Explainer

The Law Expanding Gender Separation in Higher Education and Its Implications

| Written By:

Update: This bill passed into law in the early morning of July 16, 2026

The legislation expands the possibility of gender-separated studies in higher education, fundamentally altering the balance between the desire to make higher education accessible to the Haredi population and the principle of equality.

Photo by Hadas Parush/Flash90

Gender separation in higher education is currently permitted only in limited circumstances, primarily in undergraduate programs intended for the Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) population, and only in classrooms. The bill seeks to expand it to all degrees—including research degrees—across all fields of study and to broader groups of students. A last-minute change was inserted into the bill, aimed at expanding separation in some institutions and allowing it to take place outside classrooms as well; in other words, in all public spaces within the institution, such as cafeterias, libraries, courtyards, and corridors.

What does the bill say?

The bill significantly expands the possibility of holding gender-separated studies in higher education. Today, such separation is permitted only in designated undergraduate tracks for the Haredi population, subject to the rules set by the Council for Higher Education and the High Court of Justice. The bill seeks to change this arrangement in several key ways:

  • Expanding gender-separated studies to advanced degrees—master’s and doctoral degrees: Today, gender-separated studies are largely limited to undergraduate degrees. The bill would allow separate tracks to be offered at all degree levels.
  • Expanding separation to all fields of study: Today, separation exists only within designated programs approved by the Council for Higher Education. The bill would allow separate study tracks to be offered in every field of study.
  • Expanding the target population: Today, the limited arrangement that permits gender separation is intended for the Haredi population. The bill would apply it to anyone who wishes to study in a gender-separated setting “for religious reasons,” without defining exactly what that term includes.

What was added to the bill at the last minute?

At the stage of debating reservations to the bill—that is, when the legislative process was already in its final stages—a significant addition was introduced that materially changes an already severe proposal, without any discussion having been held on it.

Throughout the legislative process, it was emphasized that although the possibility of gender-separated studies would be expanded to all fields of study and to advanced degrees, it would still be limited to classrooms only.

Nevertheless, according to the most recent changes, the updated bill provides that in “separated institutions,” the limitation restricting separation to classrooms only will not apply. In other words, in these institutions it will be possible to act to change the arrangements and, among other things, to expand separation into the public space as well, that is, to libraries, cafeterias, courtyards, corridors, and other shared spaces. The bill does not define what a “separated institution” is or which institutions will fall under this definition.

What are the implications of the new law

The bill fundamentally alters the balance that has been established to date between the desire to make higher education accessible to the Haredi population and the principle of equality. If approved, it could have several serious consequences:

  • Harm to the principle of equality and the expansion of women’s exclusion from the public sphere: Israeli law has long recognized that “separate is not equal.” In other words, gender separation is not a neutral arrangement; its direct meaning is harm to women’s right to equality. In practice, separate mechanisms develop in such a way that institutions intended for women risk becoming lower in quality and undermine equal opportunity for women. For this reason, gender separation is currently permitted only as a narrow exception, in defined cases in which a special need has been demonstrated, and subject to restrictions that minimize its consequences and scope as far as possible. Such a significant expansion of this exception in institutions of higher education could normalize gender separation and the exclusion of women in other areas of life as well.
  • Harm to the quality of academic training: This is especially true in advanced degrees, where research training and learning are based on exposure to a diversity of opinions and perspectives, continuous inquiry, and freedom of thought. This harm could later affect the quality of Israeli academia, impairing its excellence and its contribution to society and the economy.
  • Harm to professional training and integration into the labor market: Among other reasons, many professions require direct familiarity with the needs of both women and men, as well as joint work by women and men.
  • Harm to women’s freedom of occupation: Women may be excluded from teaching in men-only tracks, while men will be able to teach in all tracks. This could also harm female teaching assistants, assistant instructors, and women’s opportunities for advancement in academia.

What about the argument that expanding gender separation is a price worth paying in order to integrate Haredim into higher education?

The existing arrangement is already based on the recognition that there are sometimes grounds for allowing gender separation, limited in time and subject to conditions, in order to enable integration—and in this case, to enable the Haredi population to acquire training that will help them integrate into higher education and the labor market. For this reason, the High Court of Justice and the Council for Higher Education permitted limited separation for undergraduate degrees only, alongside clear restrictions intended to protect equality and the quality of education, as a limited interim stage.

The bill breaches these balances and restrictions, expanding well beyond what could be seen as reasonable accommodations into a situation that causes harm to gender equality in Israel. It seeks to normalize mechanisms for expanded gender separation on religious grounds in Israeli society, at the expense of the quality of higher education, occupational training, research, freedom of thought and diversity of opinions, and the development and progress of Israeli society.