Supreme Court: “Blatant” Bias

From Arutz-7: The Regavim Association has issued a report showing that the Supreme Court gives blatant preferential treatment to left-wing associations.

Regavim, The Association for the Preservation of State Lands, conducted a four-year review of lawsuits brought by various groups, and how those groups were treated in the “pre-ruling” stages, “when the legal merits of the various cases are not yet known.”

The report shows the Chief Justice Dorit Beinisch, in particular, is biased towards the left wing.

The preferential treatment towards lawsuits brought by the left wing is manifest in the following areas: Rushed proceedings, Beinisch’s participation on the judicial panel, the issuance of restraining orders against the State, intervention in government decisions, and especially the final rulings…

Regavim explains that its report concentrated on the procedural matters of a given suit, which take place before its merits are considered. “At this stage,” the report’s author, Betzalel Smutrich, explains, “the decisions reflect the judges’ basic positions and biases, if any, towards the matter. This is why the tremendous differences between the right-wing and left-wing petitions, as we show in the report, cannot be attributed to scholarly legal hairsplitting.”

“The facts described in the report clearly indicate a consistent and conscious policy that is based on political outlooks,” Smutrich says, “and it is led unequivocally by Chief Justice Dorit Beinisch.”…

“The public cannot be expected to place its trust in its judges under such circumstance,” he concluded.

Given that the Supreme Court is largely self-selecting, and in its bias simply follows the model of judicial activism of previous Chief Justice Aharon Barak (rightly described during Elena Kagan’s Senate confirmation hearings as the “Most liberal activist judge in the world“), Israel’s “alternate government” by judicial fiat is unlikely to end any time soon.

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

Share This