The High Court of Justice on Wednesday ordered the state to explain why a 2024 law empowering the Education Ministry to strip funding from schools and dismiss teachers over expressions of support for terrorism should not be struck down in its entirety.
Supreme Court President Isaac Amit, together with Justices Ofer Grosskopf and Gila Kanfi-Steinitz, ruled that the petitions raise sufficient constitutional questions to require a substantive response from the government and Knesset. The justices gave the respondents until April 30, 2026, to file affidavits justifying the law’s continued validity.
The law, enacted in November 2024 amid heightened security tensions, authorizes the education or a delegated official to deny temporary or permanent state funding – partially or in full - to recognized but unofficial educational institutions if “expressions of identification with an act of terror or a terrorist organization” are found to have taken place and the school’s administration “knew or should have known” of them.
It further grants the Education Ministry’s director-general the authority to dismiss state-employed teachers if, to his satisfaction, the educator publicly expressed identification with a terrorist organization, published direct calls for acts of terror, or issued praise, sympathy, or encouragement for terrorist acts – citing the heightened severity of such conduct given teachers’ roles and their contact with minors and other vulnerable populations.
Two sets of petitions were filed in late 2024. One was submitted by dozens of educators and private individuals, while the other was brought by the High Follow-Up Committee for Arab Citizens of Israel and additional civil society organizations. The petitions argue that the law conflicts with existing legislation, was enacted without a professional or educational review process, and is unnecessary given existing powers under Israel’s 2016 Counter-Terrorism Law (CTL).
Court challenges mount against Israel’s teacher dismissal law
The petitions argue that the law conflicts with existing legislation, was enacted without a professional or educational review process, and is unnecessary given existing powers under Israel’s 2016 Counter-Terrorism Law (CTL).
The petitioners further contend that the statute disproportionately infringes on freedom of expression, relies on vague and open-ended terminology, transfers sweeping enforcement powers to political actors – the education minister and the ministry’s director-general – and creates mechanisms of collective punishment against institutions.
They also argue that the law discriminates between different forms of prohibited expression and runs counter to core educational principles.
In response, the state maintained that the Education Ministry is in the process of formulating internal regulations and procedures for implementing the law, and that its constitutionality should be assessed in light of those safeguards once they are finalized and applied.
The Knesset similarly argued that the petitions were premature, citing a lack of “ripeness,” and asserted that even if the court were to reach the merits, there is no basis to invalidate the legislation.