← The Seven Files
Itzhak (Igor) Rubinov
Sentenced twice to six months for declining to provide a Get, a Jewish religious divorce, raising the question of whether a court may compel a religious act.
RELIGIOUS LIBERTYCIVIL CONTEMPTDUE PROCESS
Photographs supplied by the family have not yet been added to this profile.Documentation requested
FIRSTHAND ACCOUNT
Firsthand Account
In his own words
Published exactly as supplied. Not edited, corrected, shortened or paraphrased.
A Man in Prison, A NY Court Forcing Him to Violate His Religion
My name is Itzhak (Igor) Rubinov.
I am a man sitting in prison because I refused to do something that goes against my religious beliefs.
December 10, 2025 — The First Six-Month Sentence
On December 10, 2025, the Honorable Judge Sandra M. Moon of the Queens County Supreme Court sentenced me to six months in incarceration for failing to provide a Get, a Jewish religious divorce, to my ex-wife.
For me, this is not simply a piece of paper. A Get is a religious act. I believe that being forced by the government to participate in that religious act against my will violates something deeply personal to me.
I am not refusing because I want to defy the court. I am refusing because I believe I should not be forced to violate my religious beliefs in order to remain free.
The Constitutional Issue
My case raises serious questions about religious freedom, compelled speech, the Establishment Clause, the Free Exercise Clause, and whether a New York court has the statutory authority to compel a person to perform a religious act.
I believe the government should not have the power to tell a person what religious act he must perform and then take away his freedom when he refuses.
July 22, 2026 — Another Six-Month Sentence
On July 22, 2026, I was sentenced to another six months of incarceration.
So here I am—behind bars—not because I committed a crime, but because I refused to perform a religious act that I believe I cannot perform against my conscience.
What This Has Meant for Me
I never imagined that exercising my religious beliefs could cost me my freedom.
I never imagined that I would have to choose between being free and remaining faithful to what I believe.
But that is the position I now find myself in.
My question is simple:
Can the government imprison a man for refusing to perform a religious act that he does not consent to perform?
I believe that no person should have to surrender his religious beliefs in order to keep his freedom.
This is my story.
Case Timeline
Verified timeline events are entered separately from the firsthand account. Documentation for this timeline is being compiled.
Where Itzhak says due process failed
These are the questions his account raises. They are campaign positions and attributed claims, not findings.
Religious Liberty
Igor argues that compelled performance of a religious act implicates the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses.
Judicial Authority
Igor argues that a New York court lacks statutory authority to compel a person to perform a religious act.
Purge Conditions
Igor argues that a purge condition consisting of a religious act cannot lawfully be the key to a person's freedom.
Impact on his children and family
Igor's statement describes the personal cost of choosing between remaining free and remaining faithful to what he believes.
OFFICIAL COURT RECORD
COURT RECORD
What the official court record shows
- Case: Olga Suyunova v. Igor Rubinov
- Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Queens
- Index No. 717959/2020
- Hearing date: December 10, 2025
- An earlier order directed Rubinov to provide the Gett.
- Rubinov had not provided it.
- His attorney sought to raise religious-freedom issues.
- The court found him in contempt.
- He was remanded.
- The purge condition involved giving the Gett.
- The transcript reflects a six-month period of incarceration/review.
- A monetary sanction of $250 per day was imposed while he did not provide the Gett.
“you are going to stay there until you rot unless you give her the gett”
Transcript excerpt, presented as an official-record excerpt. It is not attributed to Igor.
Transcript viewer and download: the file is being prepared for publication.
CAMPAIGN POSITION
The constitutional questions Igor raises
- Whether a court may compel performance of a religious act.
- Whether compelled performance amounts to compelled speech.
- Whether the order implicates the Establishment Clause.
- Whether it burdens free exercise of religion.
- Whether a New York court has statutory authority to order a religious act as a purge condition.
Documents & court records
Documentation for this section is being compiled. Court orders, proofs of service, transcripts and commitment orders will be published here with source and verification labels, after review for private information.
Key quotes
“I am a man sitting in prison because I refused to do something that goes against my religious beliefs.”
“Can the government imprison a man for refusing to perform a religious act that he does not consent to perform?”