‘A Delicate Necessity’: Bruker v. Marcovitz and the Problem of Jewish Divorce
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors use the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Bruker v. Marcovitz as a lens for examining the problem of Jewish divorce, which pits two religious freedoms against each other: a man’s freedom not to grant a get or Jewish divorce to his wife, and his wife’s freedom to remarry according to the tenets of Judaism. The authors outline the case history starting with the decisions of the Quebec Superior Court and Court of Appeal, explain the questions that the majority and minority asked themselves in the Supreme Court of Canada, and conclude by analyzing that Court’s decision and its implications for Jewish spouses and spouses of other religious minorities going through the divorce process. First, though, the authors explain the nature of a get, the consequences of not obtaining one, and the responses of both Jewish and secular law, all crucial to understanding how Bruker v. Marcovitz was decided and how comparable cases should be decided in a multicultural society like Canada.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.033 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".