Tuesday, June 02, 2026

Canadian Prime Minister Announces New Steps to Combat Antisemitism

Yesterday, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney announced new measures to combat antisemitism in Canada. A press release from the Prime Minister's office says in part:

... Our government will always protect the inalienable right of the Jewish people to live openly in freedom, safety, and dignity. Protection is fundamental, but not sufficient. The Jewish community must be able to flourish in every aspect of Canadian society.

To that end, the Prime Minister, Mark Carney, today announced the launch and membership of Canada’s new Ministerial Advisory Council on Rights, Equality, and Inclusion to be chaired by the Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture. The Council has a clear mission: to combat racism and hate in all their forms, and to guide the Government of Canada as we build a fairer, more just, and more inclusive country.

Today, the Prime Minister directed the Council to begin by addressing antisemitism from four different directions:

  • Reassess the nature, scale, and drivers of antisemitism in Canada – across public institutions, workplaces, campuses, and online spaces.
  • Develop a whole-of-government approach to antisemitism to ensure federal policies, workplaces, public safety programs, and community initiatives are aligned in protecting Jewish Canadians and confronting hate.
  • Improve research and the collection of data on hate incidents and build stronger data-sharing systems so all orders of government, schools, and police services are working from the same facts.
  • Measure the impact of our efforts so that investments in education, prevention, training, and community safety are delivering real results and helping build a safer Canada for everyone....
JNS reports on the Prime Minister's action and reactions to it.

D.C. Circuit: Transgender Troops Can Remain in Military, But Ban on New Trans Enlistees Remains for Now

As previously reported, in March 2025 the federal district court for the District of Columbia issued a preliminary injunction barring the military from implementing Executive Orders and military memoranda that exclude transgender persons from serving in the military. Now in Talbott v. United States, (DC Cir., June 1, 2026), the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the preliminary injunction insofar as it applies to named plaintiffs who are already serving in the military but vacated the preliminary injunction insofar as it applies to the named plaintiffs seeking to enlist. This result came in a fragmented vote of the 3-judge panel which generated three separate opinions spanning a total of 107 pages.

Judge Wilkins concluded that all the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their equal protection challenge and that those already serving in the military are entitled to a preliminary injunction.  However, he held that the case should be remanded to the district court for it to consider whether the balance of equities that justify a preliminary injunction are different for those who are merely seeking to enlist.

Discussing the merits, Judge Wilkins concluded that the current policy on transgender service contains classifications that are not sufficiently related to a legitimate government interest; the policy is grounded on archaic and overbroad generalizations about sex, rather than on a diagnosis of gender dysphoria or medical treatment for the condition; gender dysphoria is treated differently than any other medical condition; and the policy contains classifications that are based on invidious discrimination. He concluded in part:

What has been clearly and repeatedly explained are the foundational premises of the Hegseth Policy:  persons with a “false gender identity” are unfit for the military, and persons with a history of gender dysphoria are also unfit because they lack “honesty, humility, . . . and integrity.”... [T]hose animus-filled reasons were expressly given to justify aspects of the Hegseth Policy....  Unless we are going to fall for the old Groucho Marx line—“who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?”—we have direct evidence in this case that animus motivated the classifications in the Hegseth Policy. 

Senior Circuit Judge Rogers filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. He would affirm the district court's preliminary injunction in full, saying in part:

Given the uncontested record evidence and the nature of this court’s review for abuse of discretion, the district court did not abuse its discretion in enjoining the Hegseth Policy on accession.  This is so even if based on the evidence and argument before it, the district court could have concluded that the retention policy imposes “a much greater hardship” on those currently in the military than those who seek to join it, as Judge Wilkins concludes,... and only enjoined the Hegseth Policy on retention due to  national security concerns.  But the existence of a permissible alternative is not the same as showing that the district court abused its discretion by choosing another permissible alternative....

Judge Walker filed a dissenting opinion. He would reverse in full the district court's grant of a preliminary injunction. He said in part:

Sometimes a case will present an open question informed only by confusing and contradictory precedents.  This is not one of those cases.  Rather, ... an unbroken line of unambiguous authorities directs us to uphold a military policy (1) when it does not conflict with a statutory command, (2) when it reflects a “professional military judgment[],” and (3) when it addresses a perceived, military-wide need regarding the “composition, training, equipping, [or] control” of the armed forces.

