British Court Rules Jewish Schools Cannot Admit Students Based On Matrilineal Descent

 The judges have "arrogated [to] themselves the right to decide who is a Jew."

The Manchester Guardian reports:

Faith school's admissions policy discriminatory, says appeal court
Afua Hirsch and Riazat Butt • The Guardian

A Jewish school that prioritised applications from children with Jewish mothers discriminated on grounds of race, the Court of Appeal ruled today, in a landmark decision on the admissions criteria used by faith schools.

The ruling follows an appeal brought on behalf of a 12-year-old boy known as M, who was refused admission to JFS, previously known as the Jews' Free School, in Brent, London.

M, a practising Jew who regularly attends a progressive synagogue, was told he could not be admitted to the school because his mother had converted to Judaism in a procedure not recognised by the Chief Rabbi.

Overturning a previous judgment in favour of the school, the Court of Appeal ruled that a policy determining eligibility based on a person's descent, rather than religious practice, amounted to racial discrimination.

"It appears clear to us… that Jews constitute a racial group defined principally by ethnic origin and additionally by conversion," Lord Justice Sedley said. "To discriminate against a person on the ground that he or someone else either is or is not Jewish is therefore to discriminate against him on racial grounds."

The controversial ruling comes after both the government and the United Synagogue strongly contested the claim that the school's admissions policy was discriminatory, arguing that the criterion was a purely religious and not racial one.

Faith schools are exempted from the law prohibiting discrimination on grounds of religion or belief, to enable them to provide education in line with their religious beliefs.

"Once [a faith school] is oversubscribed, it can lawfully restrict entry to children whom – or whose parents – it regards as sharing the school's faith," the court said. "No school, however, is permitted to discriminate in its admissions policy on racial grounds."

M's legal team applauded the judgment. "We welcome the strong statement by the Court of Appeal that the fundamental right to equality before the law regardless of race applies to the admissions criteria of a faith school," said John Halford, a solicitor at Bindmans who represented M's father, referred to as E.

"It is unlawful for a child's ethnic origins to be used as the criterion for entry to a school. Such a practice is even more unacceptable in the case of a comprehensive school funded by the taxpayer," Halford added.

The ruling was also welcomed by groups supporting the opening up of faith schools. "Anything that prevents discrimination and encourages faith schools to widen the range of pupils they admit is good news," said Rabbi Dr Jonathan Romain, chair of the Accord Coalition, which campaigns on reforming the law on faith schools.

However, some Jewish groups, along with the Chief Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks, condemned the ruling, saying that the principles underlying membership of the Jewish faith had "nothing to do with race and everything to do with religion".

"Ethnicity is irrelevant to Jewish identity, according to Jewish law," said Sacks. "I have advised the leadership of JFS, the United Synagogue and the Board of Deputies on behalf of our community that they have my full personal support and encouragement to use the necessary avenues available to them to maintain our historic rights to be true to our faith and a blessing to others regardless of their faith."

The United Synagogue, which provides religious guidance to JFS, warned the ruling would have a "very serious effect on all Jewish schools". JFS said it was "very disappointed" with the court's decision, claiming it would "seriously undermine the Jewish ethos of the school". It confirmed it would seek leave to appeal.

The London Jewish Chronicle's  report:

Jewish school entry policies are unlawful, court rules
Simon Rocker • The Jewish Chronicle

Many Jewish schools in the UK will be forced to tear up their entry rules after the admissions policy of the largest school, JFS, was today ruled racially discriminatory.

In a landmark judgment, the Court of Appeal said that it was illegal for Jewish schools to admit pupils on the basis of whether their mother was Jewish or not.

In a unanimous decision, Lords Justice Sedley, Rimer and Lady Justice Smith concluded: “The requirement that if a pupil is to qualify for admission his mother must be Jewish, whether by descent or conversion, is a test of ethnicity which contravenes the Race Relations Act 1976.”

The appeal was brought on behalf of M, who was refused a place at JFS in 2007 because his mother was a Progressive convert, making him non-Jewish according to the Office of the Chief Rabbi, the school’s religious authority.

Last summer a High Court judge took the view that the school’s policy was based on religious, not racial, grounds and therefore lawful.

But the Court of Appeal ruled that using matrilineal descent as a criterion for entry was based on race.

JFS governors said they now intended to appeal against the decision to the House of Lords.

A spokesman for the United Synagogue, which has already spent £150,000 on legal fees, said: "Unless the Court of Appeal decision is overturned on appeal it will have a very serious effect on all Jewish schools and on many of our communal organisations."

The Board of Deputies said it was "deeply concerned" at the potential effects of the court's ruling, though adding that this was "not expected to impact on September 2009 admissions".

John Halford, of Bindmans solicitors which represented M's case, said; “We welcome the strong statement of the Court of Appeal that the fundamental right to equality before the law regardless of race applies to the admissions criteria of a faith school.

