DOCSLIB.ORG

Article Title

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Article Title International In-house Counsel Journal Vol.12, No. 47, Spring 2019, 1 Checkmate, Forum-Shoppers: How Uniform Rules of Procedure Can End The Beit Din Selection Stalemate BEN TURIN General Counsel and Director of Public Affairs, Oorah, Inc. and Kars 4 Kids Inc., USA And YOSEF S. STEIN Legal Assistant, Oorah, Inc. and Kars 4 Kids Inc., USA Jewish Law dispute resolution practice is built upon rabbinic traditions first described in the Mishnah – a compendium of religious and civil black letter law compiled at approximately 200 CE – and its voluminous commentary.1 Parties seeking to resolve disputes under Jewish law submit to the jurisdiction of a three-person panel tasked with mediating, arbitrating and adjudicating disputes in consonance with procedural and substantive Jewish Law.2 These panels typically operate under the auspices of institutions known as Batei Din, literally “houses of law,” or, singularly, as a Beit Din3, literally a “house of law.” Since Jewish Law has no contemporary state authority,4 even in the State of Israel,5 the decision to engage in a Beit Din dispute resolution process is wholly voluntary and We thank Binyamin Turin (Georgetown University Law Center class of 2019) for providing invaluable research support. 1 The Mishnah, initially a compilation of laws and theological principles passed down orally from each generation to the next (the “Oral Law”), serves as an extension of, and elaboration upon, the terse black letter law set forth in the Torah (Five Books of Moses). Concerned that the Oral Law tradition was destined to be forgotten if not transcribed into written form, Judah ha-Nasi, also known as Judah I, codified the written Mishnah in Israel sometime around the turn of the third century. (Oren Gross, Venerate, Amend … and Violate, 46 Ariz. St. L.J. 1182 (2014).) Subsequently, the Babylonian Talmud (whose authority is generally considered to supersede that of the slightly older Jerusalem Talmud), an encapsulation of the Rabbinic commentary that ensued approximately over the three centuries following the transcription of the Mishnah, was compiled and edited by Rav Ashi and Ravina II, who lived during the fourth and fifth centuries. (Samuel Flaks, Law, Religion, and Pluralism: The Thought and Experiences of Nathan Isaacs (1886-1941), 29 Touro Law Review 340 (2013).) The Talmudists’ views were later discussed and debated by the Rishonim (who included such philosophical and theological luminaries as Maimonides, Rashi, Nahmanides and the Tosafists) from the eleventh century to the fifteenth century. The philosophies and codes of Jewish Law continue to be studied and deliberated in the academies of the contemporary Achronim period, which has lasted from about the sixteenth century to the present. See Isaac Roszler, Law as a Prism into National Identity: The Case of Mishpat Ivri, 38 U. Pa. J. Int’l L. 729 (2017). 2 In modern practice, Batei Din will generally seek to mediate disputes and help the parties arrive at mutually-agreed settlements. Unlike in common secular law practice, the Beit Din panel will often directly engage in the mediation process and not seek to appoint an outside mediator. (For instance, the Beth Din of America, one of the more prominent Batei Din in the United States, refers to itself as “a full service mediation and arbitration organization” on its website, https://bethdin.org/dintorah/.) If efforts at mediation fail, the Beit Din panel will instead issue a legal ruling in accordance with Jewish Law. Nonetheless, Beit Din proceedings almost always entail some element of compromise (see note 22 and accompanying text). See also Bet Din and Judges, Encyclopedia Judaica (2 ed. 2007), discussing the role of the Beit Din from antiquity to the modern age. 3 Alternative common English transliterations include “Bet Din,” “Beth Din,” and “Beis Din,” with “Batei Din” being the plural form. 4 For an in-depth discussion of the nature and extent of Jewish Law application in historical times, see Menachem Elon, Jewish Law: History, Sources, Principles (1994). See also Marcus Jastrow & Louis Ginzberg, BET DIN, The Jewish Encyclopedia (1906). See also Bet Din and Judges, Encyclopedia Judaica, supra. 