The judicial overhaul, designed to weaken the judiciary and unleash governmental power from its structural checks, should be understood, we argue, as part of a deeper transformation of Israel's constitutional identity. At its core, this transformation is not about ‘empowering the people’ but rather about questioning Israel's commitment to the fundamental principle of equal citizenship, mainly regarding the permissibility of preferring the interests of Jews over those of non-Jews. Understanding the judicial overhaul as part of this larger transformation of the state's identity, towards more Jewish and less democratic, carries normative implications regarding its legitimacy.

The judicial overhaul is often presented by the Israeli government as an attempt to undo the 1992 so-called ‘constitutional revolution’, questioning its legitimacy and asserting that a counter-revolution would be permissible, aligning with the current will of the people. An examination of Israel's constitutional history refutes this argument. We show that while the 1992 revolution enjoyed both normative and, at least, partial social legitimacy, current attempts do not.

我们认为，旨在削弱司法机构并释放政府权力的结构性检查的司法改革应该被理解为以色列宪法身份更深层次转变的一部分。从本质上讲，这种转变不是“赋予人民权力”，而是质疑以色列对平等公民基本原则的承诺，主要是关于是否允许优先考虑犹太人的利益而不是非犹太人的利益。将司法改革理解为国家身份更大转变的一部分，朝着更加犹太化和不那么民主的方向发展，对其合法性产生了规范性影响。

以色列政府经常将司法改革描述为试图撤销1992年所谓的“宪法革命”，质疑其合法性，并声称允许反革命，这符合人民当前的意愿。对以色列宪法历史的考察驳斥了这一论点。我们表明，虽然 1992 年的革命享有规范合法性，至少享有部分社会合法性，但当前的尝试却没有。