A heated Supreme Court hearing over petitions against the law changing the composition of the Judicial Selection Committee sparked a strong reaction from Channel 12 political commentator Amit Segal. He said the conduct of the judges crossed red lines and could force even supporters of compromise to rethink their approach to the judicial system.
Segal aimed sharp criticism at Supreme Court President Justice Isaac Amit, saying the hearing showed that the judiciary is not politically neutral. “No such thing as a conservative judge who supports striking down a Basic Law,” he said, adding that the session had moved him from “Ayelet Shaked’s method” to “Yariv Levin’s method.” He also mocked Amit’s concern about judges having a political “chip,” saying that “everyone in the country” sees Amit as politically aligned and knows “in which government he supports and in which government he does not support.”
He argued that Amit’s own rulings support that view, citing a State Civil Service Commissioner case in which, he said, Amit reversed his own decision because “this time it was a different government.” Segal then drew a line between two right-wing strategies toward the courts: Shaked’s gradual reform through appointments and compromises, versus Levin’s broad structural overhaul. He said he had generally favored Shaked’s approach, but after the hearing he was no longer sure she was right.
Segal said judges who were appointed as conservatives, such as Justice Noam Sohlberg and Justice Daphne Barak-Erez? actually, no, he named Stein and Willner, cannot be considered conservative if they seriously discuss voiding a Basic Law without legal authorization or precedent. He said the law changing the committee was not perfect and may not even produce more conservative judges, but it passed all three Knesset readings with 67 votes and is a moderate law for the next Knesset, not one giving all appointments to the coalition. He ended with a warning that if the High Court strikes it down, it should not complain when the backlash is much harsher.