The policy challenged today meets those criteria.

ABC News reports on the decision.

President Issues Message on Global Coptic Day

Yesterday, the White House posted a Presidential Message on Global Coptic Day (full text). The Message reads in part:

More than 2,000 years ago, the Holy Family fled to Egypt and sought refuge from persecution, blessing the land that later became home to one of the world’s oldest Christian communities.  When Saint Mark the Evangelist began spreading the Gospel in Egypt decades later, he planted a seed that would grow into the extraordinary Coptic Orthodox Church. 

Today, Coptic Christians throughout the United States enrich our national life through their devotion to God, love of family, and steadfast witness to the blessings of faith and freedom.  Yet throughout the world, Coptic Christians have faced the oppression of empires, persecution, and unspeakable violence—from martyrs like Saint Maurice in the ancient world to the 21 Coptic construction workers brutally executed by ISIS terrorists on a Libyan beach just 11 years ago.  The violent persecution of Christians is a barbaric evil, and my Administration remains firmly committed to ending it in all its forms.,,,

As we celebrate 250 glorious years of American Independence, Global Coptic Day stands as a profound testament to a truth written in the very soul of this Republic—that the free exercise of religion is the cornerstone of our constitutional way of life, the first freedom enshrined by our Founders, and the liberty every tyrant has always feared and sought to destroy....

Monday, June 01, 2026

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

From SmartCILP:

Friday, May 29, 2026

2nd Circuit: USCIS Rejection of Yemini Guardianships as Equivalent to Adoption Did Not Violate RFRA

In Alsonidar v. Mullin, (2d Cir., May 26, 2026), the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the US Citizenship and Immigration Services' refusal to recognize three individuals as adopted children of Salwa Asonidar, a native of Yemen who is a lawful permanent resident of the United States. Alsonidar filed an I-130 petition seeking an immigration visa for the three. The court said in part:

Plaintiffs also argue that USCIS violated RFRA by denying the petitions in a manner that burdened Salwa’s exercise of her religion ... Plaintiffs’ allegations fall short of stating such a claim.  They claim, for example, that USCIS failed to recognize Yemeni legal guardianships as equivalent to adoptions and thereby imposed a “western” understanding of family relationships inconsistent with Sharia law; they also assert that the denial of M.L.A.A.’s petition burdened Salwa’s ability to fulfill a religious obligation to care for an orphan.  But Plaintiffs do not allege what we have required to support a RFRA claim: that USCIS put “substantial pressure” on them to modify their behavior and violate their religious beliefs.... 

[Thanks to Eugene Volokh via Religionlaw for the lead.}

Children's Minister May Not Sue Church for Wrongful Discharge

In Elmore v. Mount Vernon Baptist Church, (WV App, May 27, 2026), a West Virginia state appellate court affirmed the dismissal of a suit by the former Children’s Minister at Mount Vernon Baptist Church claiming that she was unlawfully terminated by a vote of the Board of Deacons and subsequently a vote of the congregation. Plaintiff contends that she was terminated because she reported another employee for suspected child abuse and accused the church's male youth minister of sexually harassing her daughter. The majority said in part:

We find it unnecessary to resolve the parties’ dispute over the extent to which the “ministerial exception” recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court bars Ms. Elmore’s claims in this matter. As noted, the circuit court found that Ms. Elmore’s claims stemming from her termination were also barred by respondents’ constitutional right to freedom of religion under the SCAWV’s decision in Gillespie v. Elkins Southern Baptist Church....

While it is true that the SCAWV recognized that the Gillespie petitioner alleging wrongful discharge did not assert that his termination violated a substantial public policy, the Court further explained that it could not have addressed the merits of his claim even if he had....

Chief Judge Greear filed a concurring opinion, saying in part:

I fully concur with the majority’s decision holding that Ms. Elmore’s claims are barred. I write separately because I would resolve this case under the “ministerial exception” recognized in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & School v. E.E.O.C., 565 U.S. 171 (2012).

