We have organizations focused on easing the financial burden of everything else imaginable, but not for mental health.
With all the animosity floating around about the proposed judicial reforms, it’s hard to get a nuanced explanation of what is being proposed, and which aspects are upsetting to the opposition. But it’s clear that the “override clause” is a central component of the proposed judicial reforms. In your interview with MK Gafni, he boasted, “By the way, I demanded the override clause in coalition talks with the Likud 20 years ago….”
One of the features of the “override clause” is that the legislature can override any ruling by the Israeli Supreme Court with a simple majority vote in the Knesset.
But what is so confusing to the American chareidi community is the introduction of this override clause. This is because introducing an equivalent of the “override clause” in the US judicial system would basically mean that popular opinion would override the law, and we would have nowhere to appeal rulings issued against our values when protected by the law.
Recently, our community benefited greatly from numerous rulings by the Supreme Court and will likely need more in the future. This cycle is due to the fact that legislators draft laws based on what they hear from their constituents (aka popular opinion), and often these laws run afoul of the Constitution and the religious freedoms it provides.
Create a free account to keep reading.
