Government turns to High Court to challenge recognition of Utah ‘Zoom weddings’
Israel’s state attorney calls for justices to bar the Interior Ministry from recognizing existing marriages until the matter is resolved
Judah Ari Gross is The Times of Israel's religions and Diaspora affairs correspondent.
The government on Thursday appealed to the High Court of Justice to prevent the recognition of marriages conducted over video conferencing through the US state of Utah, which was seen as a step toward a form of civil marriage in Israel.
In addition to appealing the decision, the government also called for the court to bar the Interior Ministry from recognizing marriages that have already been performed until the matter is settled.
For the couples involved, lack of state recognition of their marriage can carry major financial and lifestyle ramifications, including preventing partners from receiving parental leave if a baby is born and denying them certain tax benefits.
Uri Regev, the head of the religious rights group Hiddush, which has represented many of the couples in court, called the state’s appeal an “opening salvo” in the fights that are expected over religion and state issues under the next government, which is expected to be made up primarily of religious parties.
“How symbolic that this appeal is being filed the day after elections were held in Israel. It represents an opening salvo in the fight for freedom of religion and free marriage by a government that seeks to limit these freedoms,” he said.
In early 2020, Utah reformed its marriage process, allowing ceremonies to be performed through video conferencing software, such as Zoom, provided at least one of the people involved was located physically in the state.
The State of Israel recognizes only religious marriages — Jews must marry through the rabbinate, Christians through their church, and Muslims through Sharia courts — which often causes trouble for interfaith couples, LGBT couples, and others who for one reason or another cannot or do not want to marry through the rabbinate.
How symbolic that this appeal is being filed the day after elections were held in Israel. It represents an opening shot in the fight for freedom of religion and free marriage by a government that seeks to limit these freedoms
However, the government does recognize all marriages conducted abroad. In the past, Israelis who either wanted or needed to avoid the religious marriage system had to physically leave the country to perform the ceremony. With the new Utah option, the couple and their witnesses could all remain at home — often literally — while only the officiant had to be physically present in Utah.
Some 600 Israelis have married through such Utah ceremonies since the change went into effect, according to Hiddush.
The state has fought against these marriages, arguing that since the Israelis getting married are physically located in Israel, the wedding should be considered as taking place in Israel and thus be subject to the government’s refusal to recognize all marriages but religious ones.
This issue has so far been adjudicated in two district courts, one in Lod and one in Jerusalem, both of which determined that the state’s case does not hold water as the legally significant aspects of the ceremony, namely the licensing and registration, were indeed performed in the state of Utah — and not in Israel.
In its appeal on Thursday, which was specifically in response to the Jerusalem case, the State Attorney’s Office effectively made the same argument again, saying that the lower court’s ruling was flawed and upset the marriage status quo in Israel, which it argued should be left up to legislators, not judges, to establish.
“As of today, the lawmaker has not made an arrangement that allows for civil marriages to be performed in Israel, and this decision should not be emptied of meaning by issuing a ruling that de facto allows for civil marriage in Israel through a foreign country while the couple is located in Israel and the wedding itself is held in Israel,” the state attorneys wrote.
Hiddush said it planned to fight the state’s appeal, as well as its request that the court prevent the recognition of the marriages that have already been performed, saying that this “seriously and continually infringed on the couples’ rights, particularly because there’s no way to know how long the appeals and ruling process will last.”