Federal Court Won't Order Public School to Allow Homeschooler to Play Interscholastic Sports

 In Palmer v. Virginia High School League, Inc., (WD VA, May 27, 2026), a Virginia federal district court rejected an equal protection challenge to a policy of Virginia's public high school interscholastic sports league that prohibits homeschooled students from participating in interscholastic competitions. Plaintiffs home school their 9th grade son primarily because of their Christian religious beliefs. Their son had been able to participate in track and field events in middle school. The court said in part:

The parties agree that, because there is no fundamental right or suspect classification at issue, rational basis review is the appropriate level of constitutional scrutiny to employ....

Requiring RCSB and VHSL to expend funds to support homeschooled athletic participation without receiving corresponding enrollment-based funding would be a financial burden.  As such, there is a reasonably conceivable basis for excluding homeschooled students from VHSL-sponsored competitions. ....

The court also finds persuasive defendants’ arguments regarding the logistical and competitive challenges associated with permitting homeschooled students to participate in VHSL athletics.  Under the current system ... schools with larger enrollments compete against similarly sized schools, while smaller schools compete against one another.  If homeschooled students were permitted to participate, the VHSL would need to decide whether those students should count toward a school’s enrollment numbers even though they are not actually enrolled in the school.  Counting all homeschooled students within a “high school zone” could artificially inflate a school’s enrollment and force it into a higher competitive division, potentially disadvantaging the students who are actually enrolled.  On the other hand, if homeschooled students were allowed to play without being counted toward enrollment totals, schools could gain a competitive advantage by drawing from a larger pool of athletes without moving into a higher classification.

The court refused to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiffs' claims under the free exercise clause of the Virginia Constitution and the Virginia Religious Freedom Restoration Act, saying in part:

Article I, Section 16 of the Constitution of Virginia and the VRFRA provide far broader protections for religious liberty than their federal counterparts.  However, the outer limits of those protections are not clearly defined....

...  [T]his case presents difficult and unresolved questions of Virginia law.  While this court often considers state-law matters, some of which are unsettled, considerations of judicial economy, convenience, fairness, and comity lead the court to decline exercising supplemental jurisdiction over the Virginia state-law claims here.  Those claims raise novel and undeveloped issues of Virginia constitutional and statutory law that are best left to the courts of the Commonwealth to resolve.

Thursday, May 28, 2026

6th Circuit: Plaintiffs Lack Standing to Challenge Michigan's Reproductive Rights Amendment

In Right to Life of Michigan v. Whitmer, (6th Cir., May 26, 2026), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a Michigan district court's conclusion that plaintiffs in the case lack standing in their suit challenging a Michigan state constitutional provision that guarantees a fundamental right to reproductive freedom. In the case, 16 plaintiffs sued Michigan's governor, attorney general and secretary of state seeking to enjoin enforcement of the provision that was adopted by Michigan voters in 2022, alleging that it violates their federally protected parental rights. The court said in part:

Plaintiffs’ alleged injuries must be traceable to the actions of the Defendants....

The primary allegation against the Governor and the Attorney General is that each is generally responsible for executing Michigan’s laws.  This type of general allegation cannot support Plaintiffs’ standing because a state official’s general authority to enforce state law cannot satisfy traceability in the absence of “allegations about what the [official] has done, is doing, or might do to injure plaintiffs.”...

For the Governor and Attorney General, this leaves only the allegations claiming they have enforcement responsibilities relating to the [Elliot Larsen Civil Rights Act] and [Michigan Consumer Protection Act].  But these allegations do not bear on Plaintiffs’ parental rights theory because they allege only that the ELCRA and MCPA bear on enforcement as to medical professionals, rather than in a manner that would cause harm to parental rights....  

Notably, the medical professional plaintiffs chose not to appeal. ...

Plaintiffs argue that because § 28 has led to several abortion restrictions being held unlawful, their harms directly flow from the constitutional amendment.  But this does not mean the harms flow from Defendants....

The Michigan Attorney General's office issued a press release announcing the decision.

