Supreme Court: “Blatant” Bias

You may also like...

4 Responses

  1. Baruch Pelta says:

    I’ll ask what I’m sure many others are thinking: Who’s Regavim?

  2. L. Oberstein says:

    As far as I know, the facts are as you stated. The Israeli Supreme Court is self appointed and does not allow radically different points of view onto the court. It reminds me of what I learned in public school many years ago. John Adams appointed a Supreme Court chief justice in the last days of his single term and that Federalist judge, Marshal I believe, lasted many decades after the Federalist Party ceased to exist. The Supreme Court correctly views itself as the last bastion of secularism, the wall preventing the lower classes from taking over. In the end , the majority will rule, but it may take a while. There is a war of cultures in Israel and both sides seem to lack any trust in the other,maybe with good reason. So, believe it or not, I agree with you.

  3. dr. bill says:

    Regardless of your politics, it is important to point out that Regavim is not a neutral third party as its name might imply to some – “The Association for the Preservation of State Lands.” Regavim deals with the public and legal aspects of keeping national lands in Jewish hands. Judges Beinisch and Barak’s activism is undeniable as are their strong left-wing leanings. They do not deny or disguise their left-wing orientation; calling it “Blatant” bias expresses an opinion, rather than a fact.

  4. Yaakov Menken says:

    Dr. Bill, it’s no surprise that the organization doing the study is part of the class neglected by the court. No one has challenged their analysis of the data.

    If the judges clearly prefer to address complaints from left-wing organizations, their bias is no less blatant because the judges admit it. It’s not a matter of opinion, it’s in the data itself.

Pin It on Pinterest