Heter Mayah Rabbonim

Can anyone reference me a shiur about the rules of Dina dmalchusa dina? Because something tells me that that people quote this Halacha to an extreme. It’s become almost like the Joker card. Permitted according to Torah? That’s irrelevant, because dina dmalchusa dina.

Benignuman: KODY BROWN, MERI BROWN,JANELLE BROWN, CHRISTINE BROWN,ROBYN SULLIVAN v. JEFFREY R. BUHMAN. Case: 2:11CV00652. It overturned Utah’s statue. Eventually the case was mooted since Utah’s AG promised the Federal court that Utah doesn’t enforce the law anyways. See also the additional points I made in my last comment.

Gaon: We go according to the shitta, as stated in S”A, that R”G set an expiration date. But later the rabbonim extended it. Therefore everyone agrees it continued after expiration, even the shittas that tell us there was an expiration date. But in any event this point is mostly academic. It doesn’t change the other points made.

“But in any event this point is mostly academic. It doesn’t change the other points made.”

It happens to be it does – the diff will be if it can be applied to any sort of Safek. If its a Cherim it is an issue. If its a mere “minhag” than its a diff story. (I recall many poskim discussing it, in regards to after the holocaust etc.)

Put down,
I have heard shiurim on the subject but they are not readily available online. I am sure that if you go to YU Torah and search “dina d’malchusa” (or malchuta) you will find plenty. I learned the sugya to a degree (and even once gave a shiur on the topic. The extent of its applicability is a machlokes Rishonim. But, if I remember correctly, the Rama paskens that it applies to general laws as well (i.e. not just taxes or monetary laws).

Joseph,

I will look at the case that you cited. However, I am pretty sure that no court has held that anti-polygamy laws are unconstitutional. Many years ago, the Supreme Court held that they were Constitutional. And although that holding is shaky in light of recent Supreme Court rulings, it has not yet been overruled and therefore remains the law of the land.

As I stated above, I believe we pasken (I will track down the Rama) that dina d’malchusa applies to all laws of the land (so long as they do not require violations of halacha).

You are right that if you simply live with them all halachically but only claim, legally, to be married to one of them, it would be permitted in many states (not sure about New York).

Many years ago the Supreme Court held that marriage only between men and women was legal and that sodomy was illegal. Yet courts later changed. And the court has ruled as I said above; anti-polygamy laws are constitutionally unenforceable for any purpose more than to allow the State to refuse to issue secular marriage licenses to someone already married.

In any event your acknowledgment of the point in your last paragraph makes the point moot since one can simply refrain from obtaining multiple state marriage licenses or otherwise representing himself to the government of being married more than once. He can simply stick to kiddushin.

About nine or so years ago Rav Ovadia Yosef said he feels it is wrong that many Sephardim have accepted what was an Ashkenazic-only takana against having a second wife, and said Sephardim shouldn’t abide by such an across-the-board rule.

Gaon, what you’re quoting is part of the kesuba of many Sephardim. That has been done for many years by many Sephardim but it has never been an across-the-board provision accepted by all Sephardim. The Sephardim customize their kesubas and some take certain conditions, as agreed upon between chosson and kallah prior to marriage, while other Sephardim don’t implement those provisions in their kesuba (in which case he could take additional wives without anyone else’s reshus.) But even the kesuba provision you quoted, for those Sephardim that use that provision, (as you said) even they can take a second (or third) wife with the reshus of beis din, which the provision expressly allows for.

Neville’s question was about a situation where a Sephardi was in a marriage where the wife ran away without accepting a Get or something. In such a case it would be very easy for a Sephardic Beis Din to allow him to take a second wife, due to such a circumstances. Because the provision even allows Beis Din to allow additional wives when he’s still happily living with his first wife.

An interesting point regarding Neville’s question, whereas Ashkenazim are prohibited from forcibly divorcing a wife against her will based on Cherem Rabbeinu Gershom, Sephardim have no such preclusion and could simply divorce her against her will if she took off and didn’t want to accept a divorce.