editorials
Israel’s Supreme Court Must Stay
Independent T
he issue has been brewing for quite some
time. The far-right and ultra-Orthodox
parties in prime minister-designate Benjamin
Netanyahu’s anticipated coalition government
are unhappy with several rulings of Israel’s
Supreme Court.

They want to put a system in place that
will allow a simple majority of the Knesset to
overrule court decisions, even those that fi nd
a particular law passed by the Knesset or an
administrative ruling of a government minis-
try to be unconstitutional or to violate basic
human rights.

Earlier this year — at a time when the
hard-right and haredi parties were plotting in
opposition — legislation was being considered
to change Israel’s current multitiered vetting and
approval process for the selection and appoint-
ment of Supreme Court justices. The new approach
would have justices chosen by the parties in power
and confi rmed by a majority vote in the Knesset so
that the dominant political leadership of the day
would control the entire process. Early last sum-
mer, Likud and its right-wing allies chose not to
propose the change. Instead, they decided to wait
to see what a new election would bring.

And that gamble paid off . But rather than pro-
moting an approach that would enable them to
pack the court with favored justices, the hard right
Israel’s Supreme Court Building
is pursuing a plan to authorize a simple majority of
the Knesset to override any Supreme Court ruling.

The proposed override law is troubling. An over-
ride law would signifi cantly erode the Supreme
Court’s independence and severely limit the court’s
ability to block laws or governmental decisions
that are deemed illegal or in violation of human
rights. Instead, the very politicians who passed
the problematic law or regulation will be able to
re-pass the law and override the Supreme Court
with a simple majority vote.

Each of the major factions in Netanyahu’s right-
wing coalition has reason to support an override
law. For the radical right, the Knesset could
bypass rulings placing limits on the confi sca-
tion of land owned by Palestinians in the West
Bank. For the ultra-Orthodox, the law would
provide a path to avoid troubling rulings on
military service by haredi Jews and assure
continued funding with no supervision for the
ultra-Orthodox education system. And fi nally,
for Likud and Netanyahu, an override law could
have signifi cant impact on continued pursuit by
the government of corruption charges against
elected offi cials, including Netanyahu.

When reports of coalition agreement on the
override law became public, more than 100 law
professors and lecturers from Israel’s leading
universities and academic institutions signed
a letter opposing the law and warning that it “will
seriously damage the protection of human rights.”
The letter also predicted that the bill would “trans-
form the citizens of Israel from citizens with rights,
whom the Knesset must respect, and the court pro-
tect, to those who are subject to the mercy of the
political majority at any given moment.”
The eyes of the world are carefully watching
how Netanyahu navigates the competing political
demands of his empowered and doctrinaire coali-
tion partners. Taking steps to neuter an indepen-
dent judiciary and impose rule by political fi at is
bad government and even worse politics. JE
I n November 1941, a radio program aired in time for
Thanksgiving. Called “Psalm for a Dark Year,” it was
written and produced by Norman Corwin, a Jewish
creator of depth and poignancy who became known
as American radio’s “poet laureate.”
That dark November, Europe was at war. Soon
after the broadcast, Japanese planes attacked Pearl
Harbor and, in a fl ash, America was at war as well.

Like Corwin and his listeners, we sense that we
have been through a dark year. And like them, we
don’t know what lies ahead — although for them,
the unthinkable was still to come.

This has been a year of growing hate and
antisemitism, of further and deeper political divi-
sions, of war in Europe and mounting threats to
world order, of sustained economic concerns and
mounting uncertainty, and the ever-louder alarm
that we lack what it takes to save ourselves and
our planet.

Despite these concerns, we know that we are
12 NOVEMBER 24, 2022 | JEWISHEXPONENT.COM
fortunate, and we know that there is reason to be
grateful and hopeful as we gather for Thanksgiving.

Our democracy was put through a stress test this
month, and it is holding up just fi ne. Ukraine’s
David is beating back Russia’s Goliath.

Two years ago, we couldn’t gather for
Thanksgiving. This year, we gather with family and
friends with less fear of COVID-19. We are closer
than ever to our congregations and our commu-
nity. The receding pandemic has left us joyful and
open to new ways of expressing our Judaism. And
if we look at the part of the glass that’s full, we
can appreciate all the good the United States has
provided to us and to our community.

We are proud to be American and Jewish. We
give thanks that our Jewish heritage is one of joy
and deep knowledge — a tree of life that can help
lift us above petty distractions. We give thanks
that there were Jews who dreamed big and worked
hard to create and sustain the state of Israel — yes,
imperfect but an ongoing blessing and inspiration
for us and for the world. And we are grateful for
the Thanksgiving holiday, which still unites all of
America’s people in gratitude.

So let’s all take a moment to consider how for-
tunate we are to be a part of the American experi-
ence and to be able to call this place home.