5 While present-day Israeli law has developed primarily based upon the legal systems of Britain and other common law jurisdictions, there is a decades-old movement to incorporate elements of Jewish Law into the law of the modern State of Israel. This proposed integration of Jewish Law into contemporary Israeli law is known as Mishpat Ivri (“Hebrew Law”). International In-house Counsel Journal ISSN 1754-0607 print/ISSN 1754-0607 online 2 Ben Turin and Yosef S. Stein necessarily governed by the laws of the territory in which the Beit Din functions. For example, in the United States, dozens of Batei Din presently operate to accommodate disputants who seek to resolve their disputes under Jewish Law.6 Under contemporary law,7 there are generally two ways in which a claim may be brought before a Beit Din panel. Beit Din jurisdiction attaches where the parties in dispute have previously agreed to arbitrate before Beit Din in a pre-existing contract between the parties, typically in the form of a mandatory binding arbitration clause stipulating that any disputes shall be adjudicated by a Beit Din panel. Alternatively, the parties may both agree in writing to engage a Beit Din to resolve an existing dispute. Procedurally, a Beit Din hearing shares much in common with other forms of arbitration or judicial proceedings.8 Notwithstanding such similarities, there are significant structural challenges with the current state of Beit Din practice across the world. For the most part, the hundreds of Batei Din currently operating internationally are independent and do not share uniform rules of procedure. The lack of uniformity between the proceedings of different Batei Din is one of the root causes of procedural inefficiencies and inequities in the Beit Din adjudication process. Specifically, the lack of universally accepted procedural rules has created an environment that rewards opportunistic behavior and penalizes litigants who are legitimate good-faith participants in the Beit Din process. This paper seeks to highlight a number of the procedural inconsistencies and inefficiencies in the contemporary Beit Din framework9 and proposes a path towards the establishment of a more uniform procedural landscape through the adoption of uniform Beit Din procedural rules. The paper begins with a recent case study in which carefully-drafted dispute resolution provisions were ineffective at preventing a protracted and inefficient procedural dispute between disputing parties. The paper seeks to identify procedural inefficiencies and interstices which would be improved by the adoption of uniform Beit Din procedural standards. In closing, the paper proposes a two-stage approach for the development and adoption of uniform Beit Din rules of civil procedure. This paper proposes the development of model uniform procedural rules for Beit Din adjudication, which could be elected into by parties either at the drafting phase of commercial agreements or once a dispute has arisen. Following a comment period, the proposed uniform rules would be promulgated as stand-alone dispute resolution rules, as well as in the form of model Annexes that could be appended to existing rules of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) procedure being referenced in contractual agreements, such as the rules of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) or the American Arbitration See Steven F. Friedell, Some Observations About Jewish Law in Israel’s Supreme Court, 8 Wash. U. Global Stud. L. Rev. 659 (2009). 6 A non-exhaustive list of US Batei Din compiled by the Boston Agunah Task Force lists at least one Beit Din panel in each of 44 distinct US states (available at http://www.getyourget.com/beit-din-listings). It should be noted that Batei Din’s areas of expertise vary, and not all Batei Din necessarily adjudicate commercial matters. 7 See, e.g., United States of America Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), 9 U.S.C. § 2. 8 The plaintiff presents her claim, the defendant is given an opportunity to respond, the judges ask pertinent questions of both parties, evidence is presented, and witnesses may be brought to corroborate and/or contradict the positions of the respective litigants. Toanim, or rabbinic advocates, are often hired to help bolster the arguments of the respective parties. After a litigant has stated her position, her advocate may advance Jewish Law sources in favor of such position. Once the Beit Din panelists feel confident in their understanding of all relevant facts and viewpoints, they will confer amongst themselves before mediating a settlement or rendering an arbitration ruling, depending on the circumstances and based upon applicable Jewish laws. 9 Specific inefficiencies discussed in this paper include: (1) Lack of procedural rules regarding language of communication, see note 13 and accompanying text; (2) Inconsistent service requirements, see note 14 and accompanying text; (3) Inconsistent rules regarding the availability to remove to secular court, see note 18 and accompanying text; (4) Inconsistent rules with respect to availability of removal