Title VI Does Not Bar Religious Discrimination

In Storms v. Carcieri, (D NJ, May 26, 2026), a New Jersey federal district court dismissed a suit which challenged a requirement by the Somerset County YMCA that in order to serve as a Board member, a board nominee must complete a 30-minute training course titled "Advancing Equity, Understanding Biases." Plaintiff Michael Storms refused to take the course because it violated his "deeply held religious belief that only Jesus Christ can forgive my sins." Storms, proceeding pro se, sued alleging that imposing the requirement on him violated his 1st and 14th Amendment rights, as well as Title VI and Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the New Jersey Civil Rights Act. A number of his claims were dismissed because he had not plausibly alleged that the YMCA's conduct involved state action. The court dismissed plaintiff's Title VI claim because Title VI only bars discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin. It does not cover religious discrimination. He also failed to show that the federal funding received by the national YMCA organization was the source of any of operations of the local entity.

Interestingly, in his complaint, Plaintiff also listed "Jesus Christ" as a plaintiff. In a footnote the court said: "The Court finds that Jesus Christ is not a proper plaintiff and proceeds in its analysis with Storms as the sole plaintiff in this matter."

Wednesday, May 27, 2026

DOJ Sues UCLA Under Title VI for Discrimination Against Jewish and Israeli Students

Yesterday the Justice Department announced that it has filed suit against the University of California, Los Angeles, alleging that UCLA violated Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act by ignoring harassment and discrimination against Jewish and Israeli students. The complaint (full text) in United States v. Regents of the University of California, (CD CA, filed 5/26/2026), alleges in part:

On April 25, 2024, following months of antisemitic and anti-Israeli demonstrations, masked and armed agitators, many of whom were openly hostile to Jews and Israelis, occupied the heart of the University of California, Los Angeles (“UCLA”) campus.  They built an illegal encampment, surrounded it with barriers, and formed “human phalanxes” to block Jews and Israelis from entering academic buildings They kicked and slapped Jews, beat Jews with sticks, and assaulted Jews with pepper spray. One Jewish student was knocked unconscious and was taken to the hospital with an open head wound. 

Although UCLA knew that its Jewish and Israeli students risked physical assault when attempting to go to class or the library, UCLA inexplicably took no serious action whatsoever until May 2, 2024, when it finally allowed police to clear the encampment. Chaos ensued. Law-enforcement officers “were met with bursts of pepper spray, protesters wielding fire extinguishers against them, bright strobe lights, and protesters wearing helmets and goggles.”...

The suit asks the court to order UCLA to take various affirmative steps to ensure full and equal access to UCLA’s educational opportunities for Jewish and Israeli students and asks the court to appoint a monitor to oversee UCLA's compliance. The complaint also alleges the UCLA is in breach of provisions in its grant contracts with the federal government that require it to comply with Title VI. It asks the court to declare that because of this breach, the federal government need not make any additional payments to UCLA under its grant contracts, and to order UCLA to repay amounts already received under grant contracts while UCLA was in violation of Title VI.

Certiorari Denied in Interlocutory Appeal of Church Autonomy Ruling

The Supreme Court yesterday denied review in Conference of Catholic Bishops v. O'Connell, (Docket No. 25-849, certiorari denied 5/26/2026) (Order List). Plaintiff in the case charged the USCCB with fraudulent solicitation of donations, claiming that it misrepresented where money donated to Peter's Pence Collection would go. USCCB sought dismissal of the suit on church autonomy grounds. The district court refused. A 3-judge panel of the DC Circuit held that the district court's ruling could not be appealed until the district court had rendered a final decision in the case. Subsequently (over a lengthy dissenting opinion) the 3rd Circuit denied en banc review. (See prior posting.).

Tuesday, May 26, 2026

Pope Leo's First Encyclical Addresses Governments as Well as Individuals

 Yesterday, Pope Leo XIV issued his first Encyclical. The 245-paragraph document is titled Magnifica Humanitas; On Safeguarding the Human Person in the Time of Artificial Intelligence (full text). The broad-ranging document includes a number of appeals to governmental actors. Here are some of those portions of the document:

5. It now falls to us to face the challenges of our time with clarity of thought and responsibility. It is necessary to establish adequate regulatory tools capable of upholding justice and curbing the distorting effects of technological power.... Today, however, the main drivers of development are private, often transnational, parties that are endowed with resources and the capacity to intervene that surpass those of many Governments. Technological power thus takes on an unprecedented, predominantly “private” aspect, which makes it even more challenging to discern, govern and direct such power toward the common good....

