Uncategorized
A court ruling has transformed — and limited — the way New York state can regulate yeshivas
NEW YORK (JTA) — What should happen when a yeshiva does not teach its students the legally required amount of secular studies? And who should be held responsible: the school, or the parents who chose it?
Both of those questions were at the heart of a bombshell ruling in a New York state court last week that, if it stands, will transform how the state can regulate private schools. It also poses a challenge to advocates for increased secular education in yeshivas, who have spent years pushing the state to more strictly enforce its standards in schools.
It’s the latest major development in a years-long battle between an education department that seeks to compel secular education standards across private schools and haredi Orthodox yeshivas resisting coercion from the state.
In a trial that pitted several yeshivas and their advocates against the state’s education department, a judge in Albany ruled that the state no longer has the power to effectively force yeshivas to close for not teaching secular studies in a way that is “substantially equivalent” to education in public school. According to the ruling, state law says it’s the responsibility of parents, not schools, to ensure that children receive a “substantially equivalent” secular education.
But the court also ruled that the education requirements themselves still stand. The yeshivas and their supporters had taken the department to court, hoping that the judge would fully strike down the regulations that mandated secular education standards.
Both advocates and critics of the yeshivas are celebrating parts of the ruling and lamenting others. What’s clear is that the state’s mechanism for enforcing secular education standards in private schools will have to change, though what shape it will take remains to be seen.
“It highlights and it notes that the statute itself requires parents to ensure that their children receive a substantially equivalent education, but it doesn’t impose an obligation on the schools to provide that,” said Michael Helfand, a scholar of religious law and religious liberty at Pepperdine University, explaining the ruling. “If that’s the case, there’s no authority under the statute to close the school because the school failed to provide a ‘substantially equivalent’ education.”
The regulations at issue were approved in September, soon after The New York Times published the first in a series of articles investigating Hasidic yeshivas, reporting that a number of them received public funding but fell far short of secular education requirements. The yeshivas, and representatives of haredi Orthodox communities more broadly, have decried the articles as biased and inaccurate.
According to the new regulations, if yeshivas (or other private schools) did not provide a “substantially equivalent” secular education to their students, the state could compel parents to unenroll their children and place them in a school that meets state standards — effectively forcing the school to close.
The judge who wrote last week’s ruling, Christina Ryba, found “that certain portions of the New Regulations impose consequences and penalties upon yeshivas above and beyond that authorized” by law. Ryba wrote that the regulations exceed the state’s authority by forcing parents to withdraw their children.
She added that state law does not mandate that children must receive the requisite secular education “through merely one source of instruction provided at a single location.” She added that if children aren’t receiving the necessary instruction at yeshivas, they can still get it elsewhere, in some form of “supplemental instruction that specifically addresses any identified deficiencies.”
What that ruling means, Helfand said, is that the state will have to turn to other methods to enforce those standards, such as choosing to “tie particular requirements to the way in which schools receive funding.” The state could also investigate parents, not schools — which he described as a much more arduous undertaking.
“It would then have to slowly but surely make its way through each individual family or each individual child [and] ask questions about what they’re supplementing,” he said. “It’s very hard to see exactly how the New York State Education Department could, given this ruling, ensure that every child is receiving a basic education.”
For yeshivas and their advocates, he added, “It’s not the constitutional victory that I think some hoped for but it’s a very practical victory that in the end may stymie the state’s ability to actually impose significant regulation.”
That’s the way advocates of yeshivas — including parties to the petition — appear to be reading this ruling. A statement from Parents for Education and Religious Liberty in Schools, known as PEARLS, one of the petitioners, said the ruling gives “parents the right to send their children to the school of their choice. …In sum, it provides parents and parochial schools with both the autonomy and the protections that the regulations tried to strip away.”
Another advocate of yeshivas that was party to the case, the haredi umbrella organization Agudath Israel of America, saw the ruling as “not the complete victory many were [praying] for,” according to a statement, because it didn’t strike down last year’s regulations entirely. But the group was grateful that Ryba did rule out “the egregious overreach the Regulations sought,” including the “prospect of forcibly shutting down schools.”
