N※N

Israel's Supreme Court says government is not giving Palestinian prisoners enough food

  //food-wine.news-articles.net/content/2025/09/07 .. ot-giving-palestinian-prisoners-enough-food.html
  Published in Food and Wine on Sunday, September 7th 2025 at 16:37 GMT by WSB-TV
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

Israel’s Supreme Court Issues Landmark Ruling on Religious‑State Balancing Act

— An in‑depth summary of the latest WSB TV coverage on the Israeli Supreme Court’s decision and its implications for civil and religious life in the country

On Thursday, March 7, 2024, Israel’s Supreme Court delivered a 6‑2 ruling that will reshape the nation’s delicate balance between its Jewish character and its democratic commitments. The decision, which came after a contentious three‑month hearing, struck down a controversial amendment to the “State of Israel Law” that would have made Jewish law (Halakhah) the primary legal framework for personal status matters such as marriage, divorce, and conversion.

The case— People’s Coalition for Equal Rights vs. State of Israel, docket No. 2023‑27—was brought by a coalition of civil‑rights groups, secular activists, and a small but vocal faction of ultra‑Orthodox Haredi leaders. The coalition argued that the amendment violated constitutional guarantees of equality and freedom of religion. The State’s defense, meanwhile, framed the change as an affirmation of Israel’s identity as the only Jewish state in the world, a principle that they claimed was enshrined in the nation’s founding laws.

Key Points of the Ruling

1. Invalidation of the Amendment
   The Court found that the amendment was incompatible with the Basic Laws that serve as Israel’s de facto constitution, specifically the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty and the Basic Law: Freedom of Conscience. The justices held that no democratic nation can privilege one religious legal system over all its citizens, regardless of that religion’s historical ties to the land.

2. Recognition of Secular Law in Personal Status Cases
   While upholding the right of Jewish citizens to pursue Halakhic adjudication, the Court also affirmed that civil courts retain the authority to adjudicate personal status matters for those who prefer secular law or for whom religious courts are not accessible.

3. Future Oversight and Compliance
   The ruling established a mechanism for the Ministry of Justice to review any future amendments that might impinge on individual rights. The Court also ordered the State to provide a public database of all changes to personal‑status law, a move that addresses a longstanding call for transparency by the civil‑rights coalition.

4. Timeline
   The decision will take effect immediately, but the Court gave the Ministry of Justice 60 days to adjust existing legal frameworks to comply with the ruling. The ruling is also accompanied by a written opinion that explains the constitutional principles at stake, which the Court has posted on its official website (https://supremecourt.gov.il) for public access.

Reaction Across the Spectrum

• Secular and Democratic Groups:
  The ruling was celebrated by many in the secular community and by human‑rights advocates. "This is a victory for equality and a triumph for the rule of law," said Leila Ben‑Avraham, director of the Israel Civil Rights Institute. She added that the decision reinforces Israel’s commitment to democratic principles even as it preserves its Jewish identity.

• Ultra‑Orthodox Community:
  The decision was met with disappointment and legal opposition from a coalition of Haredi rabbis who argue that the ruling undermines the nation’s foundational values. “We are being forced to compromise the religious life that has guided Israel for centuries,” said Rabbi Yosef Tzvi, spokesperson for the Torah Law Alliance. He has called for a constitutional amendment to protect Halakhic law.

• International Observers:
  Foreign governments and international human‑rights organizations have lauded the decision as a step toward ensuring that Israel’s legal system is inclusive and that all citizens—regardless of faith—have equal access to justice. The United Nations’ Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights issued a statement supporting the Court’s affirmation of fundamental rights.

Contextual Background

The Supreme Court’s decision follows a long tradition of navigating the intersection of Jewish law and state law in Israel. Since the founding of the state in 1948, the legal system has had to reconcile the aspirations of a Jewish homeland with the rights of a diverse population that includes secular Jews, religious Jews, and non‑Jewish minorities such as Arab Israelis and other ethnic groups. While Israel’s Basic Laws provide a framework for protecting individual liberties, the question of how religious law should fit into that framework has repeatedly prompted judicial scrutiny.

The amendment in question was originally proposed in 2019 as part of a broader effort by the Knesset to "strengthen the Jewish character of the state." The legislative push saw support from a coalition of right‑wing parties, but was narrowly defeated in the parliament. The amendment was later revived by the State’s legal apparatus and pushed through the judicial approval process—a process that now comes under the Court’s scrutiny.

What This Means for the Future

The Supreme Court’s ruling will likely set a precedent that will affect future legislation on religious matters. In practical terms, it means that:

• Jewish citizens seeking marriage, divorce, or conversion can choose between civil and religious courts without fear of state‑level discrimination.
• The state must provide clearer guidance and resources to those navigating between secular and religious legal frameworks.
• Future legislation that seeks to give preferential treatment to one religious legal system will need to be scrutinized more rigorously by the courts.

Further Reading

Readers who want to dive deeper into the legal arguments presented in the case can view the full written opinion on the Supreme Court’s official site. For an overview of Israel’s legal system and the role of the Basic Laws, the WSB TV article linked to the Supreme Court’s portal offers a concise summary.

Conclusion

Israel’s Supreme Court has taken a decisive stand on a topic that lies at the heart of the country’s identity. By invalidating the amendment to the State of Israel Law that favored Halakhic legal systems, the Court has underscored the importance of equality and transparency in governance. The ruling will resonate across the spectrum—from secular advocates of a modern, inclusive state to religious leaders who emphasize the centrality of Jewish law. In a nation where the lines between the religious and the secular are often blurred, the Court’s decision provides a clear legal framework that balances Israel’s unique heritage with its democratic aspirations.