to a different Beit Din panel, see note 21 and accompanying text; (5) Requirement to enter into a supplemental arbitration agreement, see note 22 and accompanying text; and (6) Sanctions available to and in use by a given Beit Din for a party’s non-compliance with the directive of the Beit Din, see note 24 and accompanying text. Forum Shopping 3 Association (AAA). It is hoped that the proposed uniform rules will gain acceptance amongst drafting parties over the next few years. If this initiative is successful, it is further proposed that ultimately, these uniform Beit Din rules of procedure would be adopted by the various independent Batei Din and that a confederation of Batei Din might be formed. This Beit Din association would link together many disparate Batei Din, thereby generating increased uniformity and predictability in the Beit Din process.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Highlighting the Impact of Revel
    HIGHLIGHTING THE IMPACT OF REVEL BERNARD REVEL GRADUATE SCHOOL OF JEWISH STUDIES YESHIVA UNIVERSITY Highlighting the Impact of Revel To honor the eightieth anniversary of the founding of the Bernard Revel Graduate School, we highlight the impact that Revel has had on Jewish scholarship, education, and leadership worldwide. Inside this pamphlet are 80 publications, lectures, and courses presented by Revel faculty and alumni during Revel’s eightieth year. This is a sample of the hundreds of presentations delivered over the years. PUBLICATIONS Rabbi Hayyim Angel “Controversies over the Historicity of Biblical Passages in Traditional Commentary,” Increasing Peace through Balanced Torah Study, Conversations 27. Dr. Joseph Angel “A Newly Discovered Interpretation of Isaiah 40:12-13 in the Song of the Sage.” Ha-Ish Moshe: Studies in Scriptural Interpretation in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Literature in Honor of Moshe J. Bernstein (Brill, 2017) . Rabbi Yitzchak Blau “Idolatry and Martyrdom,” Torah U’Madda Journal. Dr. Elisheva Carlebach Essay in Reimagined: 45 Years of Jewish Art (Glitterati Inc., 2016). Rabbi Shalom Carmy “’It Can Sink So Low and No Lower: On Fanaticism and Dogma,’” Tradition 50:1 Dr. Yaakov Elman Co-author. “The Quantification of Religious Obligation in Second Temple Jerusalem.” Ha-Ish Moshe: Studies in Scriptural Interpretation in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Literature in Honor of Moshe J. Bernstein (Brill, 2017). Dr. Steven Fine The Menorah: From the Bible to Modern Israel (Harvard University Press, 2016). Dr. Ezra Frazer Abraham Ibn Ezra on Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi: A Critical Edition, Translation, and Super Commentary with an Analytic Introduction.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 Tort Liability in Maimonides
    CHAPTER 2 TORT LIABILITY IN MAIMONIDES’ CODE (MISHNEH TORAH): THE DOWNSIDE OF THE COMMON INTERPRETATION A. INTRODUCTION: THE MODERN STUDY OF JEWISH TORT THEORY AS A STORY OF “SELF- MIRRORING” B. THE OWNERSHIP AND STRICT LIABILITY THEORY VS. THE FAULT-BASED THEORY (PESHIAH) (1) The Difficulties of the Concept of Peshiah (2) The Common Interpretation of the Code: The “Ownership and Strict Liability Theory” C. EXEGETICAL AND CONCEPTUAL DIFFICULTIES OF THE COMMON INTERPRETATION OF MAIMONIDES (1) Maimonides did not Impose Comprehensive Strict Liability on the Tortfeasor (2) Maimonides’ Use of the Term Peshiah in Different Places (3) The Theory of Ownership Contradicts Various Rulings in the Code (4) The Problem with Finding a Convincing Rationale for the Ownership Theory D. DIFFICULTIES IN UNDERSTANDING SOME ELEMENTS OF TORT LIABILITY MENTIONED IN THE CODE (1) Rulings that are Difficult to Interpret according to Either Ownership or Fault-Based Theories (2) Providing a Rationale for the Exemption in Tort (3) Standard of Care in Damages Caused by a Person to the Property of Another: Absolute/Strict Liability or Negligence? (4) Deterrence of Risk-Causing Behavior E. RE-EXAMINING THE OPENING CHAPTER OF THE BOOK OF TORTS IN THE CODE: CONTROL AS A CENTRAL ELEMENT OF LIABILITY IN TORT F. CONCLUSION 1 A. INTRODUCTION: THE MODERN STUDY OF JEWISH TORT THEORY AS A STORY OF “SELF- MIRRORING” Isidore Twersky showed us that “[t]o a great extent the study of Maimonides is a story of ‘self- mirroring’,”1 and that the answers given by modern and medieval scholars and rabbis to some questions on the concepts of Maimonides “were as different as their evaluations of Maimonides, tempered of course by their own ideological convictions and/or related contingencies.”2 Maimonides’ opening passages of the Book of Torts (Sefer Nezikin) in the Code (Mishneh Torah) can also be described as a story of “self-mirroring”.