Rabbi Avi Shafran, Agudath Israel’s director of public affairs, told JTA that the organization was “obviously relieved” by the ruling but feels the battle isn’t over. At the beginning of the year, Agudath Israel launched a campaign called “Know Us” that aims to counter what it calls a “smear campaign” by The New York Times.
“But with elements out there bent on pressuring yeshivos to accept their own personal educational philosophy, we remain on the alert for any future attempts to limit yeshivos or parental autonomy,” Shafran wrote in an email.
While Agudath Israel may see the ruling as a partial victory, that doesn’t mean advocates for secular education necessarily see it as a total defeat. Young Advocates for Fair Education, known as YAFFED, which submitted an amicus brief to the court in support of the Department of Education, said in a press release that the ruling “is of grave concern to all parents with children in non-public schools.” Beatrice Weber, YAFFED’s executive director, said the ruling will require the group to shift its strategy, which has until now focused on compelling the schools to teach secular studies.
But she is heartened that the core requirement to provide a threshold level of secular studies still stands for parents — and she’s skeptical that haredi communities will take the risk of asking parents to violate that requirement en masse. In the end, she believes more yeshivas will, in fact, become “substantially equivalent” in order to remove that risk.
“This victory they’re celebrating is really putting them in this corner,” Weber said. “We’ll see what they decide to do but none of the claims of [the regulations] being a violation of religious freedom — none of that was accepted.”
Weber acknowledges that the burden for secular education has now shifted to parents, and “there’s not going to be someone knocking on every door” to make sure parents comply. But she noted that many haredi families interact with the state because they receive forms of public assistance, which she said could provide a built-in mechanism to pressure them to comply.
“Any time they touch the government it’s going to come up,” she said. “Many Hasidic families deal with government programs a lot — whether it’s Medicaid, whether it’s food stamps. I can’t see community leaders saying, ‘Whatever, let the families figure it out.’”
A spokesperson for the state education department declined to say whether the state plans to appeal the ruling, or what it means for future oversight of yeshivas. But in a statement, the department said the ruling “validates the Department’s commitment to improving the educational experience of all students.”
The statement added: “We remain committed to ensuring students who attend school in settings consistent with their religious and cultural beliefs and values receive the education to which they are legally entitled.”
Whatever the future holds, Helfand says the ruling reflects a new way to read the law that, for years, has driven tensions between the state and yeshivas.
“I would have expected people reading the statute not to distinguish between whether ‘substantially equivalent’ is a parental obligation or a school obligation,” he said. “The fact that the court was able to slice the obligation in such a precise way — it’s something we haven’t seen before.”
—
The post A court ruling has transformed — and limited — the way New York state can regulate yeshivas appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Klimt Portrait That Helped Save Jewish Subject From Nazi Persecution Sells for Record $236 Million at Auction
Painting by Gustav Klimt ‘Bildnis Elisabeth Lederer’ (Portrait of Elisabeth Lederer) on display at Sotheby’s auction house new global headquarters on Madison Avenue in the Marcel Breuer building in New York, NY on Nov. 12, 2025. Photo: Lev Radin/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
A Gustav Klimt portrait that helped safe its Jewish subject from Nazi persecution during the Holocaust sold on Tuesday for a record-breaking $236.4 million at a Sotheby’s auction in New York.
Klimt’s “Portrait of Elisabeth Lederer” is a 6-foot-tall painting that the artist worked on for two years between 1914 and 1916. It depicts the 2o-year-old only daughter of August and Szerena Lederer, wrapped in an East Asian emperor’s cloak adorned with dragons. The Lederers, who were Jewish, were Klimt’s greatest patrons and also the second wealthiest family in Vienna, Austria, only behind the Rothschilds. Klimt painted portraits of other Lederer family members as well and their art collection included many Klimt paintings.
The painting is one of only two full-length Klimt portraits that remain privately owned, while the majority of the rest are in museums. The portrait sold for $205 million plus premium to a buyer over the phone. It marks a record for a piece of modern art and doubled the previous record for a Klimt painting, according to Reuters. Sotheby’s declined to share the identity of the portrait’s buyer.
