Petition to Cancel all Yeshiva Subsidies Rejected

The Israeli Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling today dismissing a petition lodged months ago by the Students’ Union that sought to revoke state support for yeshiva students, including those who had not yet been called up for military service and are not currently of draft age under Israeli law.

The case was thrown out on procedural grounds, though Chief Justice Yitzchok Amit hinted to the petitioners that they could file a revised version that addresses the deficiencies.

The petitioners argued that students in yeshivas receive unfair advantages compared with those studying in universities and other institutions of higher education.

They asked the Court to strike down state subsidies for yeshiva students who are not subject to military service, maintaining that the grants—channeled through the institutions themselves—constitute an “evasion” of the ban on funding yeshiva students who are otherwise required to enlist.

Beyond the demand to cut hundreds of millions of shekels now allocated to religious schools, the petition also urged the Court to require the government to create a monitoring system ensuring proper transfer of funds. Without such oversight, they insisted, the state should be barred from directing money to religious institutions altogether.

Government attorneys responded by stressing that financial support for yeshivas is “the implementation of the government’s socio-economic policy that lies at the core of its authority and discretion.” They explained that the subsidies follow transparent, legally established criteria. On the claim of unequal treatment, the government replied, “religious institutions and institutions of higher education do not belong to the same equality group.”

Officials further maintained that the Ministry of Education already carries out sufficient supervision in compliance with the law. They noted that scholarships funded by the state may rightfully be distributed by religious institutions, since such payments fall under legitimate operational expenses, and therefore should not be considered improper.

In its decision, the Court stated the petition “suffers from a generality that does not allow for an efficient and proper examination of the claims and remedies contained within it.”

The justices pointed out that the petition bundled together a wide array of demands with little connection to one another, targeting multiple ministries and agencies, with each demand requiring distinct factual and legal foundations not provided by the filing.

Justice Yitzchok Amit, who authored the opinion, made clear that although the petition was inadequately drafted, certain issues within it may merit judicial discussion if resubmitted properly. He encouraged the petitioners to refile in corrected form and refrained from levying any court costs.

Amit wrote, “Our statements do not detract from the importance of some of the issues raised in the petition,” while emphasizing that any new petition must first pass through all legally required procedures.

{Matzav.com Israel}