    [Show full text]
  • Melilah Agunah Sptib W Heads
    Agunah and the Problem of Authority: Directions for Future Research Bernard S. Jackson Agunah Research Unit Centre for Jewish Studies, University of Manchester [email protected] 1.0 History and Authority 1 2.0 Conditions 7 2.1 Conditions in Practice Documents and Halakhic Restrictions 7 2.2 The Palestinian Tradition on Conditions 8 2.3 The French Proposals of 1907 10 2.4 Modern Proposals for Conditions 12 3.0 Coercion 19 3.1 The Mishnah 19 3.2 The Issues 19 3.3 The talmudic sources 21 3.4 The Gaonim 24 3.5 The Rishonim 28 3.6 Conclusions on coercion of the moredet 34 4.0 Annulment 36 4.1 The talmudic cases 36 4.2 Post-talmudic developments 39 4.3 Annulment in takkanot hakahal 41 4.4 Kiddushe Ta’ut 48 4.5 Takkanot in Israel 56 5.0 Conclusions 57 5.1 Consensus 57 5.2 Other issues regarding sources of law 61 5.3 Interaction of Remedies 65 5.4 Towards a Solution 68 Appendix A: Divorce Procedures in Biblical Times 71 Appendix B: Secular Laws Inhibiting Civil Divorce in the Absence of a Get 72 References (Secondary Literature) 73 1.0 History and Authority 1.1 Not infrequently, the problem of agunah1 (I refer throughout to the victim of a recalcitrant, not a 1 The verb from which the noun agunah derives occurs once in the Hebrew Bible, of the situations of Ruth and Orpah. In Ruth 1:12-13, Naomi tells her widowed daughters-in-law to go home.
    [Show full text]
  • Are There Any Limits to Justiciability? the Jurisprudential and Constitutional Controversy in Light of the Israeli and American Experience
    ARE THERE ANY LIMITS TO JUSTICIABILITY? THE JURISPRUDENTIAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL CONTROVERSY IN LIGHT OF THE ISRAELI AND AMERICAN EXPERIENCE Ariel L. Bendor" TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction II. On Justiciability A. The Meaning of the Term Justiciability: Normative and Institutional Justiciability B. Justiciability and Jurisdiction C. Justiciability and Substantive Law D. Justiciability and the Policies of Public Agencies E. On Normative Justiciability 1. The Universality of Law: The Law Takes a Position Regarding All Human Actions 2. Still, the Law Has Limits F. Concerning Institutional Justiciability I. Material Institutional Justiciability 2. Organic Institutional Justiciability III. Institutional Justiciability in the Absence of Normative Justiciability A. General Discussion B. Normative and Institutional Justiciability of the Rule of Reasonableness in Administrative Law 1. The Rule of Reasonableness in Administrative Law 2. On Normative and Institutional Justiciability of the Rule of Reasonableness in Administrative Law 3. The Normative Non-Justiciability of the Reasonable- ness Rule in Administrative Law-What Is Meant? 4. In Favor of Institutional Justiciability of Judicial Review Under the Rule of Reasonableness IV. Conclusion * Faculty of Law, Haifa University, Israel. This article was completed while serving as visiting professor at the Villanova University School of Law in the Summer of 1996. I would like to thank the Villanova School of Law and its Dean, Steven P. Frankino, for the generous hospitality and assistance offered to me. I would also like to thank Ms. Noga Arnon- Dagan for her invaluable assistance in conducting the research related to this article. IND. INT'L & COMP. L. REV. [Vol. 7:2 I. INTRODUCTION Justiciability deals with the boundaries of law and adjudication.