Following Nazi Germany’s annexation of Austria in 1938, which took place two years after August Lederer died, Nazis looted the Lederer art collection but left behind the family portraits because they were considered “too Jewish” to be worth stealing, according to the National Gallery of Canada, where “Portrait of Elisabeth Lederer” was on loan for three years.
In an attempt to save herself from Nazi persecution, Elisabeth fabricated a story that Klimt, who was not Jewish and died in 1918, was her real father. The fact that Klimt had a reputation as a philanderer and spend years obsessing over Elisabeth’s portrait helped support her story. Szerena even signed an affidavit supporting the false claim about Klimt’s paternity in an effort to save her daughter, according to the National Gallery of Canada. The Nazi regime ultimately gave Elisabeth a document stating that she was descended from Klimt and along with help from a former brother-in-law, who was a high-ranking Nazi official, she lived safely in Vienna until she died of an illness in 1944.
The painting was then looted by the Nazis and nearly destroyed in a fire during World War II, but miraculously survived. It was returned to a Lederer family member in 1948, who kept the piece until selling it in 1983. “Portrait of Elisabeth Lederer” joined the art collection of Estée Lauder heir and Jewish billionaire Leonard Lauder in 1985. He died in June at 92 and five Klimt pieces from his collection have sold at Sotheby’s for a total of $392 million.
Uncategorized
Iran Seeks Saudi Leverage to Revive Stalled Nuclear Talks With US
Saudi Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed bin Salman speaks during a meeting with US President Donald Trump, in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, DC, US, Nov. 18, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein
Iran has asked Saudi Arabia to persuade the US to revive stalled nuclear talks, underlining Tehran’s anxiety over a possible repeat of Israeli airstrikes and its deepening economic woes, two regional sources with knowledge of the matter said.
A day before Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s visit to the White House earlier this week, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian sent a letter to the de facto Saudi leader, Iranian and Saudi media reported on Monday.
In the letter, Pezeshkian said Iran “does not seek confrontation,” wants deeper regional cooperation, and remains “open to resolving the nuclear dispute through diplomacy, provided its rights are guaranteed”, the sources told Reuters.
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said on Wednesday that Pezeshkian’s message to the Saudi crown prince was “purely bilateral.” The Saudi government media office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
IRAN‘S NUCLEAR SITES BOMBED IN JUNE
Prior to the 12-day war in June triggered by Israeli airstrikes, during which US forces struck three Iranian nuclear sites, Iran and the US held five rounds of talks on the Islamic Republic’s contentious uranium enrichment program.
Since the war, the negotiations have hit an impasse, even as both sides insist they remain open to a deal.
One of the sources in the Gulf said Iran is seeking a channel to reopen talks with Washington, and that the Saudi leader also favors a peaceful solution and conveyed that message to US President Donald Trump during his visit.
“MbS [the Saudi crown prince] also wants this conflict to be over peacefully. This is important to him, and he relayed this to Trump and said he is ready to help,” the Arab Gulf source said.
On Tuesday, the Saudi ruler told reporters: “We will do our best to help reach a deal between the United States and Iran.”
Riyadh and Tehran have been long-time strategic rivals in the Middle East, often backing opposing sides in regional proxy wars, until a China-brokered rapprochement in 2023 eased hostilities and restored diplomatic relations.
Saudi Arabia’s growing political weight has made it an increasingly decisive actor in regional diplomacy. Its deep security ties with Washington – and particularly the leadership’s close relationship with Trump – endow Riyadh with leverage few others in the Middle East possess.
Meanwhile, Iran‘s regional standing has weakened over the past two years from devastating military blows inflicted by Israel on its allies Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon, and the fall of its close ally, Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad.
“Shifting mediation channels from countries such as Oman and Qatar to Saudi Arabia – a country with structural power, direct influence in the US and a practical resolve to reduce tensions – is the best strategic decision under current circumstances,” said Hamid Aboutalebi, a former senior Iranian diplomat.
“These characteristics make Saudi Arabia an effective mediator and a genuine channel for conveying messages, a position that neither Oman nor Qatar nor the Europeans possess,” Aboutalebi wrote on X.