Corwin felt it was important to blend his Jewish
heritage into his radio program at a time when
America had much less familiarity with Jews and
Judaism than it does today. In “Psalm for a Dark
Year,” a shofar was blown to stir gratitude: “Let
now the ram’s horn of my father’s tribe resound
a note of Thanksgiving,” he said. And he gave us
a Thanksgiving psalm for this or any other dark
year: “Give thanks where thanks are due. We shall
give thanks tonight for song, and bread, and such a
thing as love, and dogged hope. And for the guar-
antee of morning somewhere.”
Amen. JE
FLICKR.COM / israeltourism
Psalm for a Dark Year



opinions & letters
What Do We Do When
Our Leaders Are Bad People
Who Do Good Things?
By Rabbi Uri Pilichowski
O ne of the most frequently asked philosophical
questions is why bad things happen to good
people and good things happen to bad people.

The Talmud relates that Moses himself was per-
plexed by this question, but instead of receiving
an answer, he was told by God to simply accept
the world as it is and humanity’s inability to fully
understand it. Ramban and others tried to mini-
mize the question by explaining that good and bad
are frequently subjective and not all people agree
on what they are. Still, the question remains.

In our generation, the question has taken on
another dimension. We are faced with the paradox
that bad people sometimes do good things and
good people do bad things. This is particularly the
case with prominent leaders or other authority
figures. in mere hours if not minutes.

There are many benefits to this new transpar-
ency. Victims of authority figures, who in the past
were often traumatized, shunned and alone, now
see themselves validated and supported. Possible
future victims, who were once unaware of the
danger they faced, are now forewarned and thus
protected. Before this change, failed or dangerous leaders
and authority figures would often go from position
to position, city to city and victim to victim. Today,
as word spreads quickly of their deeds, evil people
are stopped and often imprisoned.

In some cases, while these leaders’ actions were
sickening, they were not illegal, meaning public
shaming would have been the only way to stop
them. But in the past, the public was unaware of
their behavior, and thus could not shun them. As a
result, they sometimes rose to positions of consid-
erable power. It is a good thing that this is often no
To build a better society, people of quality are
needed to lead each community. We can tolerate
mistakes and sins, but we should not accept
leaders — however effective — whose character
and behavior continuously fail to meet the most
elementary moral standards and will not mend
their ways.

We are frequently disappointed when people
we admire make mistakes or commit grave sins,
while we are sometimes surprised when people
we despise act in admirable ways. While it’s easy
to explain this paradox by positing that people are
complex, and never fully good or evil, we are still
faced with the question of how to deal with such
leaders. In the past, we usually did not have to answer
this question, because the actions of good or bad
leaders were easily concealed. This has changed
with the advent of the internet and social media.

With news and rumors spreading at the speed of
light, acts that in the past would have been swept
under the rug are now exposed for the world to see
longer the case.

But perhaps even more baffling is the case of
bad people who are nonetheless good leaders
and do good things. A person can have a bad per-
sonal character and act like a boor to their family,
constituents and supporters, but also use their
position to do good for people and institute poli-
cies that benefit the public. It’s easy to condemn a
leader who has poor character and does bad things.

It is not as easy when a leader has poor character
but uses their talents and skills to the benefit of
the community.

When should a community condemn such lead-
ers? All great Jewish authority figures have failed
and sinned at certain points, sometimes grievously.

Abraham, Moses and King David all made mistakes.

It’s unrealistic to demand perfection from our
leaders. So, where is the line between acceptable
failings, even sin, and condemnable behavior?
The line between acceptable and condemnable
sin should be drawn at the point where the sin
causes irreparable harm and the sinner refuses
to make amends and change their behavior. If the
leader’s sin did not cause irreparable harm and they
repent and make amends to those they harmed,
while also reforming their behavior, they should
be permitted to continue in office. While these
requirements do not necessarily apply to every sin-
gle case, they draw a clear line between acceptable
and unacceptable leaders.

To build a better society, people of quality are
needed to lead each community. We can toler-
ate mistakes and sins, but we should not accept
leaders — however effective — whose character
and behavior continuously fail to meet the most
elementary moral standards and will not mend
their ways. JE
Rabbi Uri Pilichowski is a senior educator at numer-
ous educational institutions. He is the author of three
books and teaches Torah, Zionism and Israel studies
around the world.

letters Would You Act Differently?
Mitchell Bard’s op-ed “Don’t Get Hysterical Over
Israel’s Election” (Nov. 17) was outstanding and so
practical. For example, Israelis showed they have no inter-
est in compromising with people they see as a
mortal threat. Would any of us act any differently
if someone who threatened bodily harm to our
family were planning to become our neighbor? And
he ended his article with a truism: “Some American
Jews will always focus on its flaws, but true lovers
of Israel … do not turn on the country because they
have disagreements.” JE
Bob Altman, Yardley
Letters should be related to articles that have run
in the print or online editions of the JE, and may be
edited for space and clarity prior to publication. Please
include your first and last name, as well your town/
neighborhood of residence. Send letters to letters@
jewishexponent.com. JEWISHEXPONENT.COM
13