Friday, February 3, 2012

Ex-haredim to sue State for damages resulting from not being given basic core courses


Will the State of Israel be forced to pay for missing core studies? Dozens of former ultra-Orthodox men and women are seeking to sue the State for damages they allegedly suffered by not studying basic subjects like math or English in the schools they were educated in.

According to the plaintiffs, ever since leaving the religious world they have spent many years and a lot of money in order to catch up on the crucial material – and should therefore be compensated.
Posted by at

6 comments :

  1. 6ftFebruary 3, 2012 at 1:31 PM

    If I was the judge, I would rule that they can go and sit in any state school in order to catch up... That's service the state provides to other children. It should be free for them too. But no compensation...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ben MIkraFebruary 3, 2012 at 1:51 PM

    An article in haaretz. a veteran leftist makes the following comment:

    "The most worrying survey showed that 80 percent of Israelis believe in God. "

    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/politicians-can-fight-all-day-netanyahu-is-here-to-stay-1.410723



    It may be worrying to the small minority of ultra- leftists.
    But it is perhaps good to know, that G-d is believed in by Israel .

    ReplyDelete
  3. Elliot PasikFebruary 3, 2012 at 4:01 PM

    It will be hard to win a case like that. They're up against the doctrine of sovereign immunity. And here in America, there is no valid case for "educational malpractice". But I hope they win. And how about suing the rabbis also?

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousFebruary 3, 2012 at 6:34 PM

    they should be suing their ignorant parents and ignorant rabbi's for depriving them a normal secular education.
    CH.S

    ReplyDelete
  5. LazerAFebruary 5, 2012 at 9:26 AM

    Legally, the case is a joke. Basically, the argument is that the government can be held financially liable for indirect harm resulting from religious freedom. Think about the implications if they won.

    And even that argument can only begin after they first prove that (a) the schools didn't provide an adequate education and (b) that the claimant aren't just poor students who are blaming other people for the poor educational outcomes.

    The case is nothing more than a publicity stunt, and, from that perspective, it is quite effective.

    ReplyDelete
  6. DovidFebruary 5, 2012 at 5:04 PM

    I would guess that the case rests on their demonstrating that the government failed to enforce its own laws.

    Don't know about EY, but why wouldn't that fly in the US?

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.

Subscribe to: Post Comments ( Atom )