Hamas likely to respond positively to ceasefire proposal later on Friday, source tells 'Post'
Hamas's response to the proposed ceasefire and hostage deal will be delivered later on Friday to Israel, Egypt, and the United States via Qatar, a source familiar with the details told The Jerusalem Post.
The source estimates the response will be positive, with some points rewritten. These revisions are not expected to be deal-breakers.
Steve Witkoff representative Bishara Bahbah confirmed that Hamas will provide its response on Friday evening in a post to Facebook.
"Hamas will respond this evening to the Egyptian-Qatari ceasefire proposal, which Israel has accepted. I hope to hear good news this evening," Bahbah wrote.
This comes after Hamas confirmed early on Friday morning that it was discussing the US-Qatar ceasefire proposal with other Palestinian factions.
The terror group promised to announce the final decision after the meetings.
US President Donald Trump said on Thursday that he is expecting to know whether Hamas agreed to a ceasefire deal over the next 24 hours, Reuters reported.
The proposal, presented by Qatar and based on the Witkoff framework, calls for the release of 10 living hostages and 18 bodies during a 60-day ceasefire. During that period, the sides are expected to hold talks aimed at ending the war.
On Thursday, senior Hamas officials met in Turkey to discuss the proposed framework.
In exchange for the hostages, Israel would release 125 Palestinian prisoners in addition to 1,111 Gazans that Israel had arrested after October 7.
This is a developing story.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Trump says he will start talks with China on TikTok deal
President Donald Trump late Friday said that the United States 'pretty much has a deal' for an American company to acquire the U.S. branch of TikTok, adding that he intended to restart talks next week with China to approve the deal. 'We're going to start Monday or Tuesday talking to China,' Trump told reporters traveling on Air Force One on Friday night as it headed to Bedminster, New Jersey. 'We think we probably have to get it approved by China. Not definitely, but probably.' He added, 'I think the deal is good for China, and it's good for us. It's money, it's a lot of money.' Trump did not say who the potential buyer was. The president said earlier in the week that he had found a buyer for the U.S. branch of TikTok, the popular Chinese-owned video app that faces a ban adopted by Congress over national security concerns. A 2024 law required that the app effectively be banned in the United States unless its parent company, ByteDance, sold it to a non-Chinese company. Congress was concerned that sensitive user data could end up in the hands of the Chinese government. It was not clear if the deal would comply with some of the requirements Congress adopted for a sale of TikTok, particularly if ByteDance chose not to share the app's algorithm with the U.S. buyers. Private equity firms have been hesitant to invest in a deal without some form of indemnification. Trump has declined to enforce the law banning the app, which was passed by large bipartisan majorities and unanimously upheld by the Supreme Court. Shortly after being sworn in, Trump issued an executive order directing the Justice Department to suspend enforcement of the TikTok ban and has since repeatedly extended it. Attorney General Pam Bondi has told tech companies that Trump has the constitutional power to effectively set aside laws. This article originally appeared in The New York Times. Copyright 2025
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
The Supreme Court stripped judges of a powerful tool to fight Trump's autocracy. Congress must give it back.
But now they can't. Based on the Supreme Court's reading of a 1789 law, lower courts can now only take such action on specific cases before them, meaning that even clear-cut violations of the law could continue against those without the wherewithal to go to court. Advertisement Congress can and must correct this mistake. Lawmakers should pass legislation that protects judges' ability to provide robust equitable remedies when people's rights are threatened by legally or constitutionally dubious administration actions. Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Now, it's true that there have been problems with universal injunctions, and judges have sometimes misused them. But the court's ruling took a sledgehammer to a system that should have been fixed by Congress with a scalpel. And in the case of Trump, the ruling opens the door for him to strip birthright citizenship from American-born babies, continue whisking migrants to countries foreign to them with little notice and without due process, and engage in other actions that threaten people's rights and freedoms. Advertisement The court's 6-3 ideologically split opinion, authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, was based on the majority's interpretation of the Judiciary Act of 1789. The justices considered if the statute authorizes broad preliminary injunctions like that issued by Boston-based US District Court Justice Brian Murphy, which paused Trump's executive order to deny birthright citizenship to children born to some migrants. 'The answer is no,' Barrett wrote for the majority. Instead, the court held, challengers of the policy who have standing to bring suit can only obtain such preliminary relief for themselves. '[P]rohibiting enforcement of the Executive Order against the child of an individual pregnant plaintiff will give that plaintiff complete relief: Her child will not be denied citizenship,' Barrett wrote. 