Yeshiva University bans LGBTQ student club again after yearslong legal battle
Yeshiva University in New York City has once again banned its LGBTQ student club, saying the group's actions are 'antithetical' to the Jewish educational institution's religious values. The decision comes two months after the school reached a settlement with students to recognize the group and end a yearslong legal dispute that at one point reached the U.S. Supreme Court.
The undergraduate club, which was formerly known as YU Pride Alliance, was renamed Hareni in March, when the settlement was reached. But both sides now say the other violated the terms of the agreement, which included a mandate that the club 'not advocate against the Torah's teachings' and a requirement that the university continue and enhance its sensitivity training and anti-discrimination policies.
'Recent actions and statements have indicated that Hareni is operating as a pride club under a different name and as such is antithetical to the Torah values of our yeshiva,' Rabbi Yosef Kalinsky, the dean of the university's undergraduate Torah studies, said in a May 9 letter to students, which was published by The Yeshiva University Observer. 'There is no place for such a club in yeshiva. As such, we are directing the Office of Student Life to discontinue this club.'
Kalinsky's letter came one day after Hareni's legal counsel sent a letter to a university attorney alleging that senior leaders at the school had made public statements 'that display animus and hostility toward the University's LGBTQ students and may violate the terms of the Settlement Agreement.'
The letter, shared publicly by The Yeshiva University Observer, cited several examples, including an April 6 essay by Rabbi Meyer Twersky that stated in part, 'Identification with the L.G.B.T.Q acronym entails identification with a heretical, nihilistic philosophy which champions and celebrates all forms of sexual deviance.'
In a phone interview with NBC News on Wednesday, a Yeshiva spokesperson said the club's members held an unsanctioned event and started using graphics, terminology, colors and logos that had been banned under the March agreement. The new LGBTQ club, the spokesperson suggested, was just the old club renamed.
When asked for comment on the university's decision, Hareni sent an emailed statement to NBC News through the group's attorney Max Selver at Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP.
'We are deeply disappointed by the announcement of Hareni's cancellation, which followed a letter from our legal team raising concerns that YU was violating the terms of our settlement—specifically through ongoing displays of animus and hostility that threaten the safety and well-being of LGBTQ students on campus,' the statement said. 'That this effort ended not with dialogue, but with unilateral dissolution and hostility, only underscores how urgently LGBTQ students at YU need support, safety, and community. That need hasn't gone away—and neither have we."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Israel Knesset set to vote on disbanding in first step to possible election
JERUSALEM, June 11 (Reuters) - Israel's parliament is set to hold a preliminary vote on Wednesday to dissolve itself following a dispute over conscription, a first step that could lead to an early election, which polls show Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would lose. The vote could still be pulled at the last minute, and even if it goes against Netanyahu, it would only be the first of four needed to bring forward elections. This would give Netanyahu's ruling coalition further time to resolve its worst political crisis yet and avoid a ballot, which would be Israel's first since the eruption of the war with Hamas in Gaza. Dissolving the Knesset would only be a victory for Israel's enemies, said Boaz Bismuth, a lawmaker with Netanyahu's Likud party. "During war this is the last thing Israel needs," he told Reuters. Netanyahu has been pushing hard to resolve a deadlock in his coalition over a new military conscription bill, which has led to the present crisis. Some religious parties in Netanyahu's coalition are seeking exemptions for ultra-Orthodox Jewish seminary students from military service that is mandatory in Israel, while other lawmakers want to scrap any such exemptions altogether. The exemptions have been a hot-button issue in Israel for years but have become particularly contentious during the war in Gaza, as Israel has suffered its highest battlefield casualties in decades and its stretched military is in need of more troops. Growing increasingly impatient with the political deadlock, ultra-Orthodox coalition factions have said they will vote with opposition parties in favour of dissolving the Knesset and bringing forward an election that is not due until late 2026. "It's more than ever urgent to replace Netanyahu's government and specifically this toxic and harmful government," said Labour's opposition lawmaker Merav Michaeli. "It's urgent to end the war in Gaza and to bring back all the hostages. It's urgent to start rebuilding and healing the state of Israel." Opposition parties are likely to withdraw the dissolution bill if Netanyahu's coalition resolves the crisis before the vote is held much later on Wednesday. But even if it passes Wednesday's reading, the bill's final approval requires three more votes, giving Netanyahu's coalition more time to come to agreements over conscription. If passed, the dissolution bill will next go to parliament committee discussions in between readings, a legislation process which could take days, weeks or months. In this time, Netanyahu could still reach agreements with the ultra-Orthodox parties, his key political allies, and shoot the bill down. To pass the final reading, the bill would need an absolute majority of at least 61 votes in the 120-seat parliament, called the Knesset in Hebrew, and an election will have to be held within five months. Successive polls have predicted that Netanyahu's coalition would lose in an election, with Israelis still reeling over the security failure of Palestinian militant group Hamas' October 7 2023 attack and hostages still held in Gaza. Hamas' surprise attack led to Israel's deadliest single day and shattered Netanyahu's security credentials, with 1,200 people killed and 251 hostages taken into Gaza. Israel's offensive against Hamas in Gaza has since killed almost 55,000 Palestinians, according to health officials in the Hamas-run enclave, left much of the territory in ruins, and its more than two million population largely displaced and gripped by a humanitarian crisis. Twenty months into the fighting, public support for the Gaza war has waned. More than 400 Israeli soldiers have been killed in combat there, adding to anger many Israelis feel over the ultra-Orthodox exemption demands even as the war drags on. Ultra-Orthodox religious leaders, however, see full-time devotion to religious studies as sacrosanct and military service as a threat to the students' strict religious lifestyle.
