Everything that is evil and rotten in the method of appointing judges in Israel, stands out in a bright light when you see the proper and transparent selection process in the United States • Just watch and envy • Interpretation
The judges of the High Court must understand that what could not continue. The power and control that the judges have taken over the years from the legislature and the executive must return to their natural and correct place.
Archive // Photo: Reuters
This week, Judge Amy Connie Barrett was due to appear in the Senate, a four-day hearing.
This, ahead of the vote on her appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court at the end of the month. Connie Barrett was nominated as President Trump's candidate in place of Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who passed away last month.
Recommends to the public to follow the selection process.
A procedure that is broadcast to the whole world.
Watch and envy.
Everything that is wrong with the method of electing judges in Israel stands out in a bright light when one sees a proper and transparent selection process in the leading country in the world in general and in the countries of democracy in particular.
Supreme Court justices have lost public trust over the past few years.
The public is increasingly exposed to decisions made according to personal agendas while moving away from the language of the law.
Decisions without any source in the law while ruling out of nowhere in order to reach the desired result for them.
One example is the High Court ruling to return Judge Poznanski to the jury after she was fired in a disciplinary tribunal ruling.
High Court judges have been appointed to a committee of which they themselves are members. The public can not know about them, as they are not up for a public hearing before Man Dhao. The U.S. Constitution gives the president the authority to nominate Supreme Court justices, elected directly by the public.
It is important to listen carefully to Judge Connie Barrett's answers to the questions put to her at the hearing.
Connie Barrett stressed that no one in the White House has demanded an undertaking that she will rule on an election-related issue or on another issue.
"This would be a blatant violation of the independence of the judiciary."
She added that she would consider the variety of factors that come into play when the judges consider whether to overturn a precedent-setting decision.
"I promise to do that for any issue that arises, abortions or any other issue. I will act in accordance with the law."
"I have no agenda," Connie Barrett said.
"I have never discriminated on the basis of sexual preference and I have never discriminated on the basis of sexual preference."
Connie Barrett explained her decision not to comment on the issues she was asked about and said, "Judges can not get up one morning and say, 'I have an agenda. I love guns, I hate guns, I love abortions, I hate abortions,' and then proceed. "Like a queen and impose their will on the world. This is not Amy's law. This is the law of the American people."
When asked about George Floyd, the black detainee whose death led to huge demonstrations across the U.S., Connie Barrett replied that for her family it was a "very personal" issue - because two of her seven children are adopted blacks from Haiti. Connie Barrett said she and one of her daughters, Vivian, Burst into tears as they watched the documentation. Sen. Lindsay Graham, the Republican chair of the Judiciary Committee, asked Connie Barrett if when she ruled in the Supreme Court she would be able to "put aside" her religious beliefs.
Connie Barrett, who currently serves as a judge in a federal appeals court, replied, "I can. I did it, and I will."
Element of the meaning of the words
Antonin Scalia is the man who coined some of the basic terms of the constitutional debate.
Scalia argued, "I do not care if the drafters of the constitution had any latent intent when drafted. I look at the words on the basis of their giving to the American people and on the basis of their reasonably understandable meaning."
In other words, Supreme Court justices do not have to "legislate from the bench."
During his 32 years on the Supreme Court, Judge Scalia became the high priest of opposition to judicial activism.
Judge Connie Barrett winked at the same material.
Where are President Hayut, Waiter and Vogelman compared to Connie Barrett?
The procedure for selecting judges in the country must be changed and the deep foundations of the law must be returned to, according to which the judges will judge according to the law and not according to the agenda.