Although Israel will remain a vibrant democracy, it would be a far better democracy if the Supreme Court had the power to check and balance the majority regarding often unpopular basic rights.
The Amercam system is politicized but it is far preferrable to a system where judges pick their successors based on ideological and jurisprudential fealty and where , as a consequence, the Israeli court protects the interests of the Ashkenazi secular elite and intervenes on issues where it has no expertise other than what it deems 'reasonable"in such areas as economics and the religious secular status quo
Prof. D's assertion that the American procedure of judicial appointment -- nomination by the chief executive subject to confirmation by the Senate -- has politicized and degraded our Supreme court is perplexing. To be sure, the partisan vilification of Robert Bork and Brett Kavanaugh was shameful and similar abuses may well occur in future, but it's not clear to me that a different process would necessarily produce better outcomes in the long run. Giving judges appointed by experts with no popular mandate the prerogative of nullifying laws enacted by a democratically-elected legislature would undermine political legitimacy, would it not?
It must be a necessity, guaranteed by law, that The Supreme Court's decisions the final authority and open to appeals from the government by a strong majority vote.... Certainly NOT by a simple majority,
I would rather have a High Court of Justices whose Justices emulate the views of Judge Posner and the late Alexander Bickel than Judge Barak
The Amercam system is politicized but it is far preferrable to a system where judges pick their successors based on ideological and jurisprudential fealty and where , as a consequence, the Israeli court protects the interests of the Ashkenazi secular elite and intervenes on issues where it has no expertise other than what it deems 'reasonable"in such areas as economics and the religious secular status quo
Alan, it's time for you to follow in my footsteps. Leave Martha's Vineyard and come home to Israel, where you belong.
Prof. D's assertion that the American procedure of judicial appointment -- nomination by the chief executive subject to confirmation by the Senate -- has politicized and degraded our Supreme court is perplexing. To be sure, the partisan vilification of Robert Bork and Brett Kavanaugh was shameful and similar abuses may well occur in future, but it's not clear to me that a different process would necessarily produce better outcomes in the long run. Giving judges appointed by experts with no popular mandate the prerogative of nullifying laws enacted by a democratically-elected legislature would undermine political legitimacy, would it not?
It must be a necessity, guaranteed by law, that The Supreme Court's decisions the final authority and open to appeals from the government by a strong majority vote.... Certainly NOT by a simple majority,