Education Minister Yoav Kisch asked the High Court of Justice to preserve a system that funds party-affiliated haredi (ultra-Orthodox) schools according to the amount of core curriculum they teach, placing him directly at odds with the attorney-general.
On Sunday, Kisch asked the court to cancel an order requiring the government to justify the system and to reject a petition filed by religious freedom advocacy group Hiddush.
The dispute concerns hundreds of schools operated by the Independent Education Center and Ma’ayan Hahinuch Hatorani Bnei Yosef, which are affiliated with United Torah Judaism and Shas, respectively.
The schools are recognized by the state but are not part of the state school system. A special legal provision allows the two networks to receive funding on the same basis as state schools. Other recognized but unofficial schools generally receive 75% of equivalent state-school funding.
Hiddush argues that the networks are entitled to full funding only if they teach the full core curriculum, including mathematics, English, and science. It claims that schools have continued to receive funding despite failing to meet those requirements and that the Education Ministry’s supervision has not provided an accurate picture of what is taught.
Kisch disputes that interpretation. He defended the ministry’s practice of adjusting each school’s funding according to the proportion of the core curriculum it teaches. Under that system, a school assessed as teaching 85% of the required program may receive funding at a similar rate.
Kisch warns all-or-nothing rule could drive schools from state oversight
The minister argued that the system has encouraged schools to expand their core studies. An “all-or-nothing” rule could instead push schools out of the networks and into educational frameworks subject to fewer state requirements, he said.
Kisch also argued that previous attorneys-general and court rulings had accepted proportional funding. The attorney-general’s position is that the arrangement was, at most, temporary and never provided a permanent legal basis for funding network schools that do not meet their full obligations.
The disagreement led Kisch to obtain separate legal representation rather than join the state’s response filed on behalf of the Education and Finance ministries.
The court first sought additional information after a January 5 hearing at which the state hadn’t filed a preliminary response addressing the substance of the petition.
On January 8, Justices Dafna Barak-Erez, David Mintz, and Ruth Ronnen ordered the state to provide information already held by the Education Ministry. The court asked what core studies the schools must teach, how compliance is calculated, how teacher qualifications and external examinations are considered, and how the schools are supervised.
Court questions funding rules and oversight of haredi schools
After receiving a supplemental filing, the court issued a conditional order on February 17, requiring the government to justify its policy before the court reaches a final decision.
The court asked why each school’s funding should not depend on teaching the full core curriculum, employing suitably trained teachers, and participating in external assessment exams at rates comparable to state schools.
It also asked why the ministries should not establish school-by-school supervision that does not rely solely on self-reporting or visits arranged in advance, and why schools that fail to meet the conditions should not be removed from the networks.
Kisch’s Monday response said Education Ministry data showed substantial improvement. According to the filing, 498 of the networks’ 517 schools taught between 96% and 100% of the required core curriculum during the 2025-26 school year. Of those, 476 were assessed as teaching the full program.
Those figures are disputed. The attorney-general’s response said the ministry’s calculation method could conceal gaps in individual subjects.
Shortcomings in teacher training
ACCORDING TO the state, schools that did not teach English or mathematics in entire grades could still be classified as teaching more than 95% of the program because the ministry calculated total hours across subjects and age groups.
The state also identified shortcomings in teacher training, external testing, and enforcement.
Kisch acknowledged a shortage of trained teachers but argued that similar shortages exist in state schools. He also said teacher qualifications had not previously been treated as a direct condition for funding a school.
His filing presented different qualification rates for each subject, ranging from 4.6% for middle-school science teachers to 24.5% for general elementary-school teaching. Kisch said the ministry had introduced a multiyear training program intended to improve those figures.
The minister also said the ministry strengthened inspections and enforcement, saying that removal notices were sent to 22 schools, and two Independent Education Center schools were subsequently transferred out of the network.
Under the transition proposed by Attorney-General Gali Baharav Miara, a school that does not teach the full curriculum during the 2026-27 school year could continue receiving reduced funding only if it commits to full compliance the following year. A school that refuses would face removal from the network.
Kisch also argued that the court should exercise restraint because Israel is approaching an election and haredi education funding is politically disputed.
Hiddush rejected that position. Dr. Yifat Solel, the organization’s deputy director and the lawyer who filed the petition, accused Kisch of seeking to preserve public funding without ensuring that the schools provide the education for which the money was allocated.
The High Court must now decide whether the responses justify the existing arrangement or whether to make its order final.