'And extending the injunction to cover everyone similarly situated would not render her relief any more complete.' This is untenable, and will only lead to a cruel game of judicial whack-a-mole that fails to provide adequate protection to those most imperiled by these policies. The onus should not fall on those who are targeted by these policies to fend for themselves. It should fall on the administration to show that it is acting in a lawful way. The court did just the opposite, holding that it is the administration that will likely suffer irreparable harm if courts dare to exercise their authority as a check on the executive. The overuse of universal injunctions has been an issue of increasing bipartisan concern, particularly since the Obama administration. In the last two decades, both the number of executive orders issued and the number of temporary injections blocking them have steadily ballooned. But the number of executive orders Trump has issued in his second term is without historical precedent, even exceeding Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who issued a flurry of edicts in an effort to implement his New Deal agenda. Advertisement And many of Trump's orders are based on strained legal or constitutional arguments, such as the administration's claim that the 14th Amendment's birthright citizenship protection only extended to children of enslaved people, that the Alien Enemies Act allows migrants to be deported without due process, or that the Immigration and Nationality Act allows the government to send migrants to countries where they've never been and to which they have no connection. Judges must have the ability to decide when relief extending beyond named plaintiffs is warranted. Should there be limits on that power? Yes, and Congress can include them in its bill. It can also underscore that states can still seek statewide relief from policies they can demonstrate harm all of their residents, and ease the process for class actions to be formed at the earliest stages of litigation to give relief to groups of people who demonstrate a need for protection. Judges handling the flurry of Trump-related litigation need more tools, not fewer. It's lawmakers' duty to give those tools to them. The Supreme Court must also swiftly take up and decide the constitutional and legal questions presented by Trump's orders. The justices could have rejected the Trump administration's erroneously limited reading of the 14th Amendment's birthright citizenship protections, but opted instead to leave that question for another day. But given the risks of the order, there is no time like the present. And in the meantime, federal judges must do all they can to help challengers who will be harmed by Trump's policies. The Supreme Court did not tie judges' hands completely when it comes to equitable relief. Quick certification of class actions and swiftly granting relief to states that demonstrate the peril to their residents are among the arrows still in judges' quivers. They must use them. Advertisement We are not as bound or doomed by history as the Supreme Court's justices believe. The public needs to demand that members of the legislative and judiciary branches stand up and reclaim their powers to check a president who believes he is above the law and the Constitution. Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Defiance in Tehran as Khamenei makes appearance
They rose to their feet in ecstatic surprise, shouting "heydar, heydar" - a Shia victory chant. This was the first public appearance of their supreme leader since Israel began attacking their country. He emerged during evening prayers in his private compound. He said nothing but looked stern and resolute as he waved to the crowd. He has spent the last weeks sequestered in a bunker, it is assumed, for his safety following numerous death threats from Israel and the US. His re-emergence suggests a return to normality and a sense of defiance that we have witnessed here on the streets of Tehran too. Earlier, we had filmed as men in black marched through the streets of the capital to the sound of mournful chants and the slow beat of drums, whipping their backs with metal flails. This weekend they mark the Shia festival of Ashura as they have for 14 centuries. But this year has poignant significance for Iranians far more than most. The devout remember the betrayal and death of Imam Hussein as if it happened yesterday. We filmed men and women weeping as they worshipped at the Imamzadeh Saleh Shrine in northern Tehran. The armies of the Caliph Yazid killed the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad in the seventh-century Battle of Karbala. Shiite Muslims mark the anniversary every year and reflect on the virtue it celebrates, of resistance against oppression and injustice. But more so than ever in the wake of Israel and America's attacks on their country. The story is one of prevailing over adversity and deception. A sense of betrayal is keenly felt here among people and officials. Many Iranians believe they were lured into pursuing diplomacy as part of a ruse by the US. Iran believed it was making diplomatic progress in talks with America it hoped could lead to a deal. Then Israel launched its attacks and, instead of condemning them, the US joined in. Death to Israel chants resounded outside the mosque in skies which were filled for 12 days with the sounds of Israeli jets. There is a renewed sense of defiance here. One man told us: "The lesson to be learned from Hussein is not to give in to oppression even if it is the most powerful force in the world." A woman was dismissive about the US president. "I don't think about Trump, nobody likes him. He always wants to attack too many countries." Pictures on billboards nearby draw a line between Imam Hussein's story and current events. The seventh-century imam on horseback alongside images of modern missiles and drones from the present day. Other huge signs remember the dead. Iran says almost 1,000 people were killed in the strikes, many of them women and Iran is projecting defiance but not closing the door to diplomacy. Government spokeswoman Dr Fatemeh Mohajerani told Sky News that Israel should not even think about attacking again. "We are very strong in defence and as state officials have announced, this time Israel will receive an even stronger response compared to previous times," she said. "We hope that Israel will not make such a mistake." But there is also a hint of conciliation: Senior Iranian officials have told Sky News that back-channel efforts are under way to explore new talks with the US. Israel had hoped its attacks could topple the Iranian leadership. That proved unfounded, the government is in control here. For many Iranians, it seems quite the opposite happened - the 12-day war has brought them closer together.
