Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Religion & Law Blogs -> Religion Clause

Religion & Law

: Religion Clause

British Appeals Court Says Jewish School's Admission Criteria Are Racial, Not Religious

By Howard M. Friedman

In an important decision yesterday, the Court of Appeal of England and Wales held that an Orthodox Jewish school's admissions criterion that favors only children considered Jewish by the Office of the Chief Rabbi amounts to racial, rather than religious, discrimination. Faith schools receiving public funding are exempted from legal prohibitions on religious discrimination, but not racial discrimination. The school's rule thus was found to violate the Race Relations Act 1976.

E.R. (On the Application of E) v. The Governing Body of JFS, (Ct. App., June 25, 2009), involved a challenge by parents of a boy who was not admitted to the Jewish Free School because it refused to recognize the validity of his mother's conversion to Judaism conducted in a Progressive, rather than an Orthodox, synagogue. The court wrote:

The OCR considers that there are two essential ways in which a person may be or become a Jew. One is descent from parents whose own identity as Jews can be established or inferred. The other is by conversion in accordance with the tenets of Orthodox Judaism. ....

One of the great evils against which the successive Race Relations Acts have been directed is the evil of anti-Semitism. None of the parties to these proceedings wants or can afford to put up a case which would result in discrimination against Jews not being discrimination on racial grounds....

M was refused admission to JFS because his mother, and therefore he, was not regarded as Jewish.... There are of course theological reasons why M is not regarded as Jewish, but they are not the ground of non-admission: they are the motive for adopting it.....

it appears to us clear (a) that Jews constitute a racial group defined principally by ethnic origin and additionally by conversion, and (b) that 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 motive for the discrimination, whether benign or malign, theological or supremacist, makes it no less and no more unlawful. Nor does the factuality of the ground. If for theological reasons a fully subscribed Christian faith school refused to admit a child on the ground that, albeit practising Christians, the child's family were of Jewish origin, it is hard to see what answer there could be to a claim for race discrimination.

The refusal of JFS to admit M was accordingly, in our judgment, less favourable treatment of him on racial grounds. This does not mean ... that no Jewish faith school can ever give preference to Jewish children. It means that, as one would expect, eligibility must depend on faith, however defined, and not on ethnicity.

Reporting on the decision, Politics.co says that the school will seek leave to appeal. British Chief Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks criticized the ruling, saying that the school's criteria have "nothing to do with race and everything to do with religion."

Full post as published by Religion Clause on June 26, 2009 (boomark / email).