Meretz Chairwoman MK Zahava Galon forced the Israeli Supreme Court to desecrate Shabbat, with an appeal which was already irrelevant when she filed it, argued pundit, author and Holocaust scholar Itamar Levin in a column he published on the News1 website.

Galon appealed to the court on Shabbat day, Sept. 3, asking that it order the Ministry of Transport to carry out the scheduled works on the Railroad infrastructure which had been halted on Friday night due to Haredi party pressure. “This meant that the employee on call at the reception had to receive the appeal and pass it to the Justice on call, which happened to be Anat Baron,” Levin wrote, suggesting this could also mean that the people on call in the Justice’s chambers had to work on Shabbat as well.

But, as turns out from the Justice’s ruling, also given on Shabbat, the appeal was not urgent and did not justify forcing a state employee to desecrate Shabbat. Justice Baron wrote: “The appeal was submitted today, Shabbat day, at 3 PM. When it was submitted, the infrastructure works had been ceased yesterday, following the prime minister’s order shortly before the start of Shabbat. Under these circumstances there is no point in issuing the requested injunction in response to a situation which the appellant claims was created on this weekend.”

Justice Baron instead ordered the State to respond by Monday, Sept. 5, to Galon’s appeal for an injunction — an appeal she could have submitted Saturday night, Levin wrote.

Israeli courts, including the Supreme Court, maintain skeletal Shabbat and Holiday shifts to respond to the most urgent needs. These include police requests for injunctions to prevent the smuggling of children, or for arrest warrants. But Levin wrote that he did not recall any other time when the Supreme Court was compelled to desecrate Shabbat to deal with an administrative issue such as the works on the railroad.

Following a Supreme Court Ruling Thursday ordering the evacuation and demolition of 17 structures in the Netiv Ha’Avot outpost in Gush Etzion, rightwing politicians called for a Regulation Act that would set out to legalize thousands of Judea and Samaria properties about which there are now or may be future claims. The general outline of the proposed regulatory legislation will authorize the Israeli government to compel proven claimants to receive market-value compensations, in comparable land or in money. A coalition move back in July to start work on the Regulation Act was thwarted by the AG Avihay Mandelblitt, who said the law is not constitutional and would be knocked down by the high court on appeal.

Thursday’s ruling, by a three-judge panel, evoked sharp criticism on the right, with Habayit Hayehudi Chairman Naftali Bennett condemning the ruling, saying extreme leftwing elements who have given up on their ability to ever persuade the people to accept a Palestinian State in Judea and Samaria are bypassing the public and usurping the legal system to force their policies on the majority. “When the Supreme Court collaborates with them this erodes the public trust in the court,” Bennett warned.

Minister Zeev Elkin (Likud), who is a resident of Gush Etzion, said the high court’s “scandalous decision” constitutes the crossing of red lines, revealing the court’s utter disconnection from common sense and from the historic values and the legacy of the nation of Israel. Elkin called on Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked (Habayit Hayehudi) to lead a far-reaching reform to regain the public’s trust in the Supreme Court.

Thursday’s ruling was an uncompromising order to destroy homes that “were built illegally on private lands.” Considering the fact that the ruling required forcing residents out of their homes, and the large number of homes in question, Court President Justice Miriam Naor gave government and the residents 18 months to prepare for the evacuation/demolition.

Naor wrote that the court ignored on principle the fact that the outpost had been established with government endorsement and support, saying government does not enjoy a special status when it comes to standing before the high court. “In the judicial process government is equal to other litigants,” Naor emphasized, adding that the fact that government had been aiding in a long-term illegal enterprise does not make it kosher.

According to the petition by Peace Now, which dug up the Arabs who are now claiming to be the original owners of Netiv Ha’Avot, the lands of the Al-Khader village near Bethlehem and Gush Etzion, in Judea, had been undergoing regulation by the Jordanian government at the time the IDF conquered the land in June 1967. The Israeli court opted not to rule whether or not the Jordanian government had the legal authority to carve up and hand out the land to local Arabs, land it had acquired through an act of war, invading the “West Bank,” including Jewish Gush Etzion, in 1948.

Davidi Pearl, who heads the Gush Etzion Regional Council, responded to the High Court’s decision saying the court had opted to belittle the government which had presented a vast array of legal alternatives that had been confirmed by the AG. Pearl called on the government to act immediately to enact a law to protect the honor of the Israeli government and the Judea and Samaria residents who had acted in good faith with the government’s encouragement.

