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
‘A collapse’: Number of Israelis who believe Trump prioritizes Israel’s security falls to new low, poll finds
(JTA) — The share of Israelis who believe that Israel’s security is a central consideration of President Donald Trump fell to a record low as Democratic support for Israel in the U.S. continued to decline, according to two new polls Tuesday.
A new poll from the Israel Democracy Institute found that, amid widening disagreements in Israel over U.S. efforts to broker a new nuclear deal with Iran, the share of Israelis who believe Trump prioritizes Israel’s security had seen a “collapse” from 44% in May to 28% in June, pollsters said.
The survey, which polled 603 Jewish respondents and 151 Arab respondents from June 28 to July 1, found that among Jewish respondents, the belief that Israel can fully rely on Trump has plummeted by 38 points between March and June 2026.
Just over one-third of Israelis said they believed Israel’s strategic security situation is better today than it was before the war with Iran. The margin of error was 3.57 percentage points.
Another survey released Tuesday, conducted by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research from June 11 to 17, added to a growing number of polls showing waning support for Israel among U.S. adults.
The AP poll, which surveyed 3,040 people, including 1,022 Jewish adults, found that 40% of U.S. adults believe America is “too supportive” of Israelis, while 39% believe the U.S. is “not supportive enough” of Palestinians. While the survey included a large sampling of Jewish adults to allow for more reliable estimates of their opinions, the survey was weighted to ensure their views weren’t overrepresented in the findings, the pollsters said.
Among Democrats, the poll found that 58% now say the U.S. is “too supportive” of Israelis, up from 45% in an AP-NORC poll in January 2024.
The share dropped among Republicans, of which just 21% said they believed the U.S. was “too supportive” of Israelis. The share of Republicans who say the U.S. is “not supportive enough” of Israel has shrunk from 39% to 15% since 2024.
It also found that a third of American Jewish adults believe that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza, while another 49% said that it has not.
Among U.S. adults overall, the poll found that about one-third believe Israel has committed genocide, including roughly half of Democrats.
The poll also found that the favorability of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani was split. It found that, among U.S. adults, 38% have an unfavorable view of Netanyahu, while just 28% of U.S. adults have an unfavorable opinion of Mamdani.
Among Jewish adults, about 6 in 10 view Netanyahu unfavorably, while just 39% view Mamdani negatively and 44% view the New York City mayor positively.
For the AP poll, the margin of error for adults overall was 2.8 percentage points, and the margin of error for Jewish adults was 5.0 percentage points.
The post ‘A collapse’: Number of Israelis who believe Trump prioritizes Israel’s security falls to new low, poll finds appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
The iconic crest worn by Messi and Argentina’s soccer team was designed by a Jewish superfan 50 years ag
(JTA) — BUENOS AIRES — Soccer fans around the world are familiar with the crest worn by Argentina and its star Lionel Messi: a vertical shield with laurel branches symbolizing victory and glory at the bottom and three stars at the top representing the team’s three World Cup titles.
But few are aware that the crest has its roots in Argentina’s close-knit world of Jewish sports clubs, where its designer developed his affinity for soccer.
Norberto “Toto” Rud was in his late 20s and a member of Club Náutico Hacoaj, a Jewish club, when he proposed the crest in 1976, drawing on the branding acumen and graphic design skills he would use throughout his career as a businessman and soccer aficionado in Buenos Aires.
Rud has long been credited with developing the crest after observing that while many European soccer teams wore distinctive emblems, his own beloved Argentina’s jerseys were notable only for their sky blue-and-white colors.
Watching international soccer in the era of black-and-white television, Rud noticed that supporters could instantly recognize teams such as West Germany by its eagle or the Soviet Union by its CCCP lettering, but Argentina could easily be confused with clubs wearing similar striped shirts. He concluded that the national team needed a visual identity equal to its footballing tradition.
Rud prepared approximately 20 design proposals and submitted them to the Argentine Football Association, in a proposal that reached its president and executive committee. The crest made its debut on Nov. 28, 1976, just days after it was approved, in a 0-0 friendly against the Soviet Union in Buenos Aires.
Fifty years later, the crest is basically unchanged and is one of the most widely worn team logos in the world, as Messi jerseys are popular across the globe.
“As a son and a member of the Jewish community and as an Argentinean, it’s a source of pride,” Toto Rud’s son Oliver Rud told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. He added, “Every time I see Argentina’s national team crest, it still amazes me.”
Toto Rud got to see Argentina wear his crest to two World Cup championships, in 1978 and 1986. But he did not live to see the third in 2022. He died in 2010 at age 61 and is buried in Buenos Aires’ La Tablada, Latin America’s largest Jewish cemetery.
Oliver Rud said his father’s mother came to Argentina from Ukraine, a common pathway for Jewish migrants in the first half of the 20th century. Toto Rud was born in March 1948 and was a longtime member of Hacoaj, where he played club soccer himself.
Founded in 1935 by Jewish immigrants to Buenos Aires, Club Náutico Hacoaj is a sports and cultural club with around 10,000 members and five facilities, one in Buenos Aires city and four in Tigre, a city in the north of the Buenos Aires province. Hacoaj, which means “strength” in Hebrew, has been the launch pad for a number of prominent Jewish athletes, including tennis star Diego Schwartzmann. Oliver Rud said a tree dedicated to his father is planted on Hacoaj’s sprawling campus.
