 |
| Israel’s Supreme Court (CNN) |
After the Court ruling, Arye Erlich, editor of ultra-orthodox magazine @themishpacha, posted a tweet that opened "In a certain way this day is worse than October 7."
It has since been deleted with an apology (of sorts) explaining that he had been overcome by emotion. I understand why he might have been upset with that ruling. I might even agree that the court’s decision was wrong. But to say that it was worse than October 7th is insulting in the extreme.
How can anyone with even an ounce of intelligence and compassion make a comment like that? On October 7th 1200 Jews were brutally raped, dismembered, beheaded, sexually tortured, and slaughtered. 240 hostages were taken on that day. And over 100 hostages still remain in terrorist hands.
What kind of ethics and morality dominate the mind of such an individual? Sure... he apologized. Sort of. But that doesn’t mean that his actual value system wasn’t reflected by the original tweet. The truth always comes out when unguarded thoughts surface in the heat of the moment.
With respect to the actual Supreme Court decision, if I didn’t know better, I’d say that what the Israeli Supreme Court just did yesterday was a skit on SNL. By an 8-7 vote the Court struck down a law passed in the Knesset that reined in their total control over the national ethos.
For those with short term memory loss, the Knesset passed legislation that placed limits on what the court considered reasonable or unreasonable legislation. They could no longer strike down a law by virtue of considering it unreasonable.
Reasonableness is subjective. What is unreasonable to a secular individual might be considered a very reasonable value to religious person. Other than using ‘reasonableness’ as a means to strike down a law, the Court retained its full power to strike down laws that violate its version of the constitution - the basic laws.
They made this decision as though it was made without any bias. How stupid do they think the public is? (At least that part of the public that is objective.) That decision was, however, cheered by the left who considers it a restoration of the checks and balances required of a true democracy.
How giving unlimited power of one branch of government over the other makes it a system of checks and balances eludes me. I guess the left believes that - what a leftist court considers reasonable is the ultimate expression of a democracy. That religious values don’t matter if they conflict with secular values.
As I said so many times before the war consumed my every waking moment, checks and balances only work when there is no single branch has the kind of power that Israel’s Supreme Court has arrogated to itself. The US system of checks and balances does not give that kind of power to any of its 3 branches.. The authority of the US Supreme Court to strike down a law cannot be made on the basis of what they think is reasonable. It can only rule on whether a Legislative law or Executive order is constitutional. The interpretation of which depends on the political philosophy of the justices. Which is diverse.
The reason it is diverse is because US justices are not self selected. When a vacancy occurs, justices are chosen by the Executive Branch and then confirmed by the Legislative Branch. Making the choices subject to the political philosophy of the President. That allows the court to swing both ways depending on whether the President at the time of a vacancy is liberal or conservative.
Not so Israel’s Supreme Court. When a vacancy occurs there, the Court itself selects justices thereby permanently perpetuating it’s own political philosophy. Which in Israel’s case means a permanent left leaning philosophy that tends to far more often rule in favor of ‘reasonable’ secular values than it does in favor of the ‘unreasonable’ religious values.
Checks and balances can only work if there is a mechanism that takes away some of the Court’s power and gives it to other branches. That is all the Knesset did with that law. Which the court in its arrogance just struck down.
It should be noted that it was not a unanimous decision. There are actually seven members of the court that realize the inconsistency of ruing in favor of its own power and calling it unbiased. Sad that the majority justices on the court are little more than self serving left wing politicians that love power.
And another thing. That a controversial decision like this was made at a time of war when there was no particular law before the court that it could affect - shows just how power hungry those 8 members of the court are. If nothing else it weakens the national unity that Israel needs at time of war - all while the world is clamoring for a permanent cease fire!
I have no idea what the Knesset is going do about this. But the fact that each side thinks the other side has too much power does not bode well for a compromise. Nor will this decision make Israel’s mission in this war any easier.