is here. It is the environment in which we are now living. And so, given that you now live in a country with an authoritarian leader, the question is: What can you do for your country?'