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
AUDIO: What does the Sydney attack mean for Jews in Australia?
ס׳איז לעצטנס אַרויסגעלאָזט געוואָרן אַ ראַדיאָ־אינטערוויו אויף ייִדיש וועגן דער שחיטה פֿון ייִדן דעם 14טן דעצעמבער, בעת אַ חנוכּה־פֿײַערונג אין באָנדי־ביטש, אויסטראַליע.
פֿופֿצן מענטשן זענען דערהרגעט געוואָרן אין דעם טעראָריסטישן אַטאַק, אַרײַנגערעכנט אַ 37־יאָריקן רבֿ און טאַטע פֿון פֿיר קינדער, ר׳ יעקבֿ לעוויטאַן, און אַ 10־יאָריק מיידעלע.
דעם שמועס, פּראָדוצירט פֿון דער באָסטאָנער ראַדיאָ־פּראָגראַם „דאָס ייִדישע קול“, האָט דער דיקטאָר פֿון דער פּראָגראַם, מאיר דוד, געפֿירט מיטן מעלבורנער ייִדישיסט אַלעקס דאַפֿנער.
דאַפֿנער, אַ ייִדישע ראַדיאָ־פּערזענלעכקייט אין מעלבורן, אַנאַליזירט עטלעכע מעגלעכע סיבות וואָס האָבן מסתּמא אומדירעקט דערפֿירט צו דעם טעראָריסטישן אַטאַק. ער באַשרײַבט אויך די פּאָליטישע שטימונג אין לאַנד לגבי ישׂראל און דעם הײַנטיקן זיכערהייט־מצבֿ פֿאַר די אָרטיקע ייִדן.
The post AUDIO: What does the Sydney attack mean for Jews in Australia? appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
US Education Department’s New Database Reveals Qatar Ranks as Top Foreign Funder of American Universities
Qatar’s Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al-Thani speaks on the first day of the 23rd edition of the annual Doha Forum, in Doha, Qatar, Dec. 6, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ibraheem Abu Mustafa
Qatar is the single largest foreign source of funding to American colleges and universities, according to a newly launched public database from the US Department of Education that reveals the scope of overseas influence in US higher education.
The federal dashboard shows Qatar has provided $6.6 billion in gifts and contracts to US universities, more than any other foreign government or entity, outpacing the next highest contributions from Germany ($4.4 billion), England ($4.3 billion), China ($4.1 billion), Canada ($4 billion), and Saudi Arabia ($3.9 billion).
Of the schools that received money from Qatar, Cornell University topped the list with $2.3 billion, followed by Carnegie Mellon University ($1 billion), Texas A&M University ($992.8 million), and Georgetown University ($971.1 million).
The newly publicized figures come as universities nationwide face heightened scrutiny over campus antisemitism, anti-Israel activism, and academic priorities, prompting renewed concerns about foreign influence on American campuses.
US Education Secretary Linda McMahon unveiled the Foreign Gift and Contract transparency portal this week, saying the tool gives taxpayers, lawmakers, and students a clearer view of how billions of dollars from abroad flow into US universities. Under Section 117 of the Higher Education Act, federally funded institutions are legally required to disclose gifts and contracts from foreign sources worth $250,000 or more annually.
“America’s taxpayer funded colleges and universities have both a moral and legal obligation to be fully transparent with the US government and the American people about their foreign financial relationships,” McMahon said in a December statement announcing the formation of the database.
Supporters of the initiative argue the disclosures confirm longstanding concerns that potentially nefarious foreign financial ties may shape academic discourse, research priorities, and campus culture. Those concerns have intensified in the wake of controversies at elite universities over their handling of antisemitism and anti-Israel demonstrations amid the war in Gaza.
The presence of American universities in Qatar has long been controversial, with critics pointing out that the Qatari government has helped fund the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas. Qatar also hosts several high-ranking Hamas leaders, who often live in luxury outside of Gaza. Some observers argue that the Islamic country curtails academic freedom of American universities.
While universities say the funds support scholarships, research partnerships, and international programs, many critics point to Qatar’s geopolitical record and its ties to Hamas as reason for increased skepticism.
Last month, the Middle East Forum published a report showing the children of the Qatari aristocracy are vastly overrepresented at the Northwestern University campus in Qatar, a fact that, according to the US-based think tank, undermines the school’s mission to foster academic excellence by acting in practice as a “pipeline” for the next generation of a foreign monarchy’s leadership class.
The Middle East Forum released a separate report in May exposing the extent of Qatar’s far-reaching financial entanglements within American institutions, shedding light on what experts described as a coordinated effort to influence US policy making and public opinion in Doha’s favor. The findings showed that Qatar has attempted to expand its soft power in the US by spending $33.4 billion on business and real estate projects, over $6 billion on universities, and $72 million on American lobbyists since 2012.
This effort has focused heavily on higher education.