NBC News
2 hours ago
- NBC News
Consumers brace for steeper bills and lower credit scores from Trump's financial deregulation
Rob Haskell was hoping a new rule would shield his credit report from thousands of dollars in bills for recent heart procedures. Instead, he's bracing for impact from President Donald Trump's push to slash financial regulations. 'I've always had medical debt hanging over me but, you know, it's just completely unmanageable,' Haskell said in late May. He was speaking to NBC News from a hospital bed at PeaceHealth St. Joseph Medical Center in Bellingham, Washington, days before an open heart surgery that threatened to yield another steep bill. 'So, to the moon on that one,' he sighed. A lot of people don't necessarily know about the CFPB and may not understand how it's being attacked, but they will be affected. Adam Rust, consumer federation of america The 58-year-old contractor said he has battled a series of heart and kidney issues for most of his life. Despite having health insurance, his medical needs have resulted in thousands of dollars in debt. Haskell recently paid off a $5,000 bill that knocked his credit score 21 points lower — debt that might have been spared from his report under a rule instituted in the final days of the Biden-era Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The CFPB estimated at the time that the measure would have spared $49 billion in bills from hitting the reports of 15 million people. But in April, Trump-appointed leadership at the consumer watchdog reversed its position and threw its support behind credit unions and consumer reporting companies seeking to block the rule in a Texas federal court. After twice delaying the policy's March start date, the judge is expected to rule within days. Haskell used some retirement savings to pay off his last operation, in 2024. Before his heart surgery last month, he'd hoped the medical debt rule would finally help smooth out his finances, boost his credit score above 700, and improve his chances of buying property to build a home. That now appears unlikely. 'There really was very little information about the whole thing,' Haskell said of the CFPB's about-face. 'I was really surprised.' The change adds to the financial risks consumers increasingly face from months of cuts and policy rollbacks at the agency, advocates say, contributing to broader economic uncertainty stoked by Trump's trade war. Since January, CFPB leadership has attempted to fire nearly all of the agency's 1,700 workers, halted standard supervisory and enforcement actions and blocked rules aimed at buttressing consumers' wallets. The actions have stunned consumer advocates who just months ago had expected at least some of the Biden-era guidance to remain untouched. Some pointed to the populist economic message that propelled Trump back into the Oval Office, even though the CFPB — itself a byproduct of populist frustrations churned up by the 2008 financial crisis — has drawn GOP ire since its inception. 'These rules generally are very politically popular,' said Chi Chi Wu, a senior attorney at the National Consumer Law Center, a nonprofit group that stepped in to defend both the medical debt rule and a separate one capping overdraft fees at large banks at $5. The latter measure was voided in early May when Trump signed House Republicans' resolution repealing it. When federal agencies' policies are nullified under the Congressional Review Act, they're prevented from issuing substantially similar ones in the future. 'They're actively harming regular, hard-working Americans so that their billionaire buddies can profit,' Wu said of administration officials. 'There's really no other way to look at it.' Spokespeople for the CFPB and the White House didn't respond to requests for comment. The Trump administration has cast its changes as efforts to combat government overreach. In remarks to the American Bankers Association in April, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who was appointed acting director of the CFPB in late January, described Biden-era rules as politically biased and criticized their 'compliance costs' that could impede 'responsible lending and risk-taking.' 'The associated mission drift can lend itself to political ends,' he said at the time. The consumer banking industry has applauded efforts to rein in the agency. 'How do we take politics out of regulation, where it never should have been?' Lindsey Johnson, president and CEO of the Consumer Bankers Association, said at a recent industry event. She also thanked Trump in a statement last month cheering the elimination of the overdraft rule 'for protecting consumer choice and access to a deeply valued financial tool utilized by millions of Americans in times of need.' Republican policymakers, both at the CFPB and in Congress, have taken steps to unwind other recent financial regulations. In April, a Biden-era rule capping most credit card late fees at $8 was eliminated. So was a policy aimed at tightening regulations around the sale of consumers' financial data and Social Security numbers. The CFPB has also abandoned a lawsuit against the three big banks that operate the digital payments platform Zelle, which was accused of mishandling users' fraud complaints totaling more than $870 million since 2017. Gone, too, are oversight powers over big tech companies offering payment tools and plans to hold Buy Now, Pay Later services — which have rapidly become many consumers' default choice of credit — to the same regulations as card issuers. 'A lot of people don't necessarily know about the CFPB and may not understand how it's being attacked, but they will be affected,' said Adam Rust, director of financial services at the Consumer Federation of America. 