Ephraim Ohana may or may not be a despicable human being. But his behavior does not grant the state the right to force him to practice his faith, Orthodox Judaism, by its rules.
Legislation proposed by state Del. Sandy Rosenberg, D-Baltimore City, this session would do just that, however. If passed, it would force every man to sign a legal document affirming he will remove all religious barriers to remarriage for his spouse when filing for a civil divorce. While well-intentioned, it would surely draw court challenges and could pave the way to future intrusions into religious practice.
The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ? .” By making state law contingent on modifying religious practice, the bill oversteps the powers granted to Congress and state legislatures. News reports show that was the reason the General Assembly considered but abandoned similar legislation in 1999.
At issue is the fact that Ohana will not grant his former wife, Cynthia Ohana, a “get” ? a Jewish divorce ? freeing her to remarry with the blessing of the Orthodox faith. The two divorced legally in 2005 after nearly two decades of marriage, with a court finding that Ephraim quit his job to avoid paying child support and committed infidelity.
Those who argue that legislation could work point to a similar law passed 20 years ago in New York. But just because it exists does not make it right. Besides, how would the state enforce the law? Would it arrest rabbis who refuse to acknowledge the state affidavit signed by divorcing husbands?
It?s hard not to sympathize with Cynthia Ohana, who last week told the House Judiciary Committee in Annapolis, “This is a hostage situation. We are being held for ransom.” She testified on behalf of the legislation along with Sara Rosenbloom, whose former husband Sam Rosenbloom forced her to remain, like Ohana, an “agunah” ? an anchored woman.
Fortunately, both women may remarry civilly. And no law exists prohibiting the state from considering each spouse?s behavior in deciding child custody and the division of assets in a civil divorce case. In this instance the state decided to grant sole custody of the Ohana children to Cynthia.
While Cynthia Ohana?s story stirs sympathy, it must not make legislators abandon a bedrock principle and law of this country that so many have died to protect.
