High Court stands firm, denies Chief Rabbinate’s bid to block women from religious exams

‘This is not only a legal victory but an important step in public recognition of women’s status within the religious establishment.’

The High Court of Justice, in a decision authored by Supreme Court Chief Justice Isaac Amit, on Tuesday rejected a retrial request by the Chief Rabbinate of Israel, following the court’s July ruling that the Rabbinate must allow women to sit its religious certification exams.

The exam dates originally opened for November are no longer relevant, and the next testing cycle has yet to be scheduled.

The Rabbinate’s Examination Unit administers several exams assessing both general and specific halachic knowledge. It grants certifications intended to provide the Jewish-Israeli public with qualified religious authorities.

Among these are three certifications requiring six exams – three of them mandatory – for “neighborhood rabbi,” “local rabbi,” and Yoreh Yoreh, meaning someone authorized to issue halachic rulings. Yoreh Yoreh is considered the first tier of certification.

To become a regional rabbi, candidates must complete nine exams and an interview, while a city rabbi must complete 11 exams and an interview.

High Court denies Chief Rabbinate’s block on women’s exam

Of all the certifications, the city rabbi title is the only one that carries formal authority under the 1980 Rabbinate Law. The other certificates reflect deep halachic expertise and community standing, but they do not grant official public authority.

Holding these certificates often confers significant communal legitimacy, indicating recognized halachic competence. They also carry tangible professional and financial implications: regional hiring committees consider the first-tier certification – along with at least six years of yeshiva study after age 18 – equivalent to an academic degree, a qualification required for nearly all public clergy positions.

This equivalency also affects public-sector pay scales. For instance, public-school teachers of religious studies are eligible for higher salaries based on the Rabbinate certification’s academic equivalency.

Justice Noam Sohlberg’s July judgment included sharp criticism of the Rabbinate for its prolonged handling of the issue. Six women first registered for a Rabbinate exam in 2018 but were rejected.

They petitioned the High Court in 2019 through the NGOs ITIM – The Jewish Life Advocacy Center, The Rackman Center, and Kolech. Proceedings have continued ever since.

The Rabbinate sought a retrial last month, arguing that allowing women to sit the exams would contradict certain halachic principles, and also requested a delay in execution – effectively to freeze the ruling’s implementation.

Chief Justice Amit rejected both requests, noting that while the Rabbinate claimed halachic difficulties, it failed to specify which ones. He wrote that the petition amounted to a reaction to the practical implications of the ruling, not to its legal reasoning – insufficient grounds for a retrial.

The Rabbinate also argued that the longstanding range of rabbinic opinions on women’s Torah study should influence the debate. Amit countered that the matter before the court concerns examinations, not study.

The original petition maintained that the Rabbinate’s position – that it cannot ordain women – is irrelevant, since the exams merely certify knowledge rather than confer ordination or employment. Therefore, the petitioners argued, there is no justification to exclude women.

Attorney Ofra Sitesmer, head of the legal department at ITIM, said:

“The High Court of Justice sent a clear and unequivocal message today – gender exclusion can no longer be upheld under the guise of religious law. This is not only a legal victory but an important step in public recognition of women’s status within the religious establishment. Women who have studied and been examined just like their male counterparts will now receive the same treatment, the same certificate, and the same legitimacy.”

‘Women sitting for the exams would contradict certain halachic principles’