Rabbi,

What is the point of rabbinical courts if they don’t rule according to Torah law?

And why exactly don’t they rule according to Torah law? Is it because the state doesn’t give them authority to do so?

Indeed, there is no point. The state doesn’t care what goes on there. They don’t want to rule according to the law so as not to be sued for mistakes.

Another crooked thing in this country… by now it’s impossible to know whether I’m the crooked one and everything is actually perfectly straight.

I think a lot of people aren’t aware of this—that they rule according to… actually, who knows what.

Why do people go to them at all? Because of the beards?

And now seriously: if it’s really as you say (and I’m not doubting you), on what religious justification do they maintain that rabbinical courts are necessary? Do they have some theological argument, or are they relying on the public’s ignorance?

Broom,
1. I suggest you not jump to conclusions without knowing the material and the actual situation. It’s clear that you’re not familiar with the material, and from one answer of mine you shouldn’t build theories and make sweeping judgments about the universe. Not because I disagree, but because that kind of judgment isn’t serious.
2. This has nothing to do with the state in any way. Religious courts have not judged according to Jewish law for many generations. The courts here are just continuing that tradition. This is true of private religious courts too, not only state-run ones. On the contrary, the state-run ones that deal with personal-status issues usually do judge according to Jewish law (or at least are supposed to).
3. Indeed, people go to them because of the beards. That’s not so far-fetched, since there is a prohibition against litigating before judges who are not fit, even if they judge according to the correct law. Alternatively, there is some basis for the view that one should litigate before fit judges, even if they do not judge according to the correct law. Especially when people sign an agreement authorizing them to rule by compromise (whether close to the law or not).
And still, I agree too that it’s crooked and illogical and wrong to litigate before them.

Indeed, I jumped to hasty conclusions, and I really have no knowledge of the matter.

I simply thought that religious courts really do follow Torah law. It’s disappointing to hear that this is not the case.

Do we know when religious courts stopped following Torah law? And how did they justify this to the people of their own generation?

The argument you brought up about fit judges is interesting, even if they do not follow the correct law. What is gained by going to fit judges when the law itself is wrong?
An unfit judge can still issue a true ruling, because he judges according to the true law.
A fit judge who rules according to an untrue law will in any case issue an untrue ruling (maybe he’ll try to get as close to justice as possible).