Knesset asks High Court to shelve petitions against law on gender-segregated graduate study

Israel's Knesset asked the High Court of Justice on Tuesday to take two petitions off its docket. The petitions challenge a July law that extends gender-segregated study at Israeli colleges and universities to master's and doctoral degrees. The Knesset argued the cases are premature because the Council for Higher Education (CHE) has not yet decided how to carry out the law. The attorney-general took a different route and asked the court to schedule a hearing.

The filing came a week after the October 27 election and as President Isaac Herzog prepares coalition consultations. The law was passed by the outgoing Knesset. It is one of several measures on religion and public life that the next government may have to address, along with the haredi draft dispute covered in our report on United Torah Judaism's coalition demands.

This report sets out what the law says, what each side told the court, what the CHE's own figures show, and the next steps.

What the Knesset and the council asked for

The Jerusalem Post reported that the Knesset's request followed a preliminary response from the CHE and its Planning and Budgeting Committee. Both bodies asked the court to dismiss the petitions as premature.

The council said the law had not changed its existing policy. It said it had not authorized any new segregated programs for graduate students, and that institutions must keep operating under the approvals they already hold.

The council drew a line between a law that permits segregated graduate programs and a decision that actually approves one. The amendment does not require the council to approve any particular program, it said. It leaves the council in charge of setting conditions and protecting equality. Without knowing those conditions, the council argued, the court cannot judge the alleged harm or whether that harm could be justified. It also said the petitioners had not approached the council before going to court.

In its own Tuesday filing, the Knesset said the petitioners would have to amend their cases once the council adopts a policy. Setting a hearing now, without knowing when that work will end, could force all sides to argue over a changed set of facts at short notice, it said. The Knesset argued that removing the petitions, while keeping the right to challenge later arrangements, would not harm the petitioners or the public interest, since the council was not approving programs under the new framework anyway.

The attorney-general's request

The attorney-general asked the court to keep the petitions moving toward a hearing. She asked to file her own preliminary response 21 days before that hearing, once the council's position can be taken into account, according to the Post.

Both groups of petitioners agreed to that request, on the condition that the court schedule the hearing as soon as possible.

The council said its steering committee first discussed the amendment on October 6 and scheduled another discussion for Tuesday. Its recommendations must then pass through the Planning and Budgeting Committee and the full council. Even a change in policy would not automatically approve new programs, the council said. Each would still need its own approval.

What the July law says

The Knesset passed the amendment to the Student Rights Law by 52 votes to 43 in July. It was sponsored by Otzma Yehudit lawmaker Limor Son Har-Melech.

According to the Post's report on the first petition, the amendment expressly allows the CHE to approve separate programs for men and women in bachelor's, master's and doctoral studies. At institutions that otherwise teach men and women together, separation is limited to classrooms. That limit does not apply to institutions designated for only men or only women. The amendment also states that running separate institutions or programs for men and women for religious reasons will not, in itself, count as discrimination.

The Post reported in July that, at mixed institutions, enrollment in a separate track must be voluntary.

The 2021 ruling the law builds on

The dispute goes back to a 2021 High Court ruling. All five justices on an expanded panel agreed that gender segregation in higher education infringed the constitutional right to equality. A 3-2 majority still upheld the CHE's framework at the time.

The majority found the framework proportionate only because it was limited in three ways, according to the Post. It applied only to haredi (ultra-Orthodox) students. It applied only to bachelor's degrees, which the court described as an "entry gate" to higher education. And it applied only inside classrooms, not in shared campus spaces. The ruling also barred the exclusion of women lecturers. The court warned that departing from the arrangement's "delicate balances" could make segregated programs unlawful.

The existing policy generally limits segregation to undergraduate programs for graduates of haredi schools, and to classrooms, though some older segregated master's programs were allowed to continue.

Who is challenging the law

Two petitions are before the court.

The first was filed hours after the law passed in July. It was brought by six haredi women and 10 academics and is led by Tel Aviv University law professor Yofi Tirosh. The second was filed by the Israel Women's Network, the Israel Religious Action Center and Na'amat. Both ask the court to strike down the law or to read it narrowly, so that the limits set in 2021 still apply.

The Tirosh petition argues that the Knesset widened the model without fixing what it describes as long-standing breaches of the limits that made it lawful. It accuses the CHE of failing to stop segregation from spreading into libraries, corridors and administrative offices, and of failing to enforce the ban on excluding women lecturers from men's programs.

The petition quotes a 2024 CHE meeting in which officials said: "We did not find at any institution a woman lecturer teaching haredi men in a mandatory frontal course." The council told the Post the quote came from an internal discussion held before its current policy was written.

The petitioners also argue that an equality clause in an earlier draft of the bill was removed in committee. In their view, the result is a law meant to enable "separate but equal" programs that could instead lead to "separate and unequal" education. They warn that women could be steered toward lower-paid fields, and that graduate study depends on close work with senior researchers, not only on classroom teaching.

Several haredi petitioners spoke in their own words. "A partition never remains merely an option," said Dr. Estee Rieder, a researcher of haredi society. "Once established, it becomes a norm behind which women are expected to stand." Feini Suknik, a haredi educator, said: "The haredi public does not need a parallel and inferior academy. It needs real entry into academia itself."

The Israel Women's Network says on its petition page that the law seeks to stretch segregation to advanced degrees and across campus, not only classrooms. "From the experience of recent years we already know: gender segregation does not stop," the group wrote. "It only spreads and widens all the time." It said the case "is not a struggle against one population or another."

What the law's sponsor says

Son Har-Melech has said the law widens access for religious students. After the court declined in July to freeze the law, she said, according to Israel National News, that the law "is intended to expand freedom of choice and access to higher education for communities that have until now been excluded from it."

