High Court Hearing on Emanuel Mothers Adjourns


11:26 AM IL: The High Court of Justice on Tuesday morning held a closed-door session regarding the mothers of Emanuel, a session that included attorney Mordechai Green and some of the mothers. The court hearing took about 30 minutes, and the court indicated it will announce its decision later.

Another hearing is expected on Sunday to decide if the court will agree to requests to curtail the two-week jail term being served by the Emanuel fathers.

Yossi Deutsch, who was not inside the closed-door session told Kol HaChareidi the hearing addressed three basic issues.
1. The release of the mothers from the two-week jail term (to be announced. The court was extremely critical of their actions)
2. Set a hearing for Sunday regarding those already in jail, the men, to decide if they will complete the two weeks and possible address fines. (Attorney Green does not understand the purpose of Sunday’s meeting).
3. Regarding next year, the court will not permit the school to reopen unless there is compliance with the ruling, desegregation. The court added that time is running out and a solution must be found if they want the school to operate.
Most of the mothers were not present for the hearing.


  1. 3. Regarding next year, the court will not permit the school to reopen unless there is compliance with the ruling, desegregation.

    What desegregation? Over 30% of the girls in the Chassidic school were sfardi. Two of the fathers arrested were Sfardi. What the heck is with this?

  2. Exactly what law was broken?

    Did the Knesset pass a law on discrimination?
    How is discrimination defined? By race, religion, country of origin, sexual preference?
    How is discrimination measured? By absolute discrimination, discrimination by result?
    Does religious discrimination apply to religious institutions?

    Did the Judges create a new law “based on the consensus of world legal opinion”?

    Who gave the Supreme Court the right to make new laws?

    If the Supreme Court is making laws that cannot be appealed then it is functioning as a Constitutional Court. But Israel has no Constitution and the Supreme Court was never given the right to function as one.

    Laws made in the 50s and 60s in the United States, or in Europe have any bearing on Supreme Court decisions?

    Who said the “consensus of national law”, based on common law, which is based on Roman law should be the fundamental basis of Israel Law?

    Perhaps instead of Roman Law as a base, we should look to Torah law as a base for inspiration.

    In any event this question has never been settled in Israel and for a minority segment of the population to insist on Roman Law / Common Law / “consensus of national law” is in effect usurping the law for its own secular purposes.

    Israel has never been defined as a secular state, yet Judical activists are doing exactly that.

  3. To#1,
    If that the case, they should pack up their stuff and move out to a “better” place. Living in Israel is not easy, it comes with a lot of trials and tribulations, but this is our Home, and if they don’t like it there is always America!!