Government Funded Crown Heights Jewish Community Council Illegally Bars Women From Voting, Attorney Says

“Women, especially widows and divorcees, are gravely impacted by decisions regarding the distribution of food stamps, housing subsidies and other vital social services” that the council handles, Mr. Federman, 26, wrote in an April 7 letter to the council and the local rabbinical court. “It should hurt us to see religion being misapplied to wrongfully subjugate women in a context that has no basis under Jewish law and is probably unconstitutional.”

 

The Key to Marital Harmony: One Vote Per Couple?
By ELISSA GOOTMAN • New York Times

In the Hasidic enclave of Crown Heights, Brooklyn, there are many things that women can’t or just don’t do: Be counted as one of the 10 people needed to make up a minyan, or prayer quorum. Walk around in pants. But vote?

According to the bylaws of the Crown Heights Jewish Community Council, a social service agency and community pillar that has received millions of dollars in government grants over the years, only those who meet the following requirements can vote for its leadership:

    • Jewish and religiously observant residents of Crown Heights
    • Married, previously married or at least 30 years old
    • Male

Now Eliyahu Federman, a Crown Heights resident and recent law school graduate, is challenging that last requirement, saying he believes it to be unconstitutional.

In Crown Heights, religion and life are inextricably interwoven. But the council itself is not a religious organization, Mr. Federman argues. And in 2008, according to the most recent tax filings available, the council received $1.9 million in government grants.

“Women, especially widows and divorcees, are gravely impacted by decisions regarding the distribution of food stamps, housing subsidies and other vital social services” that the council handles, Mr. Federman, 26, wrote in an April 7 letter to the council and the local rabbinical court. “It should hurt us to see religion being misapplied to wrongfully subjugate women in a context that has no basis under Jewish law and is probably unconstitutional.”

Since Mr. Federman first raised the issue, in 2009, he has heard several explanations for the policy: that voting is immodest, that this is how it’s always been done — and that allotting women votes could sow discord among married couples, working against the ideal of “Shalom Bayit,” or marital tranquillity.

Mr. Federman argues that women are encouraged to vote in secular elections — and that true marital harmony comes from “a couple appreciating and accepting each other’s viewpoints.”

“If there is one vote per household, then the husband and wife have to fight over that one vote!” he wrote. “If they each get a vote, then let them vote for whomever they each want. It’s just common sense.”

His wife, Shainy, 21, agrees, saying, “Judaism empowers women to have a voice.”

Rabbi Eli Cohen, the council’s executive director, said the entire structure of the council was being reconsidered, with the voting policy “definitely in the mix of issues.” The next election is scheduled for the summer of 2013.

In an e-mail to Mr. Federman on April 6, Isaac Tamir, a lawyer known as Zaki who is the council’s chairman, mentioned the possibility of a “hybrid vote” on community matters, with one vote per household — giving a say to widows and unmarried women over 30. In a telephone interview, Mr. Tamir said the council’s bylaws were being reworked, and that he was confident that all adult women would be able to vote in the next election. Mr. Federman said that would be welcome news — which he looked forward to seeing in writing.

Marc D. Stern, the associate general counsel at the American Jewish Committee, said it was not at all clear whether the voting policy was unconstitutional, and that the only way to find out would be to litigate it.

“There is a crazy quilt pattern of anti-discrimination provisions and funding provisions,” said Mr. Stern, a lawyer who has specialized in religious liberty and civil rights for more than 30 years. “They are in a constitutional gray area. The government is in a constitutional gray area.” Were government financing not involved, he said, the policy would be “plainly legal.”

On the one hand, he said, the Supreme Court has in several cases ruled that organizations receiving most of their money from the government should not be held to the same standards as government agencies on matters including hiring and firing — so “merely having taken government money doesn’t make it unconstitutional for them to discriminate.”

On the other hand: “If the government, by some neutral rule, decided it wasn’t going to fund organizations whose boards were picked in a discriminatory way, that would probably pass constitutional muster.” Such a decision, however, would have major ramifications for the debate over faith-based initiatives.

Mr. Federman said he decided to speak with The New York Times only after his behind-the-scenes efforts were unsuccessful, saying, “I believe this discussion belongs in the public forum, not behind closed doors.”

“The topic of women’s suffrage in Crown Heights is apropos considering that Passover, a celebration of liberation from slavery, is around the corner,” he said. “According to tradition, the women are credited for redeeming the Jewish people from slavery by defying Pharaoh’s orders to kill their newborn children.”

[Hat Tip: critical minyan.]

Comments

[Joe Bumberger]

He is not an Attorney, finished law school, but did NOT pass the bar

[A E ANDERSON]

Look, there's no question they'll cave and let women vote. They're not die-hard haredim, and they've already elevated the status of women in many ways movement wide. Women are called "shluchos," and one lead Chabad official as early as 15 years ago boasted to me that one US state franchise (Virginia) was even headed by a "shluchah" (Rebetizen Kranz, widow of the male regional director).

