Israel’s Supreme Court convened on Tuesday to begin considering whether to strike down a deeply contentious law that limits the court’s own power, in a hearing that sets the stage for a constitutional showdown between the country’s judicial and executive branches of power.
The high court is considering a bill passed by Parliament in July that ruled that judges could no longer overrule ministerial decisions using the legal standard of “reasonableness.”
The case is considered one of the most consequential in Israeli history, because Israelis from all political backgrounds say the country’s future and character partly depends on the hearing’s result. Justices could take until January to reach a decision.
The government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — the most nationalist and religious conservative in Israel’s history — sees the court as an obstacle to its vision of a more conservative, nationalist society. The court has historically acted as a check on religious influence on public life, some Israeli activity in the occupied West Bank, and decisions that favor Jews over Arabs.
The opposition considers the court a guarantor of Israel’s secular character, a protector of its minorities, and a bulwark against authoritarianism.
With the legislation passed in July, the government sought to bar the court from using the standard of “reasonableness” in adjudicating cases on the grounds that it was too flexible, and had in the past given unelected judges too much room to meddle in decisions by elected lawmakers. The coalition said that the court still had several other tools with which it could restrain government influence.
Yariv Levin, the justice minister, said on Tuesday morning that the court’s decision to review the law was “a mortal injury to the rule of the people.”
In a statement, Mr. Levin added that by seeking to rule on its own power, the court “places itself above the government, above Parliament, above the people and above the law. This situation is completely contrary to democracy.”
The court will hear arguments from eight petitioners against the law, most of them civil society organizations that campaign for good governance.
The law’s opponents argue that the legislation undermines Israeli democracy by limiting the power of the Supreme Court, which is the main check on government overreach. Israel has no written constitution and no second chamber of Parliament, increasing the court’s importance as a counterweight to the power of the cabinet and the legislature.
Eliad Shraga, who leads one of the groups petitioning against the law, said on Tuesday that he hoped the court hearing would “ruin the regime coup.”
“This is a historical day, a historical event,” Mr. Shraga added, shortly before entering the courtroom with his sons. “I hope that it will be a red light to the regime.”
The law is one part of a wider legislative package, the rest of which the government has so far failed to implement. The government still hopes to pass another law that gives it greater control over who gets to be a judge. But Mr. Netanyahu has ruled out pursuing a third plan that would have allowed Parliament to overrule Supreme Court decisions.
The package has prompted what many see as the worst domestic crisis in Israeli history, one that has widened longstanding rifts between secular and religious Israelis, as well as Jews of European and Middle Eastern descent.
Opponents of the law have held 36 consecutive weeks of mass protests. The judicial overhaul has also prompted some investors to divest from Israel, led more than 1,000 reserve soldiers to suspend their volunteer duty for the Israeli military, and strained Israel’s relationship with the United States government.
In a sign of how seriously the judiciary views the appeal, the chief justice, Esther Hayut, decided that all 15 of the court’s judges would hear the case — a record number. Usually, between three and 11 judges sit for each case before the court.
In another sign of its importance, lawmakers, foreign diplomats and broadcasters began lining up outside the courtroom at least 90 minutes before the start of the hearing to secure a seat. Once inside, some took selfies to mark the moment.