80.... The spread of global networks, platforms and artificial intelligence systems is changing the way we obtain information, communicate and access services. Justice demands that we prevent the emergence of new forms of exclusion and deprivation of freedoms: individuals and peoples hindered or denied access to basic technologies, communities exposed to invasive surveillance and social groups penalized by opaque algorithms that perpetuate prejudice and discrimination. In the digital age, a just social order guarantees everyone equal access to opportunities, protects the youngest and weakest members of society, combats hate and misinformation and subjects the use of data and technology to public oversight, so that the guiding principle is not solely profit but the dignity of every person and the common good of all people.

81. A litmus test for social justice today is the treatment of migrants, refugees and those forced to move due to poverty, violence, climate change and environmental disasters. The way a society treats them reveals whether its sense of justice is driven by fear or by the spirit of fraternity....

103. Indeed, entrusting an algorithm in practice with the power to select who is worthy or not, without anyone bearing responsibility for that judgment, is to hand over the task of redefining the boundaries of human possibilities. In this process, political responsibility is also lost, not just empathy toward those excluded, which can, after all, be simulated. The exclusion of the vulnerable becomes cloaked in a veneer of neutrality and objectivity, against which it becomes difficult to raise objections. In this way, injustice goes unnoticed, and compassion, mercy and forgiveness — understood not as mere appearances but as real political actions — gradually disappear from view....

143. School is the place where new generations can learn to seek and love the truth, to reflect on the meaning of life and to recognize the dignity of every person....

144. ... Both within individual nations and across different regions of the world, significant inequalities persist concerning access to basic education and higher studies. In many nations, Governments have not yet invested the necessary resources for guaranteeing a quality education for all, whether by adequately supporting the public school system or by assisting private institutions that offer this essential service. When a substantial portion of education, at various levels, is entrusted to private institutions, access to schooling may become overly dependent on families’ financial means, especially in the absence of adequate public support. In the face of this risk, it is nevertheless important to acknowledge and encourage the contribution of the many private Catholic educational institutions which ensure inclusive access for children and young people of every background, even when families’ economic circumstances would not otherwise allow it....

162. Just laws and methods of redistribution are certainly necessary for correcting imbalances, including tax systems that lighten the burden on the weakest and ask for more from those with greater resources. However, the pursuit of social justice should not be considered a separate issue that follows only after the production of wealth, as if the economy existed solely to create wealth, with politicians only intervening afterwards in order to distribute it. Indeed, justice concerns every phase of economic activity, from resource acquisition to financing, and from production to consumption; every choice has moral consequences....

201.... The institutions established to safeguard the concept of a common future for all peoples and a global common good appear to have been weakened. This is due not only to structural limitations, but also to a frequent lack of shared will to support and reform them, or to recognize their moral authority. Instead of making progress, we are regressing from the significant turning point of the twentieth century. After 1989, the collapse of communist regimes in Europe was followed by a predominantly economic globalization, which lacked an adequate political framework capable of sustaining dialogue and peace. An almost blind faith was placed in the ability of the markets to generate prosperity, democracy and stability. In reality, rather than automatically generating unity and peace, globalization has provoked fundamentalist, identity-based and nationalistic reactions....

Vatican News has published a summary of the full Encyclical.

Tennessee Enacts Women's Safety and Protection Act

On May 22, Tennessee Governor Bill Lee signed SB0468, the Women's Safety and Protection Act (full text). The new law defines the terms "male" and "female" for purposes of any state law or administrative rule in terms of a person's biological reproductive system. It defines the term "sex" as an individual's biological sex as observed or clinically verified at birth. The law goes on to require public schools, domestic violence shelters, correctional facilities and juvenile detention facilities to designate each multi-occupancy restroom, changing room, and sleeping quarters for the exclusive use of either females, males, or members of the same family. With limited exceptions, it prohibits individuals from entering facilities designated for the opposite sex. ADF issued a press release announcing the governor's signing of the bill.

