Yoram

Rabin

security, Talking thinking demographics

has upheld the constitutionality of law that prevents familyunification in gration arrangements." Israel between citizens of the state and The indivisible link between the securesidents of the Palestinian Authority and demographicarguments was also (as rity well as citizens of Iran, Iraq, Lebanon and raised in ,6002 the last time the Supreme Court deliberated on the citizenship law. Syria). The Citizenship and Entry into Israel On that occasion, justices AyalaProcaccia Law is special dif- and Salim Joubran questioned the credcase; itis law with ferent dominant in the legisla- ibility of the security purpose argument, propostive process and in the examination of its ing that the true purpose of the law may When the law was first be to use immigrationlaw to prevent an constitutionality. ,3002 itsmain purpose was state increase in Israel'sArab population. passedin It was The citizenship law episode is over. The security. passedduringthe second intifada, on the initiativeof the Shin Bet cabinet will soon be asked to discuss bill service, after number of cases that puts forth comprehensiveimmigrasecurity the exact figure is disputed in which tion arrangement. That is the placeto ask used for terwhether such an arrangement is "also exentry permitsto Israel were roristactivities. pectedto address the demographic quesOver time, however, new of the meaning tion that is,the question purpose arose, At the end of of Jewish state and whether that meandemographic goal. the day the justices unanimouslyaccepted ing includes the need to foster the existhe state's argument that the law's purpose tence of Jewish majorityin Israel," as was At the same time itis Rivlin proposed. security-based. clear that at least some of the judges Shlomo Avineri, Amnon Rubinstein quite in the majorityopinion "talked security" and Liav Orgad authored the outline of while "thinkingdemographics." Some for the comprehensive immigration policy even admitted as much. Justice Miriam state, and itwas cited in the Supreme Court Naor noted that the purpose of the law ruling. They proposedbasingIsrael'simwas but that ithad demographic security migrationpolicy in part on the state's these issues were definition as implicationsalthough democracy with specific "indivisible." purpose: that is, state in which the Jewish Justice Eliezer Rivlin explainedthat to self-determipeopleexercises its right the connation. In referencing this,Levy noted that "European states are toughening ditions for immigration, for demographic in light of the moral rightness precisely reasons." Justice Edmond of this argument, "In my opinion itis not Levy, who was in the minority that sought to overclear whether the security tack taken by opinion turn the law, explained that Jews must be the state reinforces or undermines this poin the majorityin Jewish state and desition."This begs the question of whether nounced what he claimed was the implica- the time has come to take demography out tion that the minorityjustices of the closet. "put their seal of approvalon the so-called right of return of the 1948 refugees." The writer is the dean ofthe law school Levy said "the result might have been different" if at the College ofManagement in Tel Aviv
Court

the state had not insisted on usingthe seforth curity argument instead of putting "the composition of arguments regarding Israel's population, or appropriate immi-