“We have never sought to interfere with the right of Orthodox Jews to define for their own religious purposes whom they do or do not recognise as Jewish.

“However, it is unlawful for a child’s ethnic origins to be used as a criterion for entry to a school. Such a practice is even more unacceptable in the case of a comprehensive school funded by the taxpayer.”

He added that the JFS should do “what the law demands” and admit M immediately to the school. The school should also draw up “inclusive admissions criteria that are fair to all who want their children to have a Jewish education.

“We would be more than happy to insist them in that endeavour, free of charge.”

But the Chief Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks pledged his support for a legal challenge to the court's ruling. In a statement, he said: "The principles underlying membership of the Jewish faith have been maintained consistently throughout Judaism's long history, as has our duty to educate our children in the principles and practice of the faith itself.

"These principles have nothing to do with race and everything to do with religion. Ethnicity is irrelevant to Jewish identity, according to Jewish Law. Education has been the crucible of Judaism throughout the millennia, and the development of Jewish faith schools is one of Anglo Jewry's greatest achievements.

"I have advised the leadership of JFS, the United Synagogue and the Board of Deputies on behalf of our community that they have my full personal support and encouragement to use the necessary avenues available to them to maintain our historic rights to be true to our faith and a blessing to others regardless of their faith."

If the Court of Appeal’s decision stands, it could have widespread implications for other Jewish schools.

It would mean that they would have to introduce faith-based tests – such as synagogue attendance, for example – similar to Catholic schools to determine entry.

It would also mean that the children of Progressive converts who were denied a place this year could re-apply or else sue the school for damages.

The court's decision was welcomed by the chief executive of Liberal Judaism, Rabbi Danny Rich. "The JFS, a state comprehensive funded by taxpayers, has been exclusively following one Jewish religious authority and ignoring the rest," he said.

"The Court of Appeal’s ruling means that the JFS will now be open to children from all types of Jewish background, and this is something we truly applaud.”

But Dayan Yisroel Lichtenstein, head of the Federation of Synagogues' Beth Din, said it was "deplorable" that the court had "crossed a red line and strayed into religious issues that they shouldn't have. They have arrogated themselves the right to decide who is a Jew."

I believe this will come down to the issue of government funding. Schools that take government money will not be allowed to enforce matrilineal descent. Schools that do not take government money will be able to do as they please.

I think Chief Rabbi Sacks has overplayed his hand. The result of that miscalculation will eventually be Jewish community schools that are truly community schools, meaning they will not be under exclusive Orthodox control.

And that will lead to a weakening of Orthodox control in other areas.

[Hat Tip: A.E. Anderson.]

Comments

[The Monsey Tzadik]

Is this the same case here:

http://www.somethingjewish.co.uk/articles/1514_sacks_still_says_no.htm

where Chief Rabbi Sucks refused to recognize an Israeli conversion?

[Ben]

Sir Jonathan Sacks, condemned the ruling, saying that the principles underlying membership of the Jewish faith had "nothing to do with race and everything to do with religion".

This is a clear lie, since a child of non-believing parents of Jewish descent would be admitted to JFS. The school policy is not based on religion, but on ethnic origin. Furthermore, if ones ethnic origin is on the father's side he/she would not be admitted. Race based admissions? Yes. It is easy for anybody to see except for Chief Rabbi Saks apparently.

[SJ]

>> Dayan Yisroel Lichtenstein, head of the Federation of Synagogues' Beth Din, said it was "deplorable" that the court had "crossed a red line and strayed into religious issues that they shouldn't have. They have arrogated themselves the right to decide who is a Jew.

Either Lichtenstein does not seem to be grasping the issue, or Lichtenstein is posturing.

[itchiemayer]

I can't believe the sexism within orthodox Judaism whereby a Jewish man like myself is unable to pass along his Jewishness, and must depend on the woman to do so. No wonder only the women are fortunate enough to get to say the daily blessing thanking G-d for making them according to his will. Woe is me.

[bob]

you're morons just like the British judges.

Only Halocha determines who's a Jew, nothing else

[Yochanan Lavie]

This is why religion and state should be separate. Yoking them together is bad for religion as well as for politics.

[Ben]

Bob, you are right saying "Only Halocha determines who's a Jew, nothing else". However, it is quite clear that Halocha of matrelinel definition of the Jew is racist in the eyes of modern state.

Did not you know about it before this British ruling? Did not you know that saying that goy doesn't have a human soul is racist too? Are you crazy or just pretend?

[invisible hand]

Bob: This is a state-funded school. I think what the court is saying is: You can restrict preference to applicants who attend synagogue X and Y, but, if you give preference to applicants from synagogue Z, you must give preference to all students from synagogue Z. You can't decide that Rachel gets preference and Bilhah does not. Either you accept Z as part of your religion, or you do not.