Monday, May 25, 2026

President Issues Message on Pentecost

 Yesterday, the White House posted a "Presidential Message on Pentecost" (full text). It reads in part:

Melania and I join many Christians throughout our Nation and around the world who are joyfully celebrating the miracle of Pentecost today and the birth of Christ’s Church.

Fifty days after the glorious Resurrection of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ on Easter Sunday, the Bible tells us that the Holy Spirit descended upon the Apostles in Jerusalem in tongues of fire, triumphantly fulfilling Christ’s promise and giving them the courage and divine authority to proclaim the message of God to every nation and people....

On this holy day, we proclaim our faith in Jesus Christ, our hope in His saving power, and our enduring commitment to pursuing His will as one Nation under God.  As we celebrate 250 years of American Independence this year, we pray that the Holy Spirit continues to inspire our hearts, strengthen our resolve, and guide our Nation with wisdom, courage, and hope for years to come.

President's Memorial Day Proclamation

President Trump last week issued a Proclamation (full text) declaring today as Memorial Day, saying in part:

... All Americans inherit the glorious gift of liberty that has been purchased with the spilled blood of brave warriors and the tears and heartache of those they left behind.  It is fitting and necessary for our Nation to pause for an annual reminder of the enduring and perilously high cost of freedom, but the immeasurable gravity of what has been sacrificed for the greater good deserves our eternal reverence and unwavering gratitude every day. 

On this solemn day, the First Lady and I ask you to join us in prayer for lasting peace in this volatile world, for the protection of those in harm’s way, and for the grace of Almighty God to comfort all who grieve.   

In honor of all of our fallen heroes, the Congress, by a joint resolution approved May 11, 1950 ... (36 U.S.C. 116), has requested the President issue a proclamation calling on the people of the United States to observe each Memorial Day as a day of prayer for permanent peace and designating a period on that day when the people might unite in prayer. The Congress, by Public Law 106–579, has also designated 3:00 p.m. local time on that day as a time for all Americans to observe, in their own way, the National Moment of Remembrance.

NOW, THEREFORE, I ... do hereby proclaim Memorial Day, May 25, 2026, as a day of prayer for permanent peace, and I designate the hour beginning in each locality at 11:00 a.m. of that day as a time when people might unite in prayer. I ask all Americans to observe the National Moment of Remembrance beginning at 3:00 p.m. local time on Memorial Day...

Challenge To Tennessee's Requirement That Charter Schools Be Non-Sectarian Moves Ahead

Wilberforce Academy of Knoxville v. Knox County Board of Education, (ED TN, May 22, 2026), is the latest court challenge to state laws that require publicly funded charter schools to be nonsectarian and nonreligious. Plaintiff seeks to open a Christian charter school. However, its letter of intent submitted to the Knox County Board of Education was rejected because the school could not affirm that it was not a "religious or church school". Wilberforce did not proceed to the next step of submitting an application because the application required a similar representation. Instead, it filed suit in federal district court contending that the nonsectarian requirement violates the Free Exercise clause of the 1st Amendment. The defendants moved to dismiss on standing and mootness grounds because Wilberforce had never filed an application to create the school. The court refused to dismiss, saying in part:

... Wilberforce was effectively presented with only two options: either falsely disclaim its religious status or continue submitting materials that KCBOE had already indicated would be deemed incomplete. Under these circumstances, requiring Wilberforce to proceed further in the application process would elevate form over substance....

... Although it is true that KCBOE may lack discretion to approve a religious charter school, it still may be held responsible for an alleged unconstitutional law it enforces....

Wilberforce has demonstrated a concrete interest in being able to apply and to compete on equal footing with secular organizations to become a charter school in Tennessee. Although it is true that it may not be able to open a charter school during the 2027-2028 school year, Wilberforce has alleged and shown that it is “able and ready” to apply to for charter-school status “for the earliest school year it could open.”...

Accordingly, Wilberforce’s claim presents a live case or controversy that is not moot.