The Israeli Supreme Court on Sunday denied an appeal against the demolition of the Dura village house belonging to one of the terrorists who carried out the drive by shooting that killed Rabbi Miki Mark and injured his wife and children.

The appeal was submitted by The wife of Mohammad Majid Amaira, 38, from Dura, a member of the Palestinian security forces. Amaira was detained for questioning three days after the murder and confessed he was the driver during the attack, while Mohammed Jabarah al-Fakih, 29, also from Dura, fired at the Mark family car.

Amaira’s wife, his daughters and HaMoked, an Israeli NGO assisting PA Arabs in their troubles with the Shabak, filed the appeal jointly.

According to NGO Monitor, Hamoked’s annual budget as of 2014 was $2,617,980, provided by Norway, the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC), Human Rights and International Law Secretariat (jointly fundded by Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark and the Netherlands), UNDP (one of whose officials has just been indicted for being a Hamas agent), Finland, CCFD (France), Misereor (Germany), Trocaire (Ireland), Oxfam-Novib (Netherlands), and AECID (Spain).

Rightwing movement Im Tirtzu praised the Supreme Court’s decision to authorize the home demolition, and condemned the “torrent of judicial appeals” submitted by HaMoked on behalf of terrorists.

Im Tirtzu CEO, Matan Peleg, said in an email statement: “Im Tirtzu welcomes the Supreme Court’s decision to authorize the home demolition of the terrorist who murdered Rabbi Miki Mark. This decision sends a clear message to European governments, which fund radical Israeli NGOs to submit appeals to Israel’s Supreme Court aimed at damaging the IDF’s deterrence capabilities.”

Peleg added: “Im Tirtzu will continue leading the fight against this phenomenon. The Israeli public has a right to know who’s defending terrorists.”

The group Professors For a Strong Israel and NGO Regavim have petitioned the Israeli Supreme Court asking that the court order the Prime Minister and the Interior Security Minister to act to quash the systematic provocations carried out by the Waqf staff against Jewish visitors on the Temple Mount. The appeal says the Waqf has hired dozens of new “guards” who follow Jewish groups as they walk around the Temple Mount compound, taunting and cursing them, taking their pictures and even rubbing against them intentionally, all in an effort to intimidate the visitors.

Prof. Ronen Shoval, chairman of PFSI, told Israel Radio Friday morning that “there has been a disproportionate increase of the number of Waqf personnel on Temple Mount. Their presence there is not passive, they’re there to look for frictions, in a manner that assaults the fundamental rights of Jewish visitors on the Temple Mount.”

“It’s become a form of abuse, and invasion of privacy,” Shoval added. “Not only is ascending to the Temple Mount being made [needlessly] complicated and difficult, limiting the time and length of visits, but once they’re up there, the Jews who ascend to the Temple Mount are actually being persecuted.”

“Unfortunately there’s no place in all of the Land of Israel where a Jew is feeling more in exile than on the Temple Mount,” Shoval concluded. “All the Jews who go up there suffer persecution by the Waqf personnel.”

Israeli Supreme Court Chief Justice Miriam Naor on Wednesday issued a temporary injunction against the Interior Ministry ordering it to explain within two months why 11 petitioners who underwent Reform or Conservative conversion in Israel should be refused a Certificate of Oleh (immigrant) based on the Law of Return, and why they should not be registered as Jews in the Population Registry.

The Law of Return (Hok Ha-Shvut) was passed in 1950, giving Jews the right of return and the right to live in Israel and to gain Israeli citizenship. In 1970, the right of entry and settlement was extended to people with one Jewish grandparent or people married to a Jew, although they were not considered Jewish under Jewish halakha. Those who immigrate to Israel under the Law of Return are immediately entitled to gain citizenship in Israel.

According to the halakhic definition, a person is Jewish if his or her mother is Jewish, or if he or she converts to Judaism. However, Orthodox Jews do not recognize conversions performed by Reform or Conservative authorities. But the Law of Return states that any Jew, regardless of affiliation, may immigrate to Israel and claim his or her citizenship.

In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that all conversions performed outside of Israel would be recognized by the authorities under the Law of Return. The court had already ruled in 1989 that conversions performed outside of Israel were valid for the Law of Return, regardless of whether they were Orthodox, Conservative, or Reform. The 2005 ruling extended that decision, finding that overseas conversions were still valid even if the individuals did the preparatory work for the conversions while residing in Israel.

