In a decision that could have broad implications for the Bush administration’s Faith Based Initiative, an Iowa federal district court yesterday held that a state-financed prison treatment program affiliated with Charles Colson’s Prison Fellowship Ministries is "pervasively sectarian" and violates the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. (See prior posting.) Yesterday’s New York Times and today’s Washington Post report on the 140-page decision in Americans United for Separation of Church and State v. Prison Fellowship Ministries, (SD Iowa, June 2, 2006), which requires InnerChange to return $1.5 million in funding that it has received from the state of Iowa.
The court explained at length the evangelical Christian theology of InnerChange, and how it differs from the beliefs of a number of other Christian groups. It also explained the "transformational model" used by InnerChange in its program—one that instead of attempting to teach inmates to manage their behavior, attempts to "cure" prisoners by identifying sin as the root of their problems and changing their relationship with God. The court found that while the primary purpose of state officials in bringing the InnerChange program to Iowa was to reduce recidivism, funding of the program has the primary effect of advancing religion because state funds are being directed to a pervasively religious program. It concluded that it could not separate out the secular parts of InnerChange’s program for funding because the transformational model used makes it impossible to distinguish sectarian from religious aspects of rehabilitation. The court also found that participation by inmates in InnerChange was not the result of true private choice between alternative programs. There are a number of incentives for inmates to choose InnerChange, and there are no similar alternative secular programs for inmates to choose. Thus the state is unconstitutionally entangled with religion in the program.
Mark Early, president of Prison Fellowship Ministries, said the decision is so broad that it appears to ban a prison program like InnerChange even if it is privately funded. InnerChange plans to file an appeal. [Thanks to Douglas Laycock via Religionlaw for the lead, and to How Appealing for the link to the opinion.]
