MORE ON COURT V. KNESSET

Mordechai Eisenberg has an article in Ha'aretz defending the Israeli Supreme Court, "Putting the brakes on despotism." Eisenberg argues that Court power needs to be preserved in order to keep the other political branches in line, and that the Knesset's attack on the Court should be seen as a reaction to justified criticism that the political branches have failed to live up to their constitutional obligations:

As things look right now, the criticism appears to be the adoption of an unjustified defensive posture in the face of judicial review - a posture born out of the fear that this judicial review will erode the political clout of the decision-makers and will expose their serious blunders.

For another perspective, see Daniel Doron's Jerusalem Post piece criticizing the Court, "A better way to help the poor," which cites both Isaiah Berlin (negatively) and Robert Bork (positively). BTW, Doron's "better way" is for the courts to enforce anti-monopoly laws, and, more critically for his argument, to get rid of welfare rights altogether. Here's Doron:

If the law would curb our rapacious monopolies and our banks by breaking them up, the poor would benefit greatly. Cutting monopoly "rents" can quickly raise the purchasing power of Israelis by at least thirty percent, a huge bonanza to the lower earning strata. It will improve their "dignity" far more than the measly minimal amount the judicial system is striving to secure for them; and it would not harm them or the economy through the negative incentives to work that welfare always creates, and the debilitating culture of dependency (talk about dignity) that welfare always promotes.

Finally my post yesterday omitted a link to this article in Ha'aretz on the temporary injuction issued by the Court in a case brought by groups challenging welfare cutbacks.