Judicial Imperialism

On the sidewalks of south Tel Aviv

On the sidewalks of south Tel Aviv

The High Court of Justice has dealt Israeli democracy a grievous blow this week when for the second time in a year it nixed the notion of detaining illegal infiltrators and struck down Knesset legislation on the matter.

The operative upshot is that 2000 detainees will soon be back on the crime-ridden streets of south Tel Aviv – which has been turned into a festering lawless African enclave – exacerbating the already dreadful plight of its Israeli residents.
Worse yet, it means that all Africans have now been told that if they only manage to sneak into the Jewish state, they’d become legally invulnerable despite having willfully broken Israeli law by their illegal entry. This is a potent message.

The fence erected along much of the Israeli-Egyptian border won’t entirely stem the tide. Fences can be breached (as Gaza has only recently shown us).
But the direst wallop was delivered to what remains of Israel’s separation of powers, which pro forma guarantees that the different branches of government each retain independent authority and responsibility, thereby preventing any single branch from overwhelming and diminishing the others. Going against this fundamental rationale, Israel’s super-dominant High Court has essentially decimated any theoretical shreds of checks and balances.
This isn’t the stuff of abstract rumination by legal philosophers. Judicial ultra-interventionism affects the daily lives of Israelis and its ramifications especially impinge on the rancorous controversies that polarize public opinion.
The High Court to date has vetoed over twenty laws duly adopted by the Knesset, steadily eroding its authority.
Moreover, only by a hairsbreadth did the Court avoid doing the same in other exceptionally divisive  issues (like allowing Palestinian “family reunifications” within Israel proper, which would have meant an unimaginable inflow of hostile Arabs into this country, thereby upsetting its entire demographic equilibrium). The narrow margins by which such near-calamities were averted are no less frightening than the Court’s actual high-handed judgments that overturned sometimes existential legislative decisions.
Most alarming is the fact that the nine High Court justices have usurped nearly unchallengeable powers for themselves. There appears to be no avenue left for overcoming their imperiousness. The consequences for our democracy are potentially staggering.
The Knesset is directly elected by the voters and directly reflects the mood and opinions of the electorate. Overruling the citizenry’s direct representatives should be an option of truly last resort exercised only if these representatives are deemed to have egregiously overstepped their legal bounds.
Even then, cancelling laws shouldn’t be a frequently applied prerogative. Via habitual judicial hubris, the Court itself paradoxically undermines the rule of law.
Not only are our justices not elected, unlike parliamentarians, but in our system in particular the selection of justices isn’t transparent and isn’t subject to effectual vetting by either the legislature or the executive.
Our system confers inordinate powers on the serving justices to nominate new justices. Indeed the Israeli experience is that no candidate for the High Court has ever succeeded, no matter how intrinsically qualified, without the support of serving justices. This means that the justices can block the appointment of any applicant they dislike and they had done so too many times for comfort.
In other words, Israel’s highest court was entrusted with powers to replicate itself and make sure that only justices cast in its own image – sharing the same world and judicial outlooks (often even graduates of the same law schools) – will ever get to serve.
This has left us all under the sway of a small band that reflects the viewpoint of only a tiny (and shrinking) minority – the Left. This minority in point of fact rules Israel despite its recurrent electoral losses.
Inevitably such anomalies translate into detachment from ordinary Israelis – like the south Tel Avivians whose rights are regularly trampled.
Robert Bork, one of America’s prominent critics of judicial activism, wrote that “the pride of place in the international judicial deformation of democratic government goes… to the state of Israel. Israel has set a standard for judicial imperialism that can probably never be surpassed and one devoutly hopes will never be equaled elsewhere.”

12 thoughts on “Judicial Imperialism

  1. Yet again the liberal Israeli ACLA / Supreme Federal Court types ( a la USA and G.B. ) rule the roost against the wishes of the down to earth majority citizens who certainly did not and don’t want these sorts of decisions.

    Whereas governments are elected by the people (for better or worse) the courts riddled with blinkered PC types (unelected by the people) defy the will of the people. Welcome to America, G.B., Western Europe and now wit this example by Israel.

    What’s the point of a free democracy if some decisions and wishes are adhered to provided they don’y clash with the agendas of the rulers.

  2. The High Court’s abuse of authority and of the rule of law is bad enough, but its assiduous disregard for Israeli citizen’s security and wellbeing is a hate crime

  3. There must be a way to change that system. This is a system regardless how the judges vote that has the same people reinvent themselves without any brakes. At least if the Prime Minister were to nominate a candidate when a vacancy occurs and knesset would vote on it would be more in line what the populace wants. The system as now is certainly not democratic.
    I would rent lodging next to each judge and put those people there.I would donate funds to accomplish that

  4. It is hight tome for the Knesset to pass legislation restricting the ability of the Supreme Court to render judgements detrimental to the survival and domestic well being of Israel. Highly unlikely, given the state of Israeli politics, but highly desirable. I do disagree with Bork though. The SCOTUS had succeeded on gutting the Constitution in favor of fuzzy logic.

  5. Sarah, I hadn’t been to Tel Aviv in over 15 years, so when I went to visit my cousin, I was shocked. While walking back to the Central Bus Station through S. Tel Aviv, I literally didn’t see a white face for miles. It was like being in one of the ghettos of the larger American cities.
    שנה טובה

  6. This decision really irks me. Who the hell do these judges all over the world ( and now Israel) think they are? What will happen when one of these 2000 indigenous Africans harms a judge? Will the judge sing a different tune then, instead of looking at the ‘wisdom’ of Chelm for guidance?

  7. Who do these judges all over the world think they are? What will happen when one of these 2000 detainees harms a judge? Will he sing a different tune then, instead of looking at the ‘wisdom’ of Chelm for guidance?

  8. America is working hard to replicate all manner of judicial imperialism. It may even be a race to see which branch of government can wield the greatest sovereignty. Thanks for posting this. Here is a very little known area of Israeli life and its government in America.

  9. The High Court to date has vetoed over twenty laws duly adopted by the Knesset, steadily eroding Knesset authority and the democratic structure of government.

    Israel is a country that seems to not know what is good for her. Israel’s supreme court does not have the interest of the country at heart and one wonders why it has such power over and above the law?

    Under their nose Israelis are losing their democracy and in exchange are getting a dangerous kind of governance.

  10. So T-H-I-S is why Obama was able to go to Israel and not address the Knesset! What to do about this small band of leftist loose cannons? Who enforces the laws that the Israeli supreme court adopts?(In other words, what if they passed laws, and no one paid attention?) The IDF? If so, Israel is in real trouble. Judge Bork wrote a few books dealing with judicial activism(The Tempting of America, et al.), and in none of them was he sanguine about the consequences of this insidious form of elitism. But what does Shurat Ha’Din say about judicial activism? Any chance of giving the Prime Minister the power to appoint Supreme Court justices? Guess not.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s