But it may upset the little internal equalibrium that exists in the Chabad-Lubavitch capital. That's because the locals are at any point in time arrayed into factions and camps supporting or opposing a never ending procession of issues, persons, campaigns, bet din selections and so on.

Nearly every community activity or election gets contested in an unending series of bet din claims, referrals to "Zabla" panels, character assassinations, whispering campaigns, and so on. The issue du jour grips the community to the degree that the Schneerson mitzvah and messiah campaigns take a back seat to the vituperation by one faction or another. The issues and procedures become so convoluted and opaque that few besides die-hard insiders can understand the weekly lashon hora being bandied about on Kingston & Eastern Parkway.

This is shul politics in hyper mode, where every action is met with an hazmanah (summons) to bet din, a pashkvil on the lamp post, or a mesirah to the men in blue at the nearby 71th Precint cop shop.

[Chochom]

How much do you want to bet that Federman is going to run for some office in Crown Heights. This is a means of a young individual (like Greenfield in Boro Park) to show that he is an activist. These are people who can't get a real job and are generally an embarrassment to any community.
They will get the signatures of XXX number of Rabbis and off they go , standing on the City Hall steps explaining to a Billionaire how incompetent he is and didn't take care of the snow shoveling.
Big talker Greenfeld. Now he can't get to first base with the Mayor. Big Knocker.
Can't our communities put up competent people instead of Community Organizers (if you know what I mean)

[WoolSilkCotton]

Anderson, you summed up perfectly today's world of Crown Heights politics.

[shame on him]

Putting aside the discussion on halacha, constitutionality and the like, what does it say about a person who sets a match to dry tinder for his own pathetic self-aggrandizement? This poor disturbed fellow is grandstanding heedless of who he steps on. This is simply a case of a young man, who is green behind the ears, anxiously waiting to pass the bar while fending off the fury of a dissatisfied wife, well, it could bring out the crusader in anyone. I sincerely hope a big fat slip-and-fall case walks into his office and soaks up all his time.

[Shmarya]

Posted by: shame on him | April 15, 2011 at 11:48 AM

Stop using multiple aliases or I'll ban you.

[Yoel Mechanic]

Posted by: shame on him | April 15, 2011 at 11:48 AM

There is nothing in the NY Times article that
supports what you say. Unless you have
inside info and personally know everyone
involved, and will reveal this clearly, then
just repeat the following "Everything I said
is unsupported speculation...i just made it up"

[The Real Joe]

One big point he doesn't live in Crown Heights nor was he born in Crown Heights so before debating the actually issue my question is who is he to bring it up to the media

[ca]

I can always get my wife to vote the same on a issue. I just tell her I'm voting for the side that I don't want and she does the opposite.

[ah-pee-chorus]

this is why the whole concept of 'faith based' ANYTHING should have NO place in anything related to the govt. and its activities. it is shameful that a group which openly discriminates against women should have any say in how tax dollars are distributed. nor should churches or synagogues be involved in providing food or shelter with tax dollars.

His wife, Shainy, 21, agrees, saying, “Judaism empowers women to have a voice.”

this deluded young lady must really hate reality. did she derive this precious little thought from the rules of judaism which prevent women from being:
1.rabbis
2.kings
3.judges
4.witnesses
5.leaders of the davening
6.counted in a minyan
or maybe the laws that women:
7.dont own money. it belongs to their husbands, even if they earn it.
8.cant give tzedakka(since its not their money)
9.daughters can be sold as slaves
10. have no say in whether their daughters are sold as slaves.
11.may be beaten by their husbands if they dont serve their needs properly (according to the rambam)
or maybe she learned about the empowerment described in the gemara in which it is stated:
12. women are sacks of shit. (shabbos152a)
13. woe to those whose children are females
(baba batra 16b)

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS POWER
WAR IS PEACE - orwell alav hashalom

[muffinman]

If at any point a group of people, based on religion, decided that jews in general could not vote, drive (or whatever else) it would be considered discrimination and the ADL would be on it right away. There's so much antisemitism today, yet much of the treatment Jews in general are getting from antisemites is no different than how cavemen like this treat their own women.

[catcher50]

Note to John Boehner:

Have I got a spending cut for you!

[A Yid]

If at any point a group of people, based on religion, decided that jews in general could not vote, drive (or whatever else) it would be considered discrimination and the ADL would be on it right away. There's so much antisemitism today, yet much of the treatment Jews in general are getting from antisemites is no different than how cavemen like this treat their own women.

Posted by: muffinman | April 16, 2011 at 11:34 AM
There are many religious groups like that and there is nothing illegal about it.
It's protected under the 1s Amendment.
CHJCC is not a government agency it is a 501c3 non profit organization and anyone who doesn't like it can can create another competing organization. Since it doesn't discriminate in providing services it is eligible to receive government grants like any other similar non profit organization.