    [Show full text]
  • Teaching Jewish Law in American Law Schools–Part II: an Annotated Syllabus
    © The Journal of International and Comparative Law at Chicago-Kent: Volume 2, 2002 1 Teaching Jewish Law in American Law Schools–Part II: An Annotated Syllabus Samuel J. Levine* INTRODUCTION In recent years, American legal scholarship has increasingly turned to the Jewish legal system as a source of comparison and contrast for questions that arise in American legal discourse.1 Concomitantly, a growing number of American law schools have introduced into their curriculum a course in Jewish Law. By some estimates, approximately thirty American law schools include courses in Jewish Law as part of their curriculum. 2 A number of different models * Research Professor of Law, St. John’s University School of Law; LL.M., Columbia University; J.D., Fordham University; Ordination, Yeshiva University; B.A., Yeshiva University. The syllabus presented here is a variation of the syllabi I have used in the Jewish Law courses I have taught at St. John’s University School of Law and Fordham University School of Law. I gratefully acknowledge that in compiling these syllabi, I gained from the advice and assistance of friends, colleague, and mentors, many of whom shared with me the syllabi they had used in teaching Jewish Law. In addition, I thank Abraham Abramovsky, with whom I taught the course at Fordham. I also note the recent appearance of a Jewish Law textbook for use in American law schools. See M ENACHEM ELON ET AL., JEWISH LAW (MISHPATIVRI): CASES AND M ATERIALS (1999). Although Professor Elon’s book represents a groundbreaking achievement and is a valuable source for any course in Jewish Law taught in an American law school, the book differs from my own syllabus in its emphasis on Jewish law in the context of modern Israeli law, an approach more consistent with the international law model that I incorporate into my syllabus to a considerably more limited degree.
    [Show full text]
  • NOTES JBU SPEECH RCA CONVENTION Jewish Leadership
    NOTES JBU SPEECH RCA CONVENTION Jewish Leadership: the struggle for Authority and Power DATE: 6/14/93 tit^j-i n hx ^ ru -fr Introduction: Over the past five years, I have travelled the country working with Jewish organizations and Jewish communities on a variety of problems and issues - 40 project in 10 states -- ranging from care of the elderly to Jewish population studies; from plans to restructure Jewish education to strategies for outreach. -- the struggle for Authority and Power ־- Focus: Jewish leadership talk is in three parts: .Q outline what I see as the major challenges to Jewish leadership in North america; the specific role that the orthodox community can and should play in helping the overall Jewish community meet these challenges and the implications for Rabbinic leadership. SIX CHALLENGES TO JEWISH LEADERSHIP IN NORTH AMERICA 1. THE BROADER CULTURE DOES NOT SEEM TO SUPPORT OUR COMMITMENT TO JEWISH IDENTITY AND CONTINUITY • Americans are generally receptive to intermarriage with other religious and ethnic groups • The commitment to the "mosaic" of multi-culturalism seems to support black and hispanic identity, but not necessarily those of other growing ethnic groups 2. THE JEWISH COMMUNITY WILL BECOME INCREASINGLY FLUID IN ITS BOUNDARIES • The community is going to have to learn to live with large numbers of "quasi-Jews" Differences of view about "who is a Jew" exacerbate the schisms in the community • It is virtually impossible to intelligently measure the size of the Jewish community, given multiple definitions 3. THERE ARE LIKELY TO BE FEWER SELF-DEFINED JEWS IN NORTH AMERICA IN THE FUTURE • Jewish population is at or near a negative growth rate o Conversions in are balanced by conversions out o Even accounting for later marriage and child-rearing, fertility rates suggest that Jews are not reproducing themselves o Immigration is hard to predict; but not likely to substantially affect the numerical results (60,000 to 200,000 per year(?) o Many "secular" Jews are intermarried and are not raising their children as Jews ** / I 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Library of Congress Classification
