One simple and straightforward question stood before the court a month ago: whether Netanyahu can serve as prime minister after he was indicted. This is the simple kind of question that has a binary answer: yes or no. And the law provides an equally clear answer, so that in a logical matter 'the court could have provided a very short output that can be printed on A4 page, max on either side. 

The cliché says the judges do not speak to the public through the media or public speeches but through their judgments. In the supplemental judgment published yesterday, our top judges have taken this concept to distant districts. Across dozens of pages of unnecessary hassles, judges are tireless in expressing their scholarly opinions on questions of ethics, public morals and public opinion. Judge Amit added that he incorporated what is for some reason known as a "Reuben" fiction in a prime ministerial contest that did not allow him to be a city inspector due to indictment.

Afterwards and so hundreds of words and acres of woods until mined to satisfy his lust for publicistism, he further notes that "in the moral-moral-public-normative aspect it is permissible to utter words", just before sailing to discussions of "once" versus "today", releasing Another bundle of moral preaching and tongue-lashing about the condition of the people. 

A colleague is not alone. Mazuz, Mintz, Barak Erez and others all take the stage to remind everyone that corruption is bad and lament the fate of the era and the state of the public. And in this context, all means are legitimate: the names of Roman scholars, sages, and democratic thinkers fly everywhere as the sparks of morality go in every direction. 

This ruling should be taught in schools as a living example of the unbearable mix of politics and law led by judicial activism in Israel. One task I would give the students is to: Mark in the yellow marker the clear legal content in these discussions, cut the highlighted sections, re-paste on a smooth page and read in front of the class. It will be very short. I would suggest sending the rest of the text on the editorial floor to one of the opinion sections in some local progressive newspaper, but my expectations are low: even the opinion sections have more standards than the judgments. At least there are word limits.