Religion Law Commons^™

Contract Law Should Be Faith Neutral: Reverse Entanglement Would Be Stranglement For Religious Arbitration, Michael J. Broyde, Alexa J. Windsor

Faculty Articles

The first section of this Article will outline the ways in which communities—religious and other groups, including the LGBTQ+ community—have used and continue to use private law to achieve meaningful dispute resolution. By diminishing the role of civil courts to review arbitrations, parties may tailor their resolutions to prioritize community values that may be misaligned with secular society. Outside of historical religious usage, private law offers a field ripe for jurisprudential growth. Through alternative dispute resolution, affinity-based minority groups can pave an avenue towards justice which accurately reflects the unique values of their lived experiences.

The second section will provide …

Religious Alternative Dispute Resolution In Israel And Other Nations With State-Sponsored Religious Courts: Crafting A More Efficient And Better Relationship Between Rabbinical Courts And Arbitration Law In Israel, Michael J. Broyde, Ezra Ives

Faculty Articles

This paper proposes the expansion of both private and public options regarding religious arbitration in Israel, broadening both the choice of law and the choice of forum available to Israeli citizens in cases of either commercial law or issues of status (such as divorce, marriage, and conversion). The current law in Israel prohibits citizens from adjudicating their monetary disputes in state religious courts and treats private religious courts as no different from any other arbitration tribunal, precluding these private religious courts from marriage, divorce and conversion matters. We propose that both of these restrictions be lifted, while the role of …

Jewish Law Courts In America: Lessons Offered To Sharia Courts By The Beth Din Of America Precedent, Michael J. Broyde

Faculty Articles

Although the BDA is now a fifty-year-old organization, its true metamorphosis as an arbitration panel began only in 1996 when it gained autonomy from the Rabbinical Council of America. In the fifteen years since, an independent board of directors has worked with the BDA’s rabbinic leaders to craft an arbitration process that secular courts would feel comfortable upholding. While the BDA’s transformation required some level of compromise within Jewish law itself, the adaptations necessary for judicial acceptance proved to be procedural. Broadly, this meant conforming to the tenets of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). More specifically, the BDA’s viability came …