High Court Issues Conditional Order Against Expanded Rabbinical Court Powers
The High Court of Justice issued a conditional order on a petition against expanding Rabbinical Court powers over divorce proceedings, property, and custody, requiring the state to respond by January 2027.
The High Court of Justice issued a conditional order on Sunday regarding a petition filed by the "Israel Hofsheet" movement, challenging the expansion of Rabbinical Court jurisdictions over matters associated with divorce, including alimony, property division, and child custody.
The petition seeks to annul Section 3 of the Rabbinical Courts Jurisdiction Law, which was amended in November 2025 to broaden the powers of religious courts. Following the ruling, the state is required to explain why this authority should not be revoked, with its response due by January 3, 2027.
At the core of the petition lies the argument that the law enables one spouse—solely by filing for divorce first—to determine where proceedings regarding alimony, property, and custody will take place, thereby dragging the other partner into the Rabbinical Court against their will and without mutual consent.
Arguments on Freedom of Religion and Equality
According to the petition, filed by attorneys Dr. Hagai Kalai and Lior Sokol of the Kalai Rosen & Co. law firm, the legislation constitutes a severe infringement on freedom from religion and the right of every individual to choose the judicial forum for resolving the most sensitive personal matters. Petitioners argue that individuals forced into religious tribunals are subjected to proceedings governed by norms and worldviews alien to their own, even when decisions directly impact their property, livelihood, and children.
The petition further contends that the arrangement undermines equality, noting inter alia that women are barred from serving as judges in Rabbinical Courts, and that religious law may yield outcomes inconsistent with the principle of equality.
Fueling the Jurisdiction Race
Additionally, the petition asserts that the law exacerbates the "jurisdiction race" between Rabbinical Courts and family courts. Instead of encouraging couples to resolve disputes amicably, the mechanism creates incentives to rush filings to preempt the other party, escalating conflict, introducing undue leverage, and harming the best interests of children.
"Israel Hofsheet" emphasized that the issue transcends technical legal efficiency, touching upon core values of freedom of choice, equality, and the fundamental right of individuals to manage their personal and family lives free from religious coercion.
