Two of the judges who supported overturning the will of the Israeli are retiring and their replacements may not support the blatant leftist rebellion against democratic rule in Israel and a last-ditch power grab to depose Netanyahu.

In a landmark decision on 1/1/2024, the High Court of Israel struck down the law intended to cancel the Reasonableness Standard, a pivotal component of the nation’s judicial framework. This historic 8-7 ruling has incited a vast range of reactions, highlighting a deep rift in the Israeli political spectrum and raising profound questions about the essence and future of Israeli democracy.

The Movement for Quality Government in Israel heralded the verdict as “a historic day – a tremendous public victory for those who seek democracy!” This sentiment underscores the perception of many that the court’s decision safeguards the nation’s democratic character by upholding crucial checks and balances against governmental overreach.

The elected government of Israelm however, does not agree, and ministers are stepping over each other to say so. Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi condemned the ruling. His critique reflects a broader concern among some that the judiciary is overstepping its bounds and encroaching on territory traditionally reserved for the legislative branch.

Justice Minister Yariv Levin, a key figure behind the government’s judicial reform plan, voiced a scathing rebuke, asserting, “Through this verdict, the judges are actually taking into their hands all the powers, which in a democratic regime are supposed to be divided in a balanced way between the three authorities.” His statement reflects a deep-seated fear that the ruling undermines the very foundation of Israeli democracy by disrupting the delicate balance of power among the branches of government.

The timing of the decision, amidst national turmoil, further exacerbates these tensions. Critics argue that releasing such a contentious ruling during wartime undermines national unity and the war effort. Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana emphasized that the court lacks the authority to cancel fundamental laws, especially not while the nation is embroiled in conflict.

On the other hand, sour grapes grasping former Prime Minister and current opposition leader Yair Lapid lauded the court’s decision as a testament to Israel’s strength as a “Jewish, democratic, liberal, law-abiding state.” His perspective suggests that the ruling, rather than weakening the nation, reinforces its democratic foundations and the rule of law.

But then his leftist views are considered increasingly irrelevant and, in some quarters, considered treasonous, joining other anti-Bibi crybaby ex-PMs such as Jeffrey Epstein confidant Ehud Barak and corrupt convict Ehud Olmert as well as loser former Air Force choice Dan Halutz, all of whom fled public life after their abject failures. In sum, the whining losers sided with the power-grasping desperation of Israel’s morally-debased High Court.

The High Court’s ruling is poised to face challenges, and soon, with potential legislative maneuvers or new laws aimed at curtailing its power. The government, backed by its supporters, might attempt to override the decision or introduce more comprehensive judicial reforms. The outcome of such challenges is uncertain, but they are likely to intensify the ongoing debate over the judiciary’s role in Israeli democracy and potentially lead to more significant legal and constitutional confrontations.

In fact, as the Israeli electorate swings further right, the excesses of the leftist activist court, supported by the elites and left-wing media, are likely to be overturned as soon as the Knesset swings back into action. It should surprise no one that overstepping their rights and inciting against the Knesset will have a cost to the anti-democratic Kaplanists, and their supporters in the political and judicial arenas, but the government will probably not rush to settle scores in war time. However, crackdowns on leftist excesses against public order during war time, can be expected in near future. Many would say they are long overdue.