https://thespectator.com/topic/why-netanyahu-is-right-about-israels-rogue-supreme-court/
Despite recent hyperbole, Israel is not on the verge of authoritarianism. The proposed reforms to the country’s judicial system, which have attracted so much controversy — usually under the assumption that they will turn Benjamin Netanyahu into an Israeli Viktor Orbán — are lacking in historical context.
The Israeli Supreme Court is one of the most activist courts in the world. It has assigned itself more authority and subverted the balance of power between Israel’s different branches of government. It has done all this while at the same time lacking any kind of serious accountability to the electorate.
In 1950, two years after Israel’s founding, the Knesset (parliament) agreed on what is called the Harari Resolution, whereby the state would not adopt a constitution immediately but instead craft one over time. The components of what will eventually become the constitution are called Basic Laws, though as of 2023 Israel has yet to follow through with this plan. The legal status of the Basic Laws is rather nebulous in the sense that they are not yet a true constitution but are also more than just typical legislation. Some have restrictions placed on how they can be amended, and some are very vague and broad. All of these factors play into the problems that Israel’s judicial system faces.
In the absence of a constitution, the Israeli Supreme Court did not immediately acquire the power of judicial review (when the court reviews the validity of laws). Without a constitution to appeal to, there is no higher legal authority against which to judge the validity of laws. This gave the Knesset, at least in theory, parliamentary supremacy.