“For Hacoaj, it is a tremendous source of pride that one of our members was the creator of the Argentine Football Association’s crest,” the club’s president, Osvaldo Ofman, told JTA. “His design not only represents the jersey of the Argentina national team, the reigning World Cup champions, but also gives us the feeling that a small part of Hacoaj and the Jewish community lives on in an emblem recognized around the world.”
Now, Argentina will face off in the Round of 16 against Egypt, whose coach Hossam Hassan waved a Palestinian flag after defeating Australia in a 4-2 shootout on Friday. Footage of him walking across the field with the flag while chants of “Free, free Palestine” were heard quickly went viral. In a post-match interview, Hassan said his “heart and soul” were with the Palestinian people and dedicated the win to both Egyptians and Palestinians.
Tuesday’s match represents something of a de facto Israeli-Palestinian showdown in a tournament in which neither the Israelis nor the Palestinians are playing. In addition to the show of support for the Palestinians from Egypt, the Argentine government staunchly supports Israel, which Messi, a Catholic, has visited. And a recent poll by an Israeli magazine found that Argentina was the clear favorite among Israeli World Cup viewers, named by 38% of respondents as the team they hope wins the tournament.
The knockout game comes a decade after Messi ignited a backlash in Egypt after announcing on an Egyptian television program that he was donating his shoes to a charity in Cairo. Presenters on the TV show accused Messi of being Jewish and aligned with Israel, which he had visited three years earlier.
“I know he’s Jewish, he donated to Israel and visited the Wailing Wall and whatever,” then-Egyptian Football Federation spokesman Azmi Mogahed phoned in to say. “We don’t need his shoes and Egypt’s poor don’t need help from someone with Jewish or Zionist citizenship.” Mogahed died in 2020.
Messi, who plays for Inter Miami during the regular season, is 39 and is widely expected not to play in another World Cup after this one, meaning that an Argentina loss could be his last game in international competition.
For Oliver Rud, the game will be an opportunity to reflect not only on Messi’s contributions but on his father’s, as well.
“Every time I see Argentina’s national team crest, it still amazes me,” he said. “In fact, my brother Guido and I were just talking about it the other day — how incredible it is to think that Toto designed the crest for the national team some 50 years ago. It’s really extraordinary. Every time I see the crest, I feel a little piece of him in my heart. It’s a beautiful way to remember him.”
The post The iconic crest worn by Messi and Argentina’s soccer team was designed by a Jewish superfan 50 years ag appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Abdul El-Sayed has refused super PAC funding. An anti-AIPAC PAC says it will spend for him, anyway
(JTA) — A super PAC formed to counter the influence of pro-Israel political action committees confirmed that it will boost Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan’s Democratic U.S. Senate primary, despite the candidate’s pledge to refuse all super PAC funding.
A spokesperson for American Priorities PAC, the anti-AIPAC PAC, told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency on Tuesday that its vow two days earlier to “do whatever it takes” to help El-Sayed “means spending.”
The move would put El-Sayed, who has mounted an popular insurgent campaign for a seat viewed as a must-win for Democrats, in the company of other progressives this election cycle who specifically railed against pro-Israel super PACs when swearing off corporate funding — while also benefiting from spending by the newly created pro-Palestinian super PAC.
Super PACs have no limits on fundraising but by law are prohibited from directly coordinating with a campaign — so American Priorities could theoretically raise money to run ads and other get-out-the-vote operations to boost El-Sayed without his consent.
El-Sayed has yet to comment publicly on American Priorities’ plans.
A physician and former county health director, El-Sayed is scheduled to debate his opponent, U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens, on Tuesday night in Grand Rapids. A third candidate, state Sen. Mallory McMorrow, dropped out of the race over the weekend, which American Priorities said motivated its pledge to help El-Sayed. The primary is set for Aug. 4.
El-Sayed has made refusing PAC money a key element of his platform. “Money out of politics” forms part of the slogan that brands many of his yard signs. A new ad released by his campaign on June 30 claimed he was “the only candidate for Senate” who has taken “No Corporate PAC Money.”
The American Priorities spokesperson did not immediately respond to a follow-up to clarify what El-Sayed’s anti-PAC pledge would mean for the group’s spending plans. Requests for comment to the El-Sayed and Stevens campaigns also were not immediately returned.
Stevens, a pro-Israel moderate who has welcomed PAC support, has so far had at least $10 million in AIPAC-affiliated funding directed to boost her campaign, according to Federal Election Commission data. AIPAC-affiliated ads for her have trumpeted policies, including proposed restrictions on immigration enforcement, that AIPAC-funded ads in different races this year have lambasted.
American Priorities has complicated the narrative for the progressive wave of the 2026 primary cycle, which has made pro-Palestinian causes and opposition to corporate funding twin priorities while treating AIPAC as a particular bogeyman.
American Priorities also spent to help democratic socialists Claire Valdez and Darializa Avila Chevalier in their successful primary runs for New York congressional seats last month, even as Valdez pledged to “end Citizens United,” the 2010 Supreme Court decision that allowed unlimited political spending by corporations and unions, and Avila Chevalier called to “abolish Super PACs.”
The spending allowed the candidates’ opponents to accuse them of hypocrisy but failed to derail their success at the ballot box. American Priorities also spent heavily in favor of Adam Hamawy, a doctor who served in Gaza who won his crowded New Jersey congressional primary in June.
The post Abdul El-Sayed has refused super PAC funding. An anti-AIPAC PAC says it will spend for him, anyway appeared first on The Forward.