Beyond the Education Department’s database, a recent report by the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP), for example, found that Qatar has funneled roughly $20 billion into American schools and universities over five decades as part of a coordinated, 100-year project to embed Muslim Brotherhood ideologies in the US.
The 200-page report, unveiled in Washington, DC to members of Congress, chronicled a 50-year effort by Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups to embed themselves in American academia, civil society, and government agencies, exposing what ISGAP called the Brotherhood’s “civilization jihad” strategy, while maintaining an agenda fundamentally at odds with liberal democratic values.
Activists and US lawmakers say the scale of Qatari funding raises legitimate questions about whether foreign donors are influencing Middle East studies programs, faculty hiring, and student activism, even if indirectly.
The new database builds upon a broader effort by the Trump administration to rein in antagonistic foreign influence on American universities.
“Protecting American educational, cultural, and national security interests requires transparency regarding foreign funds flowing to American higher education and research institutions,” US President Donald Trump said in April.
Uncategorized
Candace Owens Posts Kanye West’s Notorious ‘Death Con 3 on Jewish People’ Tweet, Calls It a ‘Vibe’
Right-wing political commentator Candace Owens speaks during an event held by national conservative political movement ‘Turning Point’, in Detroit, Michigan, US, June 14, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Rebecca Cook
Candace Owens on Wednesday posted a screenshot of Kanye West’s notorious “Death Con 3 on Jewish People” tweet from 2022, calling it a “whole vibe.”
In October 2022, West, the rapper who now goes by Ye, posted on X, “I’m a bit sleepy tonight but when I wake up I’m going death con 3 on JEWISH PEOPLE. The funny thing us I actually can’t be Anti Semitic because black people are actually Jew also. You guys have toyed with me and tried to black ball anyone whoever opposes your agenda [sic].”
There was swift backlash to the post, which was widely perceived as antisemitic. West followed up the tweet with a series of interviews in which he made antisemitic comments such as “Every human being has value that they brought to the table, especially Hitler.” West, speaking in the voice of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, also said, “We have to control the history books, we have to control the banks, and we have to go and kill people.” He later released a song titled “Heil Hitler” in February 2025.
Owens, a popular far-right podcaster, re-upped the initial “death con 3” post this week, writing along with it: “Intercepted an email chain from the Daily Wire, further illuminating their deranged plot against me. After 2 years of dealing with this s–t I just want to respectfully submit that this tweet is a whole vibe. And I’m not sleepy. So I will be responding thoroughly to the DW on today’s show.”
Intercepted an email chain from the Daily Wire, further illuminating their deranged plot against me. After 2 years of dealing with this shit I just want to respectfully submit that this tweet is a whole vibe.
And I’m not sleepy. So I will be responding thoroughly to the DW on… pic.twitter.com/qkCX2p0aQ0
— Candace Owens (@RealCandaceO) January 7, 2026
The apparent cause of the post was Owens’ escalating feud with Ben Shapiro’s Daily Wire, a conservative media company for which she used to work until she was fired last year.
Since then, Owens has intensified her rhetoric against Jews and Israel, even admitting in November that she has become “obsessed” with Jews.
In June, she suggested that then New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani was an Israeli plant, that Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel was lying about being in the Holocaust, and that Israel is the “master of the universe” that plants characters into stories so that it can control them.
In January, Owens attacked the Babylon Bee — a conservative Christian satire organization — for making a joke about her fixation on Jews.
“It’s just very obvious they are worshipping Israel,” Owens said. “That they base their jokes on people who don’t worship Israel and ‘Bibi’ Netanyahu.” She also referred to the Babylon Bee as the “Zionist Bee” and the “Babylonian Talmudic Bee.”
Last July, Owens claimed that the Star of David originated from an evil, child-sacrificing, pagan deity and has only become associated with Judaism within the past few hundred years.
In a June episode, Owens argued that “it seems like our country [the US] is being held hostage by Israel.” She lamented, “I’m going to get in so much trouble for that. I don’t care.”
In the same episode, Owens claimed US Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) was “wading into some dangerous waters” when, during an interview with host Tucker Carlson, he spoke about how effective the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is at lobbying members of Congress and suggested the group should have to register as a foreign agent that is acting on behalf of Israel.
The reason it was dangerous, Owens said, was because “we know there was once a president that wanted to make AIPAC register, and he ended up shot … so Thomas Massie better be careful.”
Owens was referencing the fact that former US President John F. Kennedy wanted the American Zionist Council, a lobby group, to register as a foreign agent.
However, there is no evidence the group had anything to do with Kennedy’s assassination.
AIPAC is a lobbying group comprised of American citizens that seeks to foster bipartisan support for the US-Israel alliance.
Weeks later, Owens promoted a series of talking points downplaying the atrocities of the Holocaust and said experiments by Nazi doctor Joseph Mengele performed on Jews during World War II sounded “like bizarre propaganda.”