The Supreme Court's ruling Thursday, overturning the deportation order issued for Lara Alqasem, an American student denied entry to Israel over her support of the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, again showed how the court inappropriately interferes with the decisions of the executive branch.
The ruling significantly undermines the state's sovereign authority to decide who enters its borders in cases involving foreign nationals.
It will surprise no one to learn that Supreme Court justices have political agendas that are clearly reflected in their rulings and the makeup of the bench often predetermines the results of a case.
The Supreme Court is made up of judges who hold purely leftist worldviews. They were chosen for the role because their personal politics were in line with the court's overall agenda, one that pushes rights over obligations and boasts the type of liberalism that characterizes universities like Yale, Harvard and Berkeley in the United States.
But in case anyone has forgotten, Israel is in the Middle East – not in the Swiss Alps.
There is a hefty amount of judicial naivety in accepting Alqasem's claim that she is "reformed" in her opinions and has gone to great lengths to be accepted into the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. The ruling practically paints her to be "Righteous Among the Nations," whose past has been expunged and her future is bright and pure.
Her commitment that she will not promote the BDS cause while in Israel is unconvincing. She was the president of an organization that promoted boycotting the Jewish state and any commitment she makes about the future is worthless.
The court also lent unusual importance to the position of the Hebrew University, which feared its international standing would be compromised by this affair. The school's plea was so passionate, one might think for a moment that the Hebrew University's global prestige hinged solely on Alqasem's admission.
A university whose Faculty of Law holds a conference titled "Life under Occupation" and which provides an academic platform for the international attempt to present Israel as an apartheid state, cannot be taken at its word when it comes to accepting a student who supports boycotting Israel.
The Supreme Court would be wise to curb its penchant for intervening in the state's actions as it wages a battle against the delegitimization of Israel.
