Arizona Trial Court Strikes Down 3 Laws Restricting Abortions.

In Isaacson v. State of Arizona, (AZ Super. Ct., Feb. 2, 2026), an Arizona trial court struck down three Arizona statutes that restrict a woman's ability to obtain an abortion.  A 2024 Amendment to Arizona's state constitution prohibits the state from restricting pre-viability abortions unless the law is for the limited purpose of maintaining the health of the person seeking an abortion and does not infringe on that person's autonomous decision making. The court held that this provision invalidates (1) Arizona's ban on seeking an abortion because of a fetal abnormality; (2) Arizona's requirement a physician perform an ultrasound and deliver state-mandated information to a person seeking an abortion 24 hours before carrying out the procedure; and (3) Arizona's ban on use of telemedicine to provide abortion inducing drugs.

Arizona's Attorney General in a press release said in part:

Today's ruling is a major victory for Arizona women, families, and their doctors. The court has affirmed what we've known all along: the abortion restrictions challenged in this case are unconstitutional.

According to AP, Republican legislative leaders had intervened in the case to defend the restrictions. Senate President Warren Petersen's office said the decision will be appealed.

ACLU issued a press release announcing the decision. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Ministerial Exception Bars Student Chaplain's Title IX and FLSA Claims

In Davenport v. Episcopal Health Services, Inc., (ED NY, Feb. 5, 2026), a New York federal district court held that the ministerial exception doctrine bars Title IX and Fair Labor Standards Act claims by a student chaplain in an Episcopal hospital. The court said in part:

Plaintiff Archbishop Russell Davenport served as a chaplain at St. John’s Episcopal Hospital South Shore [EHS]... as part of the hospital’s clinical pastoral education program.  But he claims the hospital never paid him for spiritual and clinical counseling that he performed for patients after his shift ended.  He separately claims that the hospital improperly rejected his sexual harassment complaint against a fellow chaplain but suspended him when another employee filed a complaint against him....

Plaintiff contends that EHS is not a religious group because the complaint “makes no allegations about the religious origins or continuing religious purpose of the hospital.” ...

Like the Department of Pastoral Care, the CPE program offers “pastoral services to patients and community members.” ...  Its chaplains perform religious rituals and rites, worship with patients, and offer spiritual counsel....  The CPE’s work therefore also vests in Defendants a critical aspect of its religious entity—even if its services are not strictly Episcopalian.  That indisputably religious service renders St. John’s and EHS religious groups....

Plaintiff insists that the ministerial exception does not apply to students.  But he adduces no authority why the exception excludes those who administer religious services simply because they obtain “professional training and education for ministry” part-time....

The ministerial exception applies to Plaintiff’s wage-and-hour claims.  Just “as the initial function of selecting a minister is a matter of church administration and government, so are the functions which accompany such a selection,” including “determination of a minister’s salary.”...

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Joanmarie Davoli, Infusing Catholicism In Teaching And Writing, (December 01, 2025).
• Michael Quinlan, NSW Greens Introduce a Bill of Rights to Protect Their Preferred Rights, (News Weekly Issue No. 3204, December 20, 2025 12-13).
• Angshul Majumdar, Halakhah as a Gödelian System: Why Oral Law, Disagreement, and Authority are Structurally Necessary, (January 20, 2026).
• Robert Katz, Antisemitism and the Law, (Carolina Academic Press, 2025).
• Zachary Price, Constitutional Symmetry in the 2024-2025 Term:  Mahmoud and Skrmetti's Missteps, (January 31, 2026).
• Gagas Tri Anggoro, Inclusive Human Rights: A Paradigm for Dignity in Diversity, (January 10, 2026).
• Robert Katz, The Pearl and Troy Feibel Lecture on Judaism and Law: "American Law's Jewish Question: Religion, Race, and Free Speech in an Age of Campus Antisemitism", (January 31, 2026).
• Nancy A. McLaughlin, Donor Standing To Enforce Charitable Gifts In The 21st Century (February 03, 2026).
• Jacqueline Stevens, How John Searle and the Chicago Supermob Took Out Northwestern University: The Case of the 'Mislaid' Methodists and Proposals to Reform Nonprofit Laws, (January 20, 2026).
• Daniel B. Rice, Tradition Without Text?, (75 Duke Law Journal Online __ (forthcoming 2026)).
• Lyric Helena Emerson, Discrimination in 2025: Racism, Islamophobia, Gender, and the Reorganization of Social Hierarchy, (January 30, 2026).

From SSRN (Biblical Interpretation):

• Essien Oku Essien, Apocalyptic Diagnostics of the Divine Letters to the Seven Churches in Asia Minor, (January 23, 2026).
• Essien Oku Essien, A Constructive Reading Of Matthew 16:18 In Canonical And Patristic Perspective (January 21, 2026).
• Dov Fischer, The Value of Silence and Purposeful Communication: Lessons from Genesis (37:13), (December 07, 2025).