She added that "that concern cannot justify denying thousands of Israelis the opportunity to pursue higher education." She called on academic institutions "not to wait" and to begin applying to the CHE to open separate programs under the law. "Thousands of women and men are waiting for this opportunity," she said.

When the law passed, she said it "does not impose anything on anyone" and instead "expands freedom, enables diversity and respects the human mosaic of Israeli society," according to the Post.

The council's figures on lecturers

The CHE disputed the petitioners' account of how its current rules work. It gave the court new figures on teaching staff in existing separate programs, according to Tuesday's Post report.

Of 93 programs operating in the 2025-26 academic year, 78 reported having both men and women among their lecturers. The other 15 were required to show such a mix before opening for 2026-27, and later updated their teaching teams. Based on reports from the institutions, the council said, all of the separate programs running this year now have both male and female lecturers. It said women teach in men's tracks in various formats at most institutions, some in person.

Earlier, the council told the Post that no complaints had been filed through its channel for reporting discrimination against lecturers in recent years.

How many haredi students are in higher education

The number of students who came from the haredi school system has been rising, and the fastest growth has been in graduate study. These are the CHE's figures for the 2025-26 academic year, as reported by Makor Rishon.

Bachelor's

16,409

Master's

3,373

Doctorate

224

Source: Council for Higher Education data via Makor Rishon

Show the numbers

Degree	Students
Bachelor's	16,409
Master's	3,373
Doctorate	224

According to the same figures, the number at the bachelor's level rose 4.9% from the year before. The number in master's programs rose 15%, and the number of doctoral students rose 18.5%. The CHE sees the rise in advanced degrees as a sign that haredi graduates want to go beyond a first degree, Makor Rishon reported. Women made up 58.6% of all students in Israel this year, and 63.2% of master's students.

These figures do not show how many of these students are in separate programs. The council has not published that breakdown in the sources reviewed for this report.

Academics and resignations

A forum of women professors, Afik in Academia, filed a friend-of-the-court paper. It warned that extending segregation to advanced degrees would hurt women's job prospects, research and academic standards. The forum said it supports more haredi participation in higher education. It proposed scholarships, preparatory courses and mentoring within existing programs instead of more separation.

Five CHE members resigned in July in protest at the law. Four of them, Edit Tshuva, Marcelle Machluf, Jihad El-Sana and Lia Laor, wrote that the law "constitutes unprecedented interference in the independence of the Council for Higher Education." A fifth, Moshe Vigdor, resigned separately. He wrote that "the law will grant state legitimacy to the exclusion of women in academia," according to the Post.

Next steps at the court and the council

The court has not yet ruled on the Knesset's request or set a hearing date. In July it declined to issue a conditional order or to freeze the law while the case proceeds.

The council's committees must still finish their review. Any new graduate program would need separate approval after that. The next Knesset and government will also shape the issue. Parties that backed the law, including Otzma Yehudit, are part of the bloc that recommended Benjamin Netanyahu to the president. Opposition leaders recommended Gadi Eisenkot instead. Eisenkot has said an opposition-led Knesset would repeal laws that he says "threaten democracy," according to the Post. He has not said in the sources reviewed here whether this law is among them.

For how 567politics handles sources and disputed claims, see our methodology.

About this report

This report draws on The Jerusalem Post's coverage of the Knesset's and the council's filings and of the July petitions and resignations; Israel National News; the Israel Women's Network; and Council for Higher Education data reported by Makor Rishon. Quotes from Hebrew-language sources are 567politics translations. Times are Eastern.

Differing perspectives

Should Israel's law extending gender-segregated study to graduate degrees stand?

Each position is summarized as its supporters make it, with equal weight and in alphabetical order. A summary is not an endorsement; the evidence for each is weighed in the story above.

• Bring haredi students into mainstream academia

  Who holds it: Six haredi women and 10 academics led by Prof. Yofi Tirosh

  These petitioners say the law removes the safeguards that made segregation lawful in 2021, while existing limits were already poorly enforced. Haredi women among them say a partition does not stay optional and becomes a social norm women are expected to accept. They say the haredi public needs real entry into academia itself, not a parallel and lesser system.

  In their words: The Jerusalem Post (July petition) ↗

• Keep the law and let programs open

  Who holds it: MK Limor Son Har-Melech (Otzma Yehudit), the law's sponsor

  Son Har-Melech says the law went through the full Knesset process and widens freedom of choice and access to higher education for communities that were shut out until now. She says it imposes nothing on anyone, and that concerns raised by the petitioners cannot justify denying thousands of Israelis a chance at advanced study. She urges institutions to apply to open separate programs now.

  In their words: Israel National News ↗

• Strike the law down or read it narrowly

  Who holds it: Israel Women's Network, Israel Religious Action Center and Na'amat

  The petitioners say the court allowed segregation only as a narrow, temporary exception for haredi students in first degrees, under tight limits. They argue the law stretches it to advanced degrees, wider groups and shared campus spaces. In their view, separation tends to spread, harms equality and women lecturers, and can lead to the exclusion of women elsewhere in public life.

  In their words: Israel Women's Network ↗

• Wait for the council to set its policy

  Who holds it: The Knesset; the Council for Higher Education and its Planning and Budgeting Committee

  The Knesset and the council say the petitions are premature. The council says the law has not changed its policy or approved any new graduate program, and that it still sets the conditions and protects equality. Until those conditions exist, they argue, the court cannot judge the harm. They say removing the cases now would not stop later challenges to specific arrangements.

  In their words: The Jerusalem Post ↗