    KB RELIGIOUS LAW IN GENERAL. COMPARATIVE RELIGIOUS LAW. KB JURISPRUDENCE Religious law in general. Comparative religious law. Jurisprudence Class here comparative studies on different religious legal systems, as well as intra-denominational comparisons (e.g. different Christian religious legal systems) Further, class here comparative studies on religious legal systems with other legal systems, including ancient law For comparison of a religious legal system with the law of two or more jurisdictions, see the religious system (e.g. Islamic law compared to Egyptian and Malaysian law, see KBP) Comparisons include both systematic-theoretical elaborations as well as parallel presentations of different systems For influences of a religious legal system on the law of a particuar jurisdiction, see the jurisdiction For works on law and religion see BL65.L33 Bibliography For personal bibliography or bibliography relating to a particular religious system or subject, see the appropriate KB subclass 2 Bibliography of bibliography. Bibliographical concordances 4 Indexes for periodical literature, society publications, collections, etc. Periodicals For KB8-KB68, the book number, derived from the main entry, is determined by the letters following the letter for which the class number stands, e.g. KB11.I54, Dine Yisrael 7 General Jewish 8 A - Archiu 8.3 Archiv - Archivz e.g. 8.3.R37 Archives d'histoire du droit oriental 9 Archiw - Az 9.3 B e.g. 9.3.U43 Bulletin/International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists 10 C 11 D e.g. 11.I54 Dine Yisrael: shanaton le-mishpat ʻIvri ule-mishpahah be-Yiʼsrael 12 E - Etuder 12.3 Etudes - Ez 13 F 14 G 15 H 16 I e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Jewish Law Association 20Th International Conference July 23
    Buchmann Faculty of Law Tel Aviv University EURO-ASIAN JLA JEWISH CONGRESS עבר הווה ועתיד בחקר המשפט העברי כנס לציון מאה שנים ליסוד חברת המשפט העברי, מוסקבה 1917 Мишпат иври: прошлое, настоящее и будущее 100-летие создания Общества “Мишпат Иври” в Москве Mishpat Ivri: Past, Present and Future 100 Year Anniversary of the Establishment of the “Mishpat Ivri Society” in Moscow Jewish Law Association 20th International Conference Moscow State University Law School, Moscow July 23–26, 2018 The Organizing Committee: The Academic Committee: Prof. Alexander Golichenkov Dean, MSU Prof. Arye Edrei, TAU Prof. Arye Edrei, TAU Prof. Shaul Stampfer, (emeritus) HU Prof. Andrey Sherstobitov, MSU Prof. Gayane Davidyan, MSU Prof. Natalia Kozlova, MSU Prof. Olga Dyuzheva, MSU Ms. Evgenia Krukova, MSU Prof. Assaf Likhovski, TAU Dr. Haim Ben-Yakov, TAU Dr. Yifat Monnikendam, TAU Prof. Anton Kanevskiy, JU Prof. Anton Kanevskiy, JU Prof. Phillip Lieberman, JLA Dr. Amos Israel, SAC Dr. Amos Israel, SAC Prof. Suzanne Last-Stone, YU Prof. Phillip Lieberman, JLA Dr. Shay Wozner, TAU Conference Supported By: The Buchmann Faculty of Law, TAU | Euro-Asian Jewish Congress | The Jewish Law Association | The Zimin Foundation, TAU | The Friends Association of TAU | Eliyahu Foundation Program for Instruction and Research In Mishpat Ivri, supported by the Koschitzky Family | Embassy of the State of Israel in Moscow | The Center for the Study of Law and Religion, Emory University School of Law | David Berg Foundation Institute for Law and History, The Buchmann Faculty of Law, TAU | Taubenschlag Institute of Criminal Law, The Buchmann Faculty of Law, TAU | Media Partners: ConsultantPlus | Monday, July 23 14:00–15:00 Lunch 15:00–16:30 Preliminary Session: Jews and Judaism in the Russian Empire Moderator: Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Jewish Legal Theory and American Constitutional Theory: Some Comparisons and Contrasts Samuel J
    Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly Volume 24 Article 4 Number 2 Winter 1997 1-1-1997 Jewish Legal Theory and American Constitutional Theory: Some Comparisons and Contrasts Samuel J. Levine Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/ hastings_constitutional_law_quaterly Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Recommended Citation Samuel J. Levine, Jewish Legal Theory and American Constitutional Theory: Some Comparisons and Contrasts, 24 Hastings Const. L.Q. 441 (1997). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_constitutional_law_quaterly/vol24/iss2/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Jewish Legal Theory and American Constitutional Theory: Some Comparisons and Contrasts By SAMUEL J. LEvINE* Table of Contents I. An Introduction to Interpretation in Jewish Law, with References to American Constitutional Theory ......... 444 A. Sources and Methods of Interpretation ............. 447 1. Interpretations Revealed to Moses at Sinai ..... 447 2. Exegetical Interpretation of the Text ........... 448 3. Logic and Observation .......................... 448 4. Methods of Interpretation in Practice ........... 448 B. Interpretative Expansion and Limitation ............ 451 1. M itzvot ......................................... 451
    [Show full text]
  • Library of Congress Classification