Now it appears that the Supreme Court is prepared to bring down the last vestige of halakhic Judaism regarding conversion, in an attempt to authorize Reform and Conservative religious courts in Israel to covert, forcing the state to accept their converts as Jews.

The current Interior Minister, Aryeh Deri, is an ultra-Orthodox Jew, and will most likely fight the court’s obvious plan tooth and nail. But in the end, he will have one of three choices: obey the court (not going to happen), resign (not likely), or change the law, which is, in fact, anchored in the Haredi parties’ coalition agreement.

Can the Law of Return be changed today? Can the 1970 dreaded ruling allowing non-Jews to be accepted as Jews also be revoked, while the Knesset is at it? The fate of Netanyahu’s government may depend on it.

The Likud supreme court on Sunday ordered the Likud Central Committee, Political Bureau, Directorate, Secretariat and Knesset faction to conduct reviews of the failures of Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon (Likud) regarding the eviction of Jewish residents from Beit Rachel and Leah in Hebron, Srugim reported . The Jewish residents moved into the building, which had been lawfully purchased from its Arab owner, on Thursday, January 21, and were forcibly removed by Police and Border Guard officers on Friday, January 22.

The discussions in each Likud institution will include a vote on a call to Prime Minister Netanyahu to remove Ya’alon from his post as Defense Minister, as well as a call on Likud elected officials to act at once to annul the eviction action against the Jewish residents of Beit Rachel and Leah.

The Likud supreme court ruled on a petition by six members of Likud Eretz Israel Loyalists against Ya’alon, in which they demanded the suspension of Ya’alon’s Likud membership over his order to evict the Jewish residents in Hebron. The petition, submitted by attorney Aviad Visoly, is based on an item in the Likud constitution according to which a member who aids a competing party would be subject to a two-year suspension from the Likud party. The petitioners argued that the Ya’alon order to evict the Jews from their homes aided the leftwing parties which are eager to eliminate the Jewish presence in Hebron.

The party court’s ruling stated that “there is justification for a piercing debate with Minister Ya’alon over his decision to evict the Jews from their homes in Hebron, a decision that may be criticized and action may be taken to change it, or, in the least, prevent a repetition of this behavior in the future.” But the court ruled that the debate does not belong in the court but in the various party institutions.

The court has ordered the heads of each of the party institutions to set a date for the debates in no later than seven days.

Following a six-hour debate, the nine-member committee to appoint religious court judges on Monday agreed on only one judge out of the seven who must yet be appointed, by order of the State Supreme Court. Over the objection of Sephardi Chief Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef, Rabbi Eliezer Igra, a national religious scholar, was elected by a vote of seven in favor and two Haredi members abstaining, to be a Supreme Rabbinical Court Judge, and serve on the very committee that had just elected him.

But the singular appointment of Rabbi Igra will not fulfill the ultimatum issued by Israel’s State Supreme Court, which back in January ordered all the missing positions on the Supreme Rabbinical Court to be filled by Thursday this week, or else all the temporary appointments on the court would be revoked and the court would cease to operate.

Nevertheless, Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked (Habayit Hayehudi) called the vote “a tremendous achievement for Habayit Hayehudi,” adding, “I’m very pleased.” She said that the non-Haredi bloc on the committee, which holds a majority of five members, have been suggesting several candidates for the Supreme Rabbinical Court, and they had all been rejected by Interior Minister Aryeh Deri (Shas).

Rabbi Igra studied for ten years at the hesder yeshiva Kerem B’Yavneh, served in the IDF Armored Corps and fought in the Yom Kippur War. He was the Talmud study partner of Yoni Netanyahu, the prime minister’s late brother.

The committee ran into several stalemates on Monday, leaving the Supreme Rabbinical Court short-handed, after several of its members have retired. The Haredi committee members were able to torpedo the proposed appointments of Rabbis David Bass and Uriel Lavi to the supreme religious court, and the National Religious members, for their part, were able to block new appointments the Haredim desired to several local rabbinic courts.

The only reason Rabbi Igra received his appointment had to do with the bad blood between the Sephardi and Ashkenazi chief rabbis, according to the website Haredim 10. Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi David Lau joined the National Religious to usher in Rabbi Igra as revenge against Sephardi Chief Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef for appointing Shas member Moshe Dagan as the Chief Rabbinate CEO over Rabbi Lau’s fierce objection.