Israeli Supreme Court Suspends Yeshiva Students' Arrest Exemption Law Pending Further Review
On Wednesday, Supreme Court Justice Ofer Groskopf issued a temporary injunction halting the enforcement of the newly passed law exempting yeshiva students from arrest due to draft evasion or desertion. He also ordered the case to be heard by an expanded panel and demanded that the government and Knesset justify why the law should not be annulled. This means that arrests of draft-dodging yeshiva students will continue for now.
The injunction responds to four petitions filed by Israel Hofsheet, Yesh Atid, Yisrael Beiteinu, and the Movement for Quality Government, challenging the law. The legislation was approved by the Knesset on Tuesday in a narrow vote of 58 to 54, granting yeshiva students immunity from arrest and legal proceedings related to draft evasion until the end of January 2025.
Justice Groskopf emphasized the court's longstanding rulings on yeshiva recruitment and the serious concerns raised by the petitioners about the law's selective suspension of enforcement against a specific population segment. He ordered a conditional injunction requiring the state and Knesset to explain why the law should remain in effect and scheduled a hearing before an expanded Supreme Court panel as soon as possible.
The law was passed alongside the Basic Law on Torah Study as part of a coalition deal involving ultra-Orthodox parties, linked to controversial legislation affecting the attorney general's role. The Chief of Staff, Aviv Kochavi, sent an unusual letter to Prime Minister Netanyahu and other officials opposing the law, warning it incentivizes draft evasion and undermines military trust.
Additionally, the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee's legal advisor, Miri Frenkel Shor, issued a harsh opinion condemning the law as a clear exemption for a defined group without mechanisms to encourage enlistment, violating constitutional principles of equality and the rule of law. Knesset legal advisor Shagit Afik also criticized the legislative process as improper due to significant changes between readings.
The Supreme Court's intervention signals a significant legal and political challenge to the exemption law, with further judicial review pending.
The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.
Not the same event — other stories that share this one’s people, places, or theme: background, reactions, and follow-ups.
