Constitutional Reasoning in the Israeli Supreme Court

Abstract

This article deals with the context and methods of constitutional reasoning developed by the Israeli Supreme Court in 40 “leading cases”. It analyses the caracteristics and types of arguments in constitutional reasoning; the judicial rethorics; the use of precedents, foreign law and kew concepts; and discusses the conclusions from a comparative perspective.

This work has been developed within the CONREASON Project, hosted by the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law in Heidelberg (Germany) and by the Institute for Legal Studies of the Centre for Social Sciences at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences in Budapest (Hungary), coordinated by András Jakab, Arthur Dyevre and Giulio Itzcovich.

Keywords: Israel, Supreme Court, Constitutional Interpretation, Constitutional Reasoning