[Clue]

This is legally a ridiculous decision. If admissions were based on race then converts of"other races," and their children; would not be accepted.

Race has nothingto do with Orthodoxcriteria which is well known; conversion according to Halacha or born from a mother who is Jewish according to Halacha, regardless of her race.

[Ben]

Clue, racism, in general definition, is not always about race, but also about ethnicity.

I think the judges here use general rather then narrow definition of racism.

Is Judaism racist? True Judaism is not, but Haredi verision is most certainly is racist to the core.

[A. Nuran]

Bob, "halacha" has changed drastically on this issue. It was only codified when Israel was conquered Jewish women were having babies by foreign men. Within a century or two it had "always" been that way.

Rationalise.
Backfill.
Idolise.

Standard Operating Procedure for all authorities since we came down out of the trees.

[Clue]

To Ben: I have no idea what you are talking about "Haredi verision [sic] is racist to core."

Please show me something in Shas or Shulchan Aruch that is racist; that discriminates because of race, outside, perhaps, Amalek.

"Racism is not always about race." You are 25 years behind your time.

[Ben]

Sorry Clue, "verision" was suppose to be "version".

Haredi halacha is not based solely on Shas and Shulhan Aruch. It follows many racist statements in Zohar and Midrashim. If you happend to skip them, please go and read again. I don't want to pollute this blog by brinning them up.

[Nachum Lamm]

Shmarya, you seem not to realize that the UK is not the same country as the US. There is an established religion in the UK, and therefore it is perfectly constitutional for there to be religious schools that discriminate based on religion. For the government to withhold funding based on that would be unconstitutional. (The exact opposite of the US, as it happens.)

Now, you can argue which country has it right, but you can't argue facts.

[Simcha Plisner]

A non-orthodox family wants to send a kid to
learn Torah in an Orthodox school. They have to be crazy not take the kid in for kiruv. It is not like they were asking to perform kiddushin.

Orthodox have forgotten how to be menshen.

[Ben]

Haredi seem to unable to control themselves. It might be fundamentally biological.

Look at locust, when few in number they are nice grasshopers. However, when numbers increase and a grasshoper sees another grasshoper more then certain number of times per hour it changes. It changes color, became highly active, begins to reproduce rapidly and finally swarmes. The swarm then will move destroying everything in its way.
Haredi lately began to exhibit swarming phase locust like behavior.

[Itchiemayer]

it seems elementary to me that an orthodox school would only want to accept Jewish children which requires matrilineal descent, or children of families in the process of orthodox conversion. Otherwise, not.

[Steven in Uk]

I can not understand why a person would put themselves as well as the child trough the hustle of trying to gain admittance to a school when criteria is well known.

Here in London Non Orthodox Jewish primary schools exist, and a secondary school shortly to open.

This is my take on Jewish status. with the following analogy

I can not see a problem in eating a cake from a vegetarian shop. though I can not ask an Orthodox Rabbi to accept the cake as kosher.

Now " please I do see the difference people are real and have feelings.

" Just hope you see my point

[Isa]

It is simple...

Those that pay (the State in this instance)

Get to decide

[Pablo Faird]

Let those who know halacha determine who had a sincere conversion.
A similar case in point is a story some decades ago when the eruv issue came up in New York, where Rabbi Moshe Feinstein was adamantly against the eruv for halachic reasons. During that conference, a more liberal rabbi in attendance stated, ``I have rabbinical ordination just the same way Rabbi Feinstein does, and I believe there is no issue with an eruv``, to that Rabbi Feinstein responded with the following question ``how many pages are in the tractate Eruvin which deals exclusively with eruv issues``. The silence which followed was deafening.
The bottom line is that let the people who are learned make the decisions.

[R]

JFS were wrong in their decision. They are a state funded religious school and so they have to accept anyone who is Jewish, whether or not they are orthodox.

[R]

Oh another thing it doesn't say Jewish Orthodox Free School in their title. As far as i can tell there isn't much difference between JFS and King David and KD allow anyone who is Jewish in their school, not just orthodox.
This also means the torah study is rather minimal, most the orthodox kids that go to the school probably don't keep shabbat or kosher.

[Rob Fox]

It is abundantly clear that, in this case, JFS were seeking to exclude this child on grounds which were solely based on race - not halachic observance or any other issue of religious belief or practice.

Anyone who doesn't have a head full of religious fudge can see that this is racist.

It would not - and should not, in a democratic society - be acceptable for any other social group to discriminate in this way. Why should Jews be an exception?

Is 'Jewish' a racial or a religious epithet? Conveniently slippery definitions like 'a religious people' just aren't good enough anymore when it comes to unjust, discriminatory practice like this (and worse).

[uncle joe mccarthy]

let this be a warning to those in the states still pushing for vouchers

when you accept tax payer monies...you accept government control