Supreme Court thrusts Israel down the slope of apartheid

[Jefferson23]

The High Court of Justice's ruling touches on the balance between security needs and individual rights, but the public will understand it as a demographic ruling that protects Jews while harming Arab citizens.

Haaretz Editorial

The High Court of Justice's ruling Wednesday on the legality of the Citizenship Law proves the erosion of this institution's role as Israel's guardian of civil rights. Let's look at how the justices voted at the moment of truth on the law, which bans Palestinians from living in Israel with spouses who are Israeli citizens.

In a 2006 ruling, 6 out of 11 justices said the law was unconstitutional, and in the current ruling, 6 out of 11 justices said the law, which was made more strict after the first ruling, was constitutional. That's a disappointing outcome, in part because the first ruling was made not long after the terror attacks of the second intifada, while the current ruling was made during a period of calm, due in part to coordination between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

The title that Justice Asher Grunis gave his opinion - "Human rights are not a prescription for national suicide" - is also disappointing. No one disagrees with this, but Justice Elyakim Rubinstein, who arrived at the same judicial conclusion, recognizes that "a small group - those men and women in Israel's Arab minority who want to marry residents of the region - must pay a heavy price for greater security for all Israelis, including their own."

Justice Grunis apparently would not agree to this wording; as he put it, he's not someone who gives the "constitutional rights that are mentioned in the Basic Law on Human Dignity and Liberty the most expanded and comprehensive interpretation."

in full: http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/supreme-court-thrusts-israel-down-the-slope-of-apartheid-1.407056

[Little Tich]

1. I agree with the article.

Any spouse of an Israeli should have the absolute right to live in Israel, unless there is a justifiable reason not to grant that right to a particular person. To deny that right to Palestinians for any reason, and then upholding the ban as being constitutional is an example of apartheid. This doesn't necessarily mean that Israel is an apartheid state, it just means that the Supreme Court made a ruling that constitutes apartheid.

[Little Tich]

2. Israel's High Court doesn't deserve to be defended - Haaretz

Source: Haaretz

Long before the Citizenship Law, the rope was no more than a broken reed of support for the protection of human rights in Israel.

The fight to defend the High Court of Justice from those who would bring it down must stop now. Enough self-righteousness, enough of this masquerade, in which we imagine that we are trying to protect the last beacon of justice and the last bastion of Israeli democracy. Not only is there no longer any point to the struggle - the last-ditch battle has already failed - it is also no longer justified. No more is there reason to defend an institution that issued the shameful rejection of the petition against the amendment to the Citizenship Law.

A court that vets this nationalistic and racist amendment, which discriminates against Arab citizens of Israel solely on the basis of their ethnicity, which in the name of security is prepared to deny basic rights and destroy the lives of thousands of Israeli families, which makes false use of security to try to cover up its racism - is an institution that must no longer be defended. Its name has been taken in vain, and defending it is misleading because it makes it seem to be an institution worth fighting for. It is better to tell the truth: It is not the guardian of the seal of democracy and human rights in Israel. The right wing can continue demolishing it to their hearts' content; they are only demolishing ruins.

Let's speak plainly: This is about transfer. Not by the army, the settlers or the extreme right, but expulsion under the aegis of the law and with the court's seal of approval.

Read more: http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/israel-s-high-court-doesn-t-deserve-to-be-defended-1.407369