In January, the U.S. Supreme Court said it would hear two connected cases that could have immense implications for tens of thousands of American Jews, and could potentially change the face of Jewish life in America. They concern St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School in Oklahoma, which is poised to be the country’s first religious charter school. Michael A. Helfand explains:

The case has all the hallmarks of a blockbuster church-state case, addressing the constitutionality of publicly funded religious education and potentially opening the door to tuition-free Jewish day schools. But the crux of the case comes down to which path the court will pick when facing a constitutional fork in the road: should charter schools—which are publicly authorized and funded, but privately operated—be considered public schools or private schools?

If charter schools are public schools, then operating a religious charter school such as St. Isidore likely violates the First Amendment as a state establishment of religion. While it is true that the Supreme Court has of late increasingly expanded the scope of permissible church-state interaction, a religious public school is likely a bridge too far.

On the other hand, if the court concludes that St. Isidore’s is a private school, then rescinding its charter on account of it being a religious school would likely constitute religious discrimination prohibited by the First Amendment.

Considering the current state of Israel-Arab relations, Ghaith al-Omari writes

First and foremost, no ceasefire will be possible without the release of Israeli hostages and commitments to disarm Hamas and remove it from power. The final say on these matters rests with Hamas commanders on the ground in Gaza, who have been largely impervious to foreign pressure so far. At minimum, however, the United States should insist that Qatari and Egyptian mediators push Hamas’s external leadership to accept these conditions publicly, which could increase pressure on the group’s Gaza leadership.

Washington should also demand a clear, public position from key Arab states regarding disarmament. The Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas endorsed this position in a June letter to Saudi Arabia and France, giving Arab states Palestinian cover for endorsing it themselves.

Some Arab states have already indicated a willingness to play a significant role, but they will have little incentive to commit resources and personnel to Gaza unless Israel (1) provides guarantees that it will not occupy the Strip indefinitely, and (2) removes its veto on a PA role in Gaza’s future, even if only symbolic at first. Arab officials are also seeking assurances that any role they play in Gaza will be in the context of a wider effort to reach a two-state solution.

On the other hand, Washington must remain mindful that current conditions between Israel and the Palestinians are not remotely conducive to . . . implementing a two-state solution.