Abstract

The rise of populist political rhetoric signals a departure from accepted models of democratic representation. Nowadays, in Israel and in other democratic countries, many elected officials purport to give effect to the raw convictions of their constituents. We contend that calls for elected officials to mirror popular views undermine democratic representation. In addition to the theoretical challenges it faces, the narrative of mirroring public sentiment has the potential to disguise what might be the underlying intent of populist politicians—to actively manipulate the political agenda and reshape popular preferences, while passing these off as reflecting the public’s authentic convictions. We call this “false mirroring.” Populist rhetoric has also spilled over into the judiciary. Some judges embrace public opinion, incorporate it into their decision-making and, in doing so, generate populist courts. This article examines Israeli case studies in order to expose the unsettling role of populist rhetoric in both political and judicial contexts. Judges, we suggest, must continue developing tools to resist judicial populism and maintain robust and independent courts.

中文翻译：

---

民粹主义言论，虚假镜像和法院

摘要

民粹主义政治言论的兴起标志着人们背离了公认的民主代表模式。如今，在以色列和其他民主国家，许多民选官员声称落实到选民的生的信念。我们认为，要求民选官员反映民意的做法破坏了民主代表制。除了面临理论上的挑战之外，反映公众情绪的叙述还可能掩盖民粹主义政客的潜在意图-积极操纵政治议程并重塑民众偏好，同时假冒民众偏好，以反映公众的真实性。信念。我们称其为“错误镜像”。民粹主义言论也蔓延到司法部门。一些法官拥护舆论，将其纳入他们的决策中，并以此建立民粹主义法院。本文研究了以色列的案例研究，以揭示民粹主义言论在政治和司法环境中的令人不安的作用。我们建议，法官们必须继续开发工具来抵抗司法民粹主义，并维持健全和独立的法院。