From SSRN (Islamic Law):

• Arafat Rahman Akram & Sharat Fatema Angelic, Admissibility of Iqrar in Proving Criminal Cases: A Comparative Study of Malaysia, Pakistan, and Brunei, (January 10, 2026).
• Seyyed Abdol Hojjat Moghadas Nian, AqilaSadat MoghadasNian & Moghadas Nian SeyyedAbdolHamed, Optimizing Digital Transformation in Waqf Institutions: A Strategic KPI Framework for Enhanced Transparency and Sustainability, (April 19, 2025).
• Dr. Mohamed El Bachir Berroho, Waqf and Trust: A Comparative Analysis, (October 21, 2024).

From SmartCILP:

• Iza Hussin, Book Review. Between Empires: Arab, Asian, and European Legal Orders in the Nineteenth-Century Indian Ocean. Sovereigns of the Sea: Omani Ambition in the Age of Empire, by Seema Alavi, 50 Law & Social Inquiry 935-940 (2025).

Texas AG Sues to Close Down CAIR and Muslim Brotherhood in State

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed suit in a Texas state trial court against CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood asking for an injunction barring these organizations from engaging in any activities in the state of Texas. The complaint (full text) in State of Texas v. Muslim Brotherhood, (TX Dist. Ct., filed 2/5/2026), alleges in part:

The Muslim Brotherhood is a radical terrorist organization that exists to usurp governmental power and establish dominion through Sharia law. For three decades, it has covertly operated in the United States under the name “CAIR”—the Council on American-Islamic Relations—as its American affiliate. The group is not peaceful. It is not tolerant. It does not respect the freedom to practice other religions or sects, including Christianity and Judaism. Instead, ... the Muslim Brotherhood ... has systematically engaged in political assassinations and terrorist attacks to accomplish its goal of a global Islamic caliphate....

Last November, the governor of Texas issued a Proclamation declaring CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood to be a Foreign Terrorist and Transnational Criminal Organizations under Texas law. (See prior posting.)

The Texas Attorney General has issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

DOJ Settles RLUIPA Zoning Dispute with Pennsylvania Town

In June 2025, the Justice Department instituted an investigation of alleged RLUIPA violations by the Borough of Kingston, Pennsylvania. At issue has been the application of a 2023 Kingston zoning ordinance to attempts by the Orthodox Jewish Chabad organization to locate sites for places of worship and other religious facilities for its growing population. (See prior related posting.) On Wednesday, the Justice Department announced that it had reached a settlement agreement with Kingston.  To implement the agreement, the government filed a lawsuit against Kingston and along with it filed a proposed consent order (full text). The complaint (full text) in United States v. Borough of Kingston, (MD PA, filed 2/4/2026), alleges in part:

107. Kingston acted in violation of RLUIPA by “impos[ing] or  implement[ing] a land use regulation in a manner that treats a religious assembly or institution on less than equal terms with a nonreligious assembly or institution.” 42  U.S.C. § 2000cc(b)(l)....

110. Kingston’s enactment and application of the 2023 Zoning Ordinance, and Kingston’s conduct described in this Complaint, constitute the imposition or implementation of a land use regulation that unreasonably limits religious assemblies, institutions, or structures within a jurisdiction in violation of RLUIPA, 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc(b)(3)(B). 

 The consent order requires Kingston to make various amendments to its zoning ordinance.

Trump Announces May Event to "Rededicate America as One Nation Under God"

President Trump yesterday delivered lengthy remarks (full transcript) at the National Prayer Breakfast held at the Washington Hilton Hotel in Washington, D.C. His remarks included the following announcement:

In the last 12 months, young Americans attended church at nearly twice the rate as they did four years ago.... Some churches are seeing a 30 percent, 50 percent, or even 70 percent increase in the number of converts, and also the number of people going to church every week.

To support this exciting renewal this morning, I’m pleased to announce that on May 17th — 26th — that we’re inviting Americans from all across the country to come together on our National Mall to pray, to give thanks, and to — We are going to do something that everyone said, like, that’s tough. We’re going to rededicate America as one nation under God.

