English follows the Hebrew.

Translated from YNET Hebrew Sept. 12, 2023
All 15 Supreme Court Justices are discussing petitions against the cancellation of the "reasonableness clause" - and Judge Amit said that he is not afraid of "horror scenarios", but noted: "Democracy does not die with strong blows". Solver disavowed the legislation, and Hayat stated that he also thought it was appropriate to reduce the grounds "through the ruling". The government representative was asked to hurry - and claimed that the time limit given to him was "unreasonable". Ongoing updates (follow) 

9:11 | The 15 judges in the courtroom: the High Court hearing on the cancellation of the reason for reasonableness has begun
Gilad Morag, Gilad Cohen

15 Supreme Court judges entered Hall C in the Jerusalem Court. The dramatic discussion of the petitions against the cancellation of the reasonableness clause has begun.

9:08 | MK Gottlieb came to the discussion: "It's a circus"

9:49 | Hayut to the representative of the Knesset: "Who supervises that the government acts reasonably? You agree that there is law but there is no judge"
Gilad Morag

Hayut referred to the amendment to the Basic Law: the Judiciary, which abolishes the use of the reasonableness clause against the actions of the government and the ministers - and addressed the representative of the Knesset at the High Court hearing, after he claimed that the ministers are still obliged to act reasonably: "Who supervises that they indeed act reasonably? Or as the ombudsman wrote: 'You agree that there is justice, but there is no justice.'" Lawyer Yitzhak Brett promised to address the issue later.

YNET: Top court chief argues eliminating reasonableness clause goes against global trends
Hayut cites England and Australia as examples of countries that expanded use of standard; Government representative says Israel's founding document must not 'constrain the sovereign'
YNET correspondents | Sept. 12, 2023, Updated:12:48

Supreme Court Chief Justice Esther Hayut argued in a landmark hearing of challenges to key components of the government's push to overhaul the judiciary Tuesday that revoking the reasonableness clause goes against the global trend. (cont.)

Esser Agaroth (2¢):
MK Gottlieb is right. This is a circus. Why is the government even giving legitimacy to a court deciding the fate of a law that was passed with the goal of limiting this very court's unbridled power?

Of course,

The reasoning employed by the court is ridiculous. The President of the Supreme Court actually asked "Who supervises that they [the government] indeed act reasonably?"

I can answer that for her. The voters supervise whether the government acts reasonably or not, not the courts. The people elected the government. If the people do not believe it acts reasonably, it will elect a different government.

The people did not elect the far left court, which has proven time and time again what it considers to be reasonable, Western values, not Jewish values. And, no, my fellow American Jews, they are unequivocally not the same thing.

The "reasonableness clause" is one of the many Western, ie. non-Jewish, holdovers from the British Mandate. What is reasonable is a highly subjective concept, one which has been exploited by the leftist court led by former Supreme Court President (Chief Justice) Aharon Barak and his disciples.

Those who did not vote in the current government love this court, and its potential application of the "reasonableness clause," since its ultimate goal is to impose its leftist agenda on us.

These Jews have been brainwashed into believing that the Haredi (ultra-orthodox) dedication to Torah study and its observance is the true threat, and that if they gain enough power, they will force men to come together to pray and to study, force women to dress modestly and to cover their hair, close non-kosher restaurants, and close all businesses on Shabbat and Holidays, etc. In other words, they will take away our freedom to do what we want, travel on Shabbat, eat pork and shellfish, have indiscriminate sex, and use abortion as birth control, to name a few.

Israel is not here on this earth to do whatever it wants. We are here on this earth to do what The Almighty wants, to the best of our ability.

This, of course, is the farthest thing from the minds of the majority of Israel's Supreme Court justices. The Erev Rav (mixed multitude; Ex. 12:38), that came out of Egypt with us into the Sinai, was and still is concerned with self-will. They are stuck in a galuth (exilic) mentality. Thirty-three hundred years ago, it was their unwavering identification with the Land of Egypt. Now it is their preference for the Western World (Edom / Rome) over a Jewish one.

The same Jews concerned with self-will, some even pretending that their will is The Almighty's Will, love to sound the alarm over Israel's integration of religion and state, and point to the progressive non-Jewish governments as examples of success, and what Israel's democracy deMOCKracy should strive to be.

The Torah itself outlines a truly Jewish form of government, one which is supposed to be employed within the Land that has been Divinely promised to Jewish People. The Almighty gave us the Land of Israel, and told us how He expects it to be governed. It's not rocket science. But our misguided brethren have been indoctrinated into loyalty to the State at the expense of loyalty to The Almighty and His Torah.We can be a "stiff-necked people," and apparently do not like being told what to do.

Supreme Court Chief Justice Esther Hayut argued... that revoking the reasonableness clause goes against the global trend.
She mentions English and Australia as examples. She left out the U. S., where, if the Congress and the states amended Article III - Judicial Branch, of the Constitution, as far as I know, the courts would not have any power to stop it, with the exception of how the amendment process was carried out, as well as address any overlooked conflicts with other parts of the Constitution.

So what is the translation of Chief Justice Esther Hayut's comments?
It is important to be like the non-Jews. It is important for Israel to concern itself with the trends of the non-Jewish nations of the world. Israel should cancel its nature of being a separate and distinct people. It is preferable for the people of Israel to assimilate. And eventually? ...Disappear.

God forbid!