This chapter analyzes doctrines in Israeli constitutional and administrative law. The chapter shows that there is a strong commitment to consistency in these legal fields. However, consistency cannot serve as an assumption that explains every doctrine in the field. Specifically, it is difficult to construct a consistent pyramid of norms that can justify judicial review of legislation in Israel. The doctrine of relative voidness of flawed administrative actions leads to inconsistent legal solutions. Finally, the doctrines related to the use of physical means in security interrogations are also not consistent. Consistency is therefore an assumption that works well only some of the time.