'Partisanship is what is driving these actions, both by Congress and the CFPB, and it strikes me as an inside-the-Beltway game that ignores the effect on regular people.' In the meantime, some advocates are shifting focus to state and municipal safeguards. New York City Comptroller Brad Lander published a report this week outlining how the city and the state can fill the void left by a CFPB 'in crisis,' recommending a consumer restitution fund and bank overdraft caps. In January, California instituted its own prohibitions on health care providers and debt collectors from reporting medical debt to credit agencies. Still, Armen Meyer, a financial policy consultant who has served as both a fintech executive and a bank regulator, said he expects 'many, many consumers will be harmed no matter how much the states stand up.' When you're broke, you're broke. You just do what you can to survive. George Curlee, Garland, Texas George Curlee, 51, is keenly aware of how the CFPB's policy reversals threaten his finances. In 2023, the Garland, Texas, resident underwent an emergency toe amputation that resulted in $61,000 in total medical debt despite the insurance he'd purchased on an Affordable Care Act marketplace. Around the same time, he was fired from his retail job and his credit score plunged 60 points. Curlee said he has since managed to whittle the debt down to about $50,000 and found part-time work in March. The job pays less than half his previous $40,000 annual salary, and he's been living with two of his brothers to save money. 'When you're broke, you're broke,' he said. 'You just do what you can to survive.' Curlee now fears worse to come because of House Republicans' so-called Big Beautiful Bill, which the Congressional Budget Office estimates would push at least 16 million people off health insurance by 2034 — including those who pay for ACA coverage like him. He has since joined advocates to lobby policymakers against the proposed cuts and in favor of preserving the medical debt rule. 'I really wish that politicians would take the politics out of these bills and do what's right for the American people,' he said. 'This is a little insane.'
NBC News
3 hours ago
- NBC News
Trump admin tells immigration judges to dismiss cases in tactic to speed up arrests
A recent memo to immigration judges obtained by NBC News provides fresh insight into how the Trump administration is pulling off a new tactic — dismissing pending immigration cases, then immediately moving to arrest the immigrants — that is part of its bid to quickly increase the number of immigrants it is detaining. In the memo, the Justice Department instructs immigration judges, who report to the executive branch and are not part of the independent judiciary, to allow Department of Homeland Security lawyers to make motions to dismiss orally and then move quickly to grant those dismissals, rather than allow immigrants the 10-day response time that had been typical. 'Oral Decisions must be completed within the same hearing slot on the day testimony and arguments are concluded,' says the memo, which is dated May 30. It also tells the judges that '[n]o additional documentation or briefing is required' to grant the dismissals. Once their cases are dismissed, the immigrants in question may be put in expedited removal proceedings, which means they can be deported without a chance to make their cases for asylum before immigration judges. The memo notes that people in expedited removal proceedings 'are subject to mandatory detention' and can be taken into custody by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which falls under DHS. The Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment. A source close to the immigration judges' union said that the move is legal but that it is still upsetting to many immigration judges. 'They think it makes a mockery of the whole process and that it flies in the face of what Trump ran on. Immigration enforcement means it's done in a fair manner ... and this isn't fair,' the source close to the union said. Immigration judges are not authorized to speak to the media except through their union. The memo cites a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act that sets out the conditions under which the government can move to dismiss an immigrant's case. But it misstates the statute. The memo says, without quotation marks, that judges may grant motions to dismiss when 'circumstances have changed to such an extent that continuation is no longer in the best interest of the government.' But the Immigration and Nationality Act's wording is more specific; it states that cases can be dismissed when 'circumstances of the case have changed to such an extent that continuation is no longer in the best interest of the government.' Greg Chen, senior director of government relations at the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said he believes the new guidance violates that provision of the Immigration Nationality Act and is not legal. 'The omission of the words 'of the case' is deliberate because DHS is trying to avoid having to speak to the individual case. The law requires them to provide particular reasons for their motion, and they are not doing that. The email is the written policy that contradicts the law,' Chen said. Jason Houser, who was chief of staff at ICE during the Biden administration, said dismissing cases that way will allow ICE to arrest more people but will not really help it speed up deportations because it lacks enough space to detain those arrested before deportation. The tactic of dismissing cases and then arresting people whose cases were dismissed 'targets vetted migrants who were working and had legal status,' he said. 'Flooding the system with thousands of noncriminals wastes time and resources when federal law enforcement should be focused on national security threats.' As the agency steps up arrests, it faces an overcrowding issue. More than 51,000 immigrants were in ICE custody as of May 23, according to ICE data, though it is funded to hold only 41,500. Former ICE officials have said the agency can run over that allotment by only so much, and then only for a short amount of time, before it risks budget shortfalls and possible penalties from courts for living conditions that fall below court-mandated standards.
