Latent Judicial Intervention: The Case of Self-Claiming Palestinian Informers

Menachem Hofnung; Ofir Hadad

doi:10.1086/717419

Latent Judicial Intervention: The Case of Self-Claiming Palestinian Informers

Menachem Hofnung^*
, Ofir Hadad

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

How do judicial techniques enable courts to have a very effective impact on actual national policy while avoiding making binding decisions? Previous academic studies have focused mostly on the controversial capacity (and willingness) of courts to intervene in a country's policy through statutory interpretation or authoritative decisions. We show that by refraining from sweeping landmark decisions, courts can have a latent but substantial impact on actual national policy through technical and procedural measures. The case study here is the Israeli immigration policy toward a large group of Palestinian litigants (916 petitions) who claim to be neglected security-related collaborators.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	187-206
Number of pages	20
Journal	Journal of Law and Courts
Volume	11
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1086/717419
State	Published - 17 Apr 2023

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Law and Courts Organized Section of the American Political Science Association.

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDG 10 Reduced Inequalities

Keywords

Collaborators
Coping Strategy
Israel
Judicial Policymaking
Palestine

Access to Document

10.1086/717419

Cite this

@article{6ec83273f37948c2b39b4daf5cb084de,

title = "Latent Judicial Intervention: The Case of Self-Claiming Palestinian Informers",

abstract = "How do judicial techniques enable courts to have a very effective impact on actual national policy while avoiding making binding decisions? Previous academic studies have focused mostly on the controversial capacity (and willingness) of courts to intervene in a country's policy through statutory interpretation or authoritative decisions. We show that by refraining from sweeping landmark decisions, courts can have a latent but substantial impact on actual national policy through technical and procedural measures. The case study here is the Israeli immigration policy toward a large group of Palestinian litigants (916 petitions) who claim to be neglected security-related collaborators.",

keywords = "Collaborators, Coping Strategy, Israel, Judicial Policymaking, Palestine",

author = "Menachem Hofnung and Ofir Hadad",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Law and Courts Organized Section of the American Political Science Association.",

year = "2023",

month = apr,

day = "17",

doi = "10.1086/717419",

language = "אנגלית",

volume = "11",

pages = "187--206",

journal = "Journal of Law and Courts",

issn = "2164-6570",

publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Latent Judicial Intervention

T2 - The Case of Self-Claiming Palestinian Informers

AU - Hofnung, Menachem

AU - Hadad, Ofir

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Law and Courts Organized Section of the American Political Science Association.

PY - 2023/4/17

Y1 - 2023/4/17

N2 - How do judicial techniques enable courts to have a very effective impact on actual national policy while avoiding making binding decisions? Previous academic studies have focused mostly on the controversial capacity (and willingness) of courts to intervene in a country's policy through statutory interpretation or authoritative decisions. We show that by refraining from sweeping landmark decisions, courts can have a latent but substantial impact on actual national policy through technical and procedural measures. The case study here is the Israeli immigration policy toward a large group of Palestinian litigants (916 petitions) who claim to be neglected security-related collaborators.

AB - How do judicial techniques enable courts to have a very effective impact on actual national policy while avoiding making binding decisions? Previous academic studies have focused mostly on the controversial capacity (and willingness) of courts to intervene in a country's policy through statutory interpretation or authoritative decisions. We show that by refraining from sweeping landmark decisions, courts can have a latent but substantial impact on actual national policy through technical and procedural measures. The case study here is the Israeli immigration policy toward a large group of Palestinian litigants (916 petitions) who claim to be neglected security-related collaborators.

KW - Collaborators

KW - Coping Strategy

KW - Israel

KW - Judicial Policymaking

KW - Palestine

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85191384045

U2 - 10.1086/717419

DO - 10.1086/717419

M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???

AN - SCOPUS:85191384045

SN - 2164-6570

VL - 11

SP - 187

EP - 206

JO - Journal of Law and Courts

JF - Journal of Law and Courts

IS - 1

ER -

Latent Judicial Intervention: The Case of Self-Claiming Palestinian Informers

Abstract

Bibliographical note

UN SDGs

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this