Education Department Issues Guidance on School Prayer

Yesterday, the U.S. Department of Education issued a 9-page "Guidance on Constitutionally Protected Prayer and Religious Expression in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools" (full text). An accompanying Press Release included this summary:

Key Points of the Guidance:

• Students, teachers, and other school officials have a right to pray in school as an expression of individual faith, as long as they’re not doing so on behalf of the school.
• Public schools may not sponsor prayer nor coerce or pressure students to pray. For example, a school principal may not lead a prayer at a mandatory school assembly.
• Public schools can regulate student speech that “materially disrupts classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others.” For example, a student can’t pray out loud during math class in a way that prevents others from learning, provided such disruptions are handled consistently with other forms of speech.
• Religious speech should be treated the same as secular speech. For example, an essay with religious content should be graded by the same academic standards as a secular essay of similar quality.
• Religious student organizations should likewise be treated the same as secular student organizations. For example, if a school offers support or recognition to secular student clubs, it must provide the same support to religious student clubs.

9th Circuit: Prison May Not Revoke Religious Diet Privilege Because Inmate Did Not Strictly Adhere to It

In Harris v. Muhammad, (9th Cir., Feb. 4, 2026), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a California federal district court's denial of a preliminary injunction to a Buddhist inmate who had been taken off of the prison's Religious Meat Alternative Program (RAMP) because he often purchased non-Halal food from the prison commissary. Plaintiff was a Nichiren Buddhist. On advice of the prison chaplain, Harris chose RAMP, a halal compliant diet, as the closest to his Nichiren Buddhist belief that he should eat natural foods that are not highly processed. His precise diet that was unavailable did not require halal certification. The district court held that taking Harris off of RAMP was not a substantial burden on his religious exercise since his religion did not require him to limit his intake to halal meat. The 9th Circuit said in part:

By conditioning his ability to receive the diet which most aligns with his beliefs on whether he keeps Islamic dietary laws, Harris has shown a substantial burden on his religious exercise. ...

Holding otherwise imposes a judicial assessment of what diet is required by Harris’s Nichiren Buddhist faith....  

Judges ought not be Pharisees, decreeing from on high what practices are relevant to a prisoner’s understanding of his own faith.  See Matthew 23:23. ...  And if external forces cause Harris to fall short of the exact dictates of his religion, it is for him and his conscience, not us as courts, to decide what compromises are appropriate.  Thus, it is sufficient that Harris asserts that he sincerely believes that the RMAP program “is closest to his spiritual needs.”  In holding that an Islamic diet is not required by Harris’s Buddhist faith, the district court erred by discounting Harris’s own understanding of his faith....

... Harris’s departures from the Islamic diet—or even a Buddhist diet—do not demonstrate that his beliefs do not require him to adhere to that diet if possible. “[A] sincere religious believer doesn’t forfeit his religious rights merely because he is not scrupulous in his observance; for where would religion be without its backsliders, penitents, and prodigal sons?”  ...

Each man’s faith is his own, and judges must avoid questioning whether a prisoner has strictly abided by the letter of his own sincere belief.

The district court erred by considering these backslides as part of a centrality inquiry (i.e., concluding that expulsion from RMAP would not affect Harris’s ability to practice his own religion)....

Although courts may not determine what actions are dictated by a plaintiff’s personal religious beliefs, a court may determine whether those beliefs are sincerely held..... RLUIPA does not entitle insincere believers in the “Church of Surf ‘n’ Turf” to luxury lobster and steak dinners.  But it also protects the rights of sincere believers, who may not fully adhere to their stated beliefs.  

Neither the district court nor the prison inquired into the sincerity of Harris’s beliefs, only their centrality to his religion.  The district court should consider that issue in the first instance....

New York Mayor Selects Director of Liberal Jewish Advocacy Group as Antisemitism Office Head

Numerous media sources report that New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani has chosen Phylisa Wisdom to head the New York Mayor's Office to Combat Antisemitism. Wisdom is currently executive director of the liberal Jewish advocacy group New York Jewish Agenda. The Forward reports:

Wisdom, 39, has aligned herself with some of the positions Mamdani has taken on countering antisemitism, including opposition to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism, which considers most forms of anti-Zionism as antisemitic. Mamdani has thus far declined to say how his administration will define antisemitism when determining which cases to investigate or pursue. While leading a Zionist organization, Wisdom has also called for more sympathy toward Palestinians, and in November 2023, Wisdom’s group, under her leadership, spearheaded a statement by liberal Jewish elected officials calling for a bilateral ceasefire in Gaza.

In her new role, Wisdom will serve as Mamdani’s point person to the Jewish community. Her appointment is another signal that Mamdani’s anti-Zionist posture will continue to factor importantly into his leadership of the city, which is home to the largest concentration of Jews outside Israel. Her challenge will be facilitating dialogue with people who hold widely diverging viewpoints, without overriding a mayor whose positions on Israel are deeply held and long-standing.

Fellowship of Christian Athletes Can Move Ahead Against School Officials on Two Counts

In Fellowship of Christian Athletes v. District of Columbia, (D DC, Feb. 3, 2026), the D.C. federal district court found that Fellowