In Board of Education of the City School District of the City of New York v. E.L., (SD NY, Sept. 30, 2025), a New York federal district court upheld a decision by a State Review Officer who decided that under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), New York schools must pay for a Judaic Studies class that is part of the curriculum of a private school which a kindergarten student with a disability attends. The private school was found to be an appropriate placement for the student after public schools failed to offer the student a free appropriate public education (FAPE). At issue was whether paying for the Judaic studies part of the curriculum violates federal regulations or constitutional provisions. The court said in part:
Here, there is no dispute that the IDEA’s guarantee of a FAPE and reimbursement for tuition at an appropriate school is a neutral program. There is no dispute that funding appropriately provided under that program adheres to federal regulations and the Constitution. The DOE, however, appears to argue that the Judaic Studies classes are not covered by that neutral program—that they are unnecessary religious instruction falling outside the IDEA educational guarantee. This issue is best resolved with an understanding of what a child of E.L.’s age needs to obtain a FAPE and whether the absence of his enrollment in Judaic Studies classes would prevent him from obtaining that FAPE. In other words, this question implicates educational expertise that is best left to the administrative officers.
... [T]he Court finds that the Judaic Studies classes are a core part of E.L.’s FAPE. The SINAI School director testified that Judaic Studies classes work on reading comprehension skills, and expressive and receptive language skills.... Moreover, the classes comprise a key part of the school day, taking place for thirty minutes to an hour in the morning, between other classes such as language studies, art therapy, and educational therapy.... For a five-year-old, these are critical periods of learning and development. To deny funding for these specific class periods would effectively exclude the child from these periods of learning.