    KB RELIGIOUS LAW IN GENERAL. COMPARATIVE RELIGIOUS LAW. KB JURISPRUDENCE Religious law in general. Comparative religious law. Jurisprudence Class here comparative studies on different religious legal systems, as well as intra-denominational comparisons (e.g. different Christian religious legal systems) Further, class here comparative studies on religious legal systems with other legal systems, including ancient law For comparison of a religious legal system with the law of two or more jurisdictions, see the religious system (e.g. Islamic law compared to Egyptian and Malaysian law, see KBP) Comparisons include both systematic-theoretical elaborations as well as parallel presentations of different systems For influences of a religious legal system on the law of a particuar jurisdiction, see the jurisdiction For works on law and religion see BL65.L33 Bibliography For personal bibliography or bibliography relating to a particular religious system or subject, see the appropriate KB subclass 2 Bibliography of bibliography. Bibliographical concordances 4 Indexes for periodical literature, society publications, collections, etc. Periodicals For KB8-KB68, the book number, derived from the main entry, is determined by the letters following the letter for which the class number stands, e.g. KB11.I54, Dine Yisrael 7 General Jewish 8 A - Archiu 8.3 Archiv - Archivz e.g. 8.3.R37 Archives d'histoire du droit oriental 9 Archiw - Az 9.3 B e.g. 9.3.U43 Bulletin/International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists 10 C 11 D e.g. 11.I54 Dine Yisrael: shanaton le-mishpat ʻIvri ule-mishpahah be-Yiʼsrael 12 E - Etuder 12.3 Etudes - Ez 13 F 14 G 15 H 16 I e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Abhandlungen
    ABHANDLUNGEN Can Judaism Serve as a Source of Human Rights? Asher Maoz* A. Judaism 677 B. Judaism and Human Rights 680 C. Judaism, Human Rights and Western Philosophy 687 D. Human Dignity 690 E. Contemporary Application of Jewish Values in the State of Israel 696 F. Contemporary Application of Jewish Values in Other Jurisdictions 702 G. Judaism: Religion and Morality 710 H. The Unique Character of Halakhic Texts 714 I. Epilogue 718 A. Judaism Judaism – Yahadut in Hebrew – is first and foremost a religion. The term Juda- ism – Judaismes in the Greek form – is first found in the Jewish-Hellenistic litera- ture of the first century as a synonym for “the religion of the Israelites”.1 The same sense is found in St Paul’s Epistles to the Galatians – “And profited in the Jews’ re- ligion”.2 This term does not appear in the Bible3 or in rabbinical literature and only occasionally is found in medieval literature. In classical sources the term used for the body of Jewish teachings is Torah, which means also the Law of Moses or the Pentateuch. The term Judaism became popular during the Age of Enlightenment.4 * Associate Professor, The Buchmann Faculty of Law, Tel-Aviv University; General Editor, Mish- pat, Hevra ve’Tarbut – An Annual on Law, Society and Culture. I wish to thank the Minerva Center for Human Rights for the research grant. This essay is the recipient of the Shlomo Zakham prize. 1 Maccabees II, 2:21; 8:1; 14:38. Professor Samuel S. C o h e n wrote: “The term Judaism (Ioudais- mos) appears to have been coined by Greek-speaking Jews to designate their way of religious belief and practice as distinct from Hellenism which was the religion of their neighbors”; The Universal Jew- ish Encyclopedia, 10 vols.
    [Show full text]
  • Jewish Law for the Law Librarian David Hollander University of Miami School of Law
    University of Miami Law School University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository Articles Faculty and Deans 2006 Jewish Law for the Law Librarian David Hollander University of Miami School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/fac_articles Part of the Legal Education Commons, and the Legal Writing and Research Commons Recommended Citation David Hollander, Jewish Law for the Law Librarian, Law Libr. J. 219 (2006). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty and Deans at University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles by an authorized administrator of University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Jewish Law for the Law Librarian* David Hollander** Mr Hollander provides an introductory guide to the Jewish legal system with the intent of providing law librarianswith the basic knowledge necessary to begin to help a patron conduct research in Jewish law. Contents Introduction .................................................... 220 Structure of Jewish Law .......................................... 222 Primary Sources of Jewish Law: Historic Development, Authority, Structure and Research Strategy ................................ 223 W ritten Law and Oral Law .................................... 223 Babylonian Talm ud .......................................... 225 The G em ara ............................................. 225 Commentaries
    [Show full text]