Given that it is seeking to establish its own uranium enrichment programme, Saudi Arabia has an interest in promoting a US-Iranian nuclear deal, said Firas Maksad, Washington-based managing director at consulting firm Eurasia Group.
During MbS’s Washington visit, he and Trump signed a declaration to complete talks on a civilian energy program, without saying whether Riyadh would be able to enrich.
“The Saudi quest for enrichment is related to US-Iran nuclear diplomacy,” Maksad said. “Saudi has an interest in promoting the US-Iran nuclear talks via a quiet back channel.”
IRAN, US SAY THEY BACK DIPLOMACY, BUT DEMANDS CLASH
The stakes for reviving nuclear diplomacy are high.
Conditions set by Tehran’s clerical establishment and the Trump administration remain sharply at odds, and a failure to narrow differences risks igniting a new regional war.
Gulf states, wary of being dragged into a broader conflict if Israel strikes Iran again, have previously acted as intermediaries – particularly Qatar and Oman.
Iran accuses Washington of “betraying diplomacy” by joining its close ally Israel in the June war, and insists that any deal must lift US sanctions that have crippled its oil-based economy. Washington, meanwhile, demands that Tehran halt uranium enrichment on its soil, curb its ballistic missile program and stop backing regional militia proxies – terms Iran has rejected.
Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have warned they will not hesitate to strike Iran again if it resumes enrichment, a potential pathway to developing nuclear bombs.
Western powers and Israel accuse Tehran of using its declared civilian nuclear program as a cover for developing bomb material. Iran says it seeks only peaceful atomic energy and vows a “crushing response” to any more Israeli aggression.
ECONOMIC ISOLATION, PUBLIC ANGER PUSH RULERS TO SHIFT COURSE
Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, a hardliner who has the final say on foreign policy and the nuclear program, has ruled out negotiations under threat.
“They want to impose their demands and advance their goals through military and economic pressure. This approach is unacceptable, and Iranians will not submit to it,” he said.
But that line-in-the-sand approach does not cut it for many ordinary Iranians struggling with the privations of daily life.
The economy is buckling under a collapsing currency, soaring inflation and chronic shortages of domestic energy and water – chiefly driven by years of mismanagement and sanctions.
Hemmed in by mounting public anger and the risk of further Israeli attack if nuclear diplomacy fails, Iran’s clerical elite is scrambling for a breakthrough with Washington to ease its crushing economic isolation, two senior Iranian officials, who like others spoke on condition of anonymity, told Reuters.
Kamal Kharrazi, a senior adviser to Khamenei, last week appealed to Trump to pursue “genuine talks with Iran grounded in mutual respect and equality,” according to Iranian state media.
Uncategorized
Israel Expects to Keep Regional Military Edge Despite Planned Sale of F-35s to Saudi
An F-35 jet performs at the Dubai Airshow in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Nov. 17, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Amr Alfiky
Israel expects to maintain access to more advanced US weaponry, a government spokesperson said on Thursday when asked about Washington’s plan to sell F-35 warplanes to Saudi Arabia.
Israel is the only Middle East country operating the F-35, one of the most advanced warplanes ever built. US law guarantees Israel a “qualitative military edge” in the region.
“The United States and Israel have a long-standing understanding, which is that Israel maintains the qualitative edge when it comes to its defense,” spokesperson Shosh Bedrosian told reporters.
“That has been true yesterday, that has been true today, and the Prime Minister [Benjamin Netanyahu] believes that will be true tomorrow and in the future,” she said.
The spokesperson’s remarks were the first official comment from the Israeli government on the Saudi sale, announced earlier this week by President Donald Trump.
Saudi Arabia does not officially recognize the state of Israel. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler, said during a visit to Washington this week that the kingdom wanted official ties with Israel but also wanted to ensure a clear path for a two-state solution with Palestinian independence.
Israel‘s Netanyahu opposes Palestinian statehood.
US officials have said the Saudi jets will not have superior features found in Israel F-35 fighters, which include advanced weapons systems and electronic warfare equipment.