More Fact-Finding Ordered in Challenge to Yeshiva, Seminary Grants
The New Jersey Supreme Court said Wednesday that it needs more information to determine whether the administration of Gov. Chris Christie violated the state constitution when it awarded more than $11 million in grants to an orthodox Jewish rabbinical school and a Presbyterian seminary.
May 02, 2018 at 01:24 PM
3 minute read
The New Jersey Supreme Court said Wednesday that it needs more information to determine whether the administration of Gov. Chris Christie violated the state constitution when it awarded more than $11 million in grants to an orthodox Jewish rabbinical school and a Presbyterian seminary.
In a per curiam ruling, the court said the secretary of education should conduct hearings in order to determine whether the grants violated a constitutional provision barring use of public funds to benefit religious institutions.
The ruling comes only weeks after the court issued a much more sweeping decision in Freedom From Religion Foundation v. Morris County Board of Chosen Freeholders, holding that the award of $4.6 million in taxpayer funds by Morris County to churches for historic preservation violated the Religious Aid Clause of the state constitution. In that ruling, the court said that grant recipients “are not being denied grant funds because they are religious institutions; they are being denied public funds because of what they plan to do—and in many cases have done: use public funds to repair church buildings so that religious worship services can be held there,” Chief Justice Stuart Rabner wrote for the court.
Last May, in the present case, a three-judge Appellate Division panel, relying on Supreme Court precedent, said the state Department of Education violated Article 1, Paragraph 3 of the constitution in 2013 when it awarded $10.6 million to Beth Medrash Govoha, a Jewish Yeshiva in Lakewood, and $645,323 to the Princeton Theological Seminary, for the facilities' improvement. Appellate Division Judge Jack Sabatino, joined by Judges Allison Accurso and Karen Suter, said the Supreme Court barred the use of public funds to support religious institutions in its 1978 ruling in Resnick v. East Brunswick Board of Education. In that case, the court said public school facilities could not be used on nights and weekends by religious groups unless they were fully reimbursed.
On Wednesday, however, the high court said more information was needed. “The record does not reveal enough about the nature of the educational training and curriculum offered by the Yeshiva and the seminary and how it is delivered,” the court said. “Nor does the record present sufficient detail about how the grant fund projects will be put to use in the institutions' respect settings.
“It is imperative that those issues be more fully developed below,” the court said.
The award of the grants had been challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey, the Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of New Jersey, and three taxpayers.
ACLU-NJ's legal director, Edward Barocas, said he welcomed the chance to develop a record.
“The court has afforded us this opportunity,” he said. “We believe the facts are on our side. Taxpayer funds cannot be used to support these activities.”
The Attorney General's Office, which had been defending the grants under the Christie administration, declined to comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAppellate Division Tosses Challenge to Rutgers Board Members That Ensnared NJ Lawyer
5 minute readOn the Move and After Hours: Einhorn Barbarito; Hartmann Doherty; Lowenstein Sandler; Lindabury McCormick
5 minute read'A More Nuanced Issue': NJ Supreme Court Considers Appellate Rules for Personal Injury Judgments
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'A Death Sentence for TikTok'?: Litigators and Experts Weigh Impact of Potential Ban on Creators and Data Privacy
- 2Bribery Case Against Former Lt. Gov. Brian Benjamin Is Dropped
- 3‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
- 4State Appeals Court Revives BraunHagey Lawsuit Alleging $4.2M Unlawful Wire to China
- 5Invoking Trump, AG Bonta Reminds Lawyers of Duties to Noncitizens in Plea Dealing
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250