Anyone who has ever visited West Bank settlements knows that the vast majority of them – particularly the ones where some of my friends live—are neatly gardened, bucolic communities with multi-generational families living in a sort suburban utopia. They certainly belie the common media picture of brimming with gun-toting, brash talking Israeli militants hell bent on killing people for an unachievable, violent messianic vision.

But that darker picture, too, exists. Mind you, many such outposts are very small and adjacent to established settlements; their residents seek to expand Jewish boundaries to thwart a future Palestinian state.

So it’s no surprise that within the American Jewish community – as to a much greater degree in Israel itself—the issue of Jewish towns on West Bank lands Israel won in the 1967 Six-Day War (prompted by weeks of bellicose actions by Arab states) is the most heated one in the diverse pro-Israel coalition, which as the recent J Street national convention in Washington, D.C. showed, is far from homogenous on the topic. Indeed, raucous debates on what are known as settlements, but which also can be thriving, multi-generational communities of tens of thousands, are not uncommon in Jewish settings.

But on this all pro-Israel stalwarts should agree: As a democracy, the Jewish state of Israel must be one where its citizens follow the laws as well as have legal avenues to appeal those statutes. With that in mind, how can one seek to disobey – or support those who do so—the Israeli cabinet’s order earlier this week to demolish by calendar year’s end all illegal West Bank outposts built on private Palestinian land? 

By the way, give Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu some credit on what he’s saying on the issue – and then let’s judge him on his actions. (See more at: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/netanyahu-settlers-price-tag-policy-is-unacceptable-1.347941 ).

The Supreme Court decision calls for the demolition of six outposts; more than a year ago I told Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Oren that his Defense Minister, Ehud Barak, said there were more than 100 such West Bank settlements, which he and the last three Israeli prime ministers have defined as illegal. Mr. Oren, an outstanding representative here, did his job. He diplomatically avoided the topic, noting that his understanding was that there were fewer and that the government was indeed dealing with the issue.

The court’s decision comes after clashes between Israeli troops and settlers over the demolition by the soldiers of three structures at the Gilad Farm outpost. Danny Dayan, chairman of the settler’s umbrella group, called the military’s moves “an act of provocation that will only serve to incite and anger while serving no practical purpose in bettering relations with our Arab neighbors.” He called for negotiations so the situation can be “solved amicably rather than through this provocative approach being proposed by the government.”

But the erection of the illegal structures, the political promise to take them down and the threats from both sides has gone on far too long. Mr. Dayan is right to call for talks, as a responsible leader should. Yet there is another reality that must be dealt with simultaneously: Those setting up the outposts are knowingly thwarting the law. That cannot be good for Israeli democracy, which for American Jews rightly is a cornerstone of our pride in the Jewish state.