void ab initio. Merin, supra note __, at 135 (citation omitted). The personal law of the Protestant faith and the Karaite community permit mixed-marraiges. Id.
NOTEREF _Ref231205810 \h \* MERGEFORMAT This means, for example, “that even a Jew who belongs to the Reform Movement cannot be married in Israel in a Reform ceremony that will be recognized by state authorities.” Merin, supra note __, at 135, n.259 (citation omitted). Merin identifies three categories of such impediments to marriage: “(1) marriages that are void ab initio including, inter alia, the second marriage of a woman still considered to be married to her previous husband and incestuous relationships; (2) doubtful marriages in which there is a question as to the validity of the marriage (which may arise, for example, in a case of a private marriage or a civil marriage that has been performed abroad), and where, because of this doubt, the wife requires a get in order to remarry; and (3) prohibited marriages that are retroactively valid – this category (which results in the couple being forced to divorce one another) includes, inter alia, the prohibition against the marriage of a Kohen (a descendant of the ancient priestly caste) to a divorced woman, to a chaluztzah (a widow released from a levirate marriage), or to a convert. These groups include about a quarter of a million immigrants from the CIS (the former Soviety Union) and many Ethiopian immigrants who are not Jewish, or whose Jewishness is questioned by the religious establishment.” Merin, supra note __, at 136 (citations omitted).
NOTEREF _Ref231205810 \h \* MERGEFORMAT Friedmann, supra note __, at 956 (citation omitted).
NOTEREF _Ref231205810 \h \* MERGEFORMAT [see if we can find some sociological data on this.]
NOTEREF _Ref231205810 \h \* MERGEFORMAT One way of addressing this overlap in jurisdiction is to simply expand the jurisdiction of the rabbinical courts, strengthening the exclusive role of the courts even further. Such a proposal was made as recently as May 2009 in the form of a government bill that would give rabbinical courts exclusive authority to hear all suits stemming from divorces concluded in a rabbinical court, including suits concerning financial and custody matters. Though rabbinical courts have decided such cases in the past, the High Court of Justice determined that they did not have legal authority to do so, and current law therefore requires that suits stemming from a divorce be filed in civil court. According to a recent Israeli news article, “Proponents of the bill say this ruling created an absurd situation, in which the rabbinical courts approve divorce settlements but then have no power to enforce them. Opponents of the bill argue that granting the rabbinical courts such broad powers would essentially create two parallel court systems, one religious and one civil, and would violate the status quo on questions of religion and state. They also say this would seriously undermine women's rights, especially of women whose husbands refuse to divorce them.” Yair Ettinger, Justice Minister pushes bill to extend rabbinical courts’ authority, Haaretz, May 18, 2009, available at http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1086222.html.
NOTEREF _Ref231205810 \h \* MERGEFORMAT Friedmann notes,”Under Jewish law, a marriage may be valid although the ceremony was not supervised by a rabbi, provided that the rules pertaining to the ceremony were observed.” Friedmann, supra note __, at n.24..
NOTEREF _Ref231205810 \h \* MERGEFORMAT See Funk Schlesinger v. Minister of Interior, 17 P.D. (1) 225 (1963). Friedmann explains that the “question of the validity of a mixed marriage of an Israeli couple performed abroad was left open, registration not being conclusive on this point. In any event, such marriages are recognized for the purpose of registration and the couple will at least enjoy the rights of a de facto married couple.” Friedmann, supra note __, at n.26 (citations omitted).
NOTEREF _Ref231205810 \h \* MERGEFORMAT Daniel Friedman, Perpetual Dillemma book review, 92 Harv. L. Rev. 952, 957 (1979).
NOTEREF _Ref231205810 \h \* MERGEFORMAT Daniel Friedman, Perpetual Dillemma book review, 92 Harv. L. Rev. 952, 958 (1979).
NOTEREF _Ref231205810 \h \* MERGEFORMAT Friedmann explains that the term “reputed spouse” and “reputed wife” is often used in these statutes. Friedmann, supra note __, at n.27, citing Friedman, The “Unmarried Wife” in Israeli Law, in 2 Israel Yearbook on Human Rights 287 (1972).
NOTEREF _Ref231205810 \h \* MERGEFORMAT Law of July 17, 1969 (2 Av 5729), Matters of Dissolution of Marriage (Jurisdiction in Special Cases) Law, cited in Friedmann, supra note __, at n.28. Friedmann notes that while this law enables mixed couples and couples who do not belong to any recognized religious community to obtain a divorce, the law does not apply “where both spouses are Jews, Moslems, Druze, or members of the Christian communities which maintain a religious court in Israel.” Id. § 1(b).
NOTEREF _Ref231205810 \h \* MERGEFORMAT See, e.g., Yuval Merin, The Right to Family Life and Civil Marriage Under International Law and its Implementation in the State of Israel, 28 B.C. Int’l & Comp. L. Rev. 79 (2005), at 134. (“Matters are further complicated by what is known as the ‘jurisdictional race,’ i.e., the race between eh spouses to file suit first, in the instance he or she prefers, either the religious court or the Family Court (generally, women prefer the family Courts, while men prefer the Rabbinical Courts).” (citation omitted)).
NOTEREF _Ref231205810 \h \* MERGEFORMAT Paul J. Magnarella, The Reception of Swiss Family Law in Turkey, Vol. 46, No. 2 Anthropological Quarterly 100, 101 (Apr. 1973).
NOTEREF _Ref231205810 \h \* MERGEFORMAT C.J. Hamson, The Istanbul Conference of 1955, Vol. 5 No. 1 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 26, 29-30 (Jan. 1956).