When is too much democracy bad for democracy?
Over in Israel, the answer was “This week.”
Prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu ran into a political buzz saw when he attempted to reform the nation’s courts. He wanted to “Give the governing coalition control over judicial appointments … grant parliament the authority to overturn its decisions and limit judicial review of laws,” according to the Associated Press.
Hundreds of thousands of Israelis protested in a general strike that shut down airports, medical care, and even some trash collection. Images of highways choked with protestors flashed across the globe. In the face of this mass demonstration, Netenyahu postponed his proposal - a defeat that was less a surrender than a promise to fight another day.
This prompted a debate at my dinner table. Would Netenyahu’s proposals weaken, or even threaten the end of Israeli democracy?
Quite the contrary. Giving parliament the power to overturn court rulings would be a step toward more democracy - it would put more power in the hands of those who are elected at the expense of those who are appointed.
So… why all the protesting?
Well. Whether you think such a proposal is a good idea depends on whether you’re one with the majority. And it doesn’t cut just one political direction.
Theodore Roosevelt toyed with a similar idea when he ran for president with the Progressive “Bull Moose” party in 1912. He was sick and tired of seeing the conservative courts defeat his progressive programs.
Who elected them? He asked rhetorically. What right did unelected judges have to overturn laws that had the overwhelming support of the people?
Bibi and Teddy wouldn’t have much in common most days of the week. One approached politics from the right, and the other from the left, but on this, with a majority of the people behind them, they were agreed - courts should be subject to popular review.
To their supporters, this made them champions of democracy.
But to their opponents, it made them dangerous demagogues.
The peril of subjecting judicial rulings to popular review comes when you’re in the minority. It’s the reason the Founding Fathers established an independent judiciary in the first place - to protect us from the tyranny of the majority.
To quote James Madison, “If men were angels, no government would be necessary.” But just as we’re imperfect, our governments are, too. Judicial review isn’t the greatest solution. Courts are just as susceptible to corruption and political pressure as legislators, and their judgments don’t always come down on the right side of history. But sometimes, when the stakes are highest, an independent judiciary might just be the only thing that can protect democracy from itself.