A constitution would be binding and could not be successfully sidestepped, ignored, and circumvented by the government - without it being blatantly obvious - like the high court's rulings are. A constitution would either A) have to include the inequities, intolerance, and racism inherent to the Israeli state, thereby exposing them to the international community in no uncertain terms; or B) force a complete reshaping of the Israeli society and its governmental, civilian, and institutional infrastructure. It would also clearly define government responsibility, control, and power, which would effectively eliminate the culture of cronyism and independent self-serving interests that provide the trademark chaotic nature of the Israeli government. Israel HAS no constitution - nor will it anytime soon - so of course this oath "isn't unconstitutional"...but it's much more than just unwise - it's a potential prelude to other measures which could easily lead Israel on a path toward fascism. Before passing such a bill, it would be wise to seriously consider the 'actual' motives of its proponents.
Second rocket fired from Gaza explodes inside Strip (Haaretz)
from the article: ANALYSIS / Lieberman's loyalty oath isn't unconstitutional, it's unwise