Strengthen the enforcement of get laws

Often it is said that our community is moving to the right in its religious observance, but there is one missing aspect of this rightward shift. Throughout the centuries, Jewish communities have admirably maintained their unity through batei din, local rabbinic courts that settled civil matters between individual Jews. Their judgment was final, and it was anathema to ignore or disrespect their rulings.

The disrespect towards rabbinic and secular authority among some Jews is evident in the weekly seruv list issued by the Organization for the Resolution of Agunot. Beyond public humiliation, there is little that batei din can do to enforce a spouse’s request for a get.

New York has had two provisions on the books to eliminate “barriers to remarriage,” which is legalese for giving the get. Section 236 of the Domestic Relations Law enables the courts to withhold alimony from a spouse who does not give the get. Section 253, on the books since 1983, is more explicit. A plaintiff suing for divorce would not be granted the divorce unless that person gives the get.

As any lawyer knows, every law worth its salt has its loopholes. For Section 253, when a wife sues her husband for divorce, she has already removed the husband’s “barriers to remarriage,” but the husband is not required to do so by this law. Until the husband provides a get, the wife cannot remarry.

In a contested divorce, there is always a defendant, but rarely does the defendant oppose the divorce itself. The defendant only opposes the other spouse’s conditions for it, such as the division of property and child custody. Allowing a recalcitrant husband to use the get as leverage undermines the authority of the state courts.

Last December, we reported on Aaron Friedman’s refusal to give the get to Tamar Epstein. Dissatisfied with a secular court’s decision, he is using the get as leverage to overturn the custody ruling.

Both spouses should be required to remove the each other’s barriers to remarriage in order to strengthen the courts and reduce the likelihood of agunot. The loophole must be closed.