"Oiy Ya'Yoi" Yated ordered to run ads for "All Lady Party" in Israel.... UPDATED MAR 16

Lol! 
The Zionist court in Israel ruled that Chareidie Newspapers must run at least one ad for the "All Lady Religious Party" .... even though "gedoilim" are vehemently opposed to them!
These "gedolim" would have opposed Devorah the Shofetes.. too. 
They are of course holier than the Tanach!

Ruth Kolian

Read and laugh your head off!

A Lod District Court ordered ultra-Orthodox newspapers Yated Ne'eman and Yom Le'yom on Friday to run campaign ads for the Haredi women's party B'Zechutan, after the party claimed the papers were discriminating against it by refusing to print its ads.

The decision could also result in official Shas and United Torah Judaism journals - which serve as the mouthpiece of the most prominent Haredi rabbis - also having to run campaign ads for a party that challenges them and accuses them of exclusion of women.

B'Zechutan leader Ruth Kolian petitioned the court with the help of the Center for the Advancement of the Status of Women and the Center for Women's Justice. Her lawyers, attorneys Karen Horowitz and Shai Zilberberg, explained that the printed Haredi press is the only media channel accessible to the party's potential voters.

Yated Ne'ema (File photo)

Judge Jacob Spasser issued an interim order which requires the two newspapers to run at least one of the party's campaign ads until Election Day, noting that in this case the principle of equality surpasses the property rights of the newspapers' owners.

"This is an ad which is public in nature, and mostly targets women in the Haredi sector," the judge wrote in his ruling. "There's considerable public importance in running it, an importance that might be higher in light of the prohibition on discrimination and the principle of equality in elections."

The court rejected the papers' claim that papers that already cover different parties whose views are clearly not in line with their own views, might offend their readers by running an ad for the Haredi women's party.

Prof. Ruth Halperin-Kaddari, the head of the Rackman Center for the Advancement of the Status of Women at Bar-Ilan University's Law Faculty, said following the ruling that "this is a historic legal precedent which determines that in certain circumstances, considerations of equality for women and election equality, as well as preventing discrimination against women and their preventing their exclusion, surpass property rights of commercial bodies like newspapers.

"This is the height of women's exclusion. Haredi women are not only prevented in practice from realizing the basic human right of running and being elected for Knesset, they are also denied the equal opportunity to inform their potential voters that they are running independently."

B'Zechutan leader Ruth Kolian said: "By having the Haredi newspapers refuse to allow us to reach our voters, we're excluded twice. First, we're not allowed to reach our audience of voters, and secondly, instead of using the time we have left until the elections to campaign, we have to turn to different courts in order to realize our right to be elected."
Kolian also said she hoped her party continues creating precedents in the elections as well.

UPDATED!!!!

Three days after an Israeli district court ordered chareidi newspapers to run election ads featuring women, the Supreme Court today overturned that decision, arguing that the judgment was hastily made and would have to be reexamined in depth without time constraints.

The chareidi women’s party Bezchutan petitioned to have their advertisements shown in chareidi print publications Yated Ne’eman and Yom Le’yom. A ruling Friday at the Lod District Court rejected claims that printing the images would insult the sensibilities of readers, and ordered their publication before Israelis head to the polls on March 17.

The newspapers, however, appealed that decision at the Supreme Court and the presiding judge ordered the commercials be postponed until the case can be properly mulled “without [the] time constraints” of Tuesday’s impending vote.

“The sequence of events led to a situation where the merits of the legal issue weren’t discussed in depth,” Supreme Court Justice Neal Hendel said.

“The necessary balance between conflicting interests and the principles at stake was not found [in the initial judgment,]” Hendel said.

He noted that a ruling had not been made in either of the parties’ favor, and called on both sides to hold a hearing within an acceptable time frame.