Late Sunday night, an article was published in "Wall Street Journal" sharply criticizing the Israeli High Court ruling and the disqualification of Aryeh Deri as a “kosher” member of the government. This article was published only two days after another article published in the Wall Street Journal criticized the Supreme Court of Israel. This series of semi-pro-judicial reform articles is highly unusual, as most global publications have been extremely against the new Netanyahu government and more specifically, its judicial reforms which most outside of Israel do not even understand.

The article published Sunday night was written by Eugene Kontorovich, a Ukrainian-born law professor at George Mason University who specializes in U.S. constitutional law and international law. In his well-argued piece, Kontorovich strongly criticizes the Israeli Supreme Court and writes that "the [Deri] ruling did not even pretend to interpret the basic laws of Israel" but was content with stating that the appointment was "technically legal, but gross", as Kontorovich put it.

To be precise, the Israeli Supreme Court claims to power to invalidate what it sees as unreasonable gov't actions, a far broader and more significant category. It can even include who can be prime minister. https://t.co/4Z1C3Mfbxg

— Eugene Kontorovich (@EVKontorovich) January 22, 2023

Kontorovich continues and writes that "[n]o judiciary in the world has as far-reaching powers over the government as Israel’s. The court assumed these powers in recent decades without authorization from lawmakers or a national consensus, and there is no reason they should be unalterable." It is important to note that Israel does not have a constitution. When the country was founded it was apparent the Arab nations would wage war and that was the priority. After the War of Independence was won, there were commissions created to codify Israeli law, however, the fragile nature of the new state and the divide between religious and secular made that nearly impossible.

In the mid-1990s, Israel's Supreme Court began using documents like the Declaration of Independence to weigh legislation. The document promises, as an example, equal rights for all citizens and freedom for all including those not Jewish. However, the move towards using those documents along with a collection of past laws and rulings that are known as Israel's 'Basic Law' as the barometer for legislation has not sat right with many who believe the court has been overstepping its bounds. 

Legal expert Eugene Kontorovich, who has championed many of Israel’s judicial reform proposals, told Breitbart News in an exclusive interview that it is time to reverse the “power grab” through which judges seized sweeping authority in the 1990s. https://t.co/5WIKUx3Lck

— Breitbart News (@BreitbartNews) January 17, 2023

In the WSJ opinion piece, Kontrovich later expressed support for the reforms planned in the Israeli legal system led by Yariv Levin and writes in reference to the issue of invalidating laws by the High Court of Justice. "the ability of a court to declare that a law violates a country’s constitution—is an American invention. Israel doesn’t have a constitution. The court assumed that power in 1995, when it proclaimed that the Knesset had given it the power to strike down laws. The 1992 law under which the court claimed that authority passed 32-21. A majority of the 120-member Knesset didn’t show up to vote, not having known the court would later claim the law as a quasi-constitution."

Crazy that the @WSJ_Online has more integrity in reporting upon the proposed judicial reform in Israel than our own Israeli media. But, that's what happens when the establishment media of a country is part of the leftist agenda. https://t.co/u9SfHqTpVs

— Avi Abelow (@AviAbelow) January 22, 2023

Kontrovich goes on to say that the Israeli court "gradually eliminated all restrictions on justiciability and standing, allowing it to rule on any issues in public life whenever it chooses, without the constraint of lower-court proceedings or fact-finding. It employed the doctrine of “reasonableness” as a free-standing basis to block government action, including the government’s makeup." The point being made is that the court has named itself the most powerful body in the land despite no one granting that authority to them. Unlike America, there are no checks and balances in the Israeli system, and while many have argued that it is time to establish a constitution and retool the way in which the government functions, to date this has not happened.

Kontrovich’s opinions about Israel’s judicial reforms, despite being based on absolute fact, defy many published opinions published, including from the constitutional lawyer, Alan Dershowitz who stands against most of the reforms currently offered. The issue most critics have but Kontrovich, as well as the Journal Editorial Board, seem to have understood is that judging Israel by the legal standards of other countries is unfair to Israel. The Jewish State should be judged by the laws of that land, not the lands of Europe or North America.