The test of the High Court: Will everything remain the same even after October 7?

The Central Elections Committee disqualified Sami Abu Shahada, and now the decision moves to the High Court of Justice. The article argues that after October 7, the discussion is not only legal but a value-based and national test, and asks whether the Supreme Court justices will change their previous decision patterns.

The Central Elections Committee disqualified Sami Abu Shahada, a candidate described by the author as someone who refuses to recognize the state and expresses himself in ways that raise questions about his attitude toward terrorism. The decision now goes to the Supreme Court. The article argues that in the past, the High Court tended to overturn similar disqualifications in the name of freedom of expression, but now, after October 7, reality has changed. The author presents the upcoming decision as a value-based and national test: will the court continue with old patterns or recognize that the boundaries of legitimacy have shifted. The article notes that even the Attorney General could not ignore the material presented. The tone is interpretive-value-based, using terms like "a moral and necessary act" and "democracy has the right to defend itself" – formulations reflecting the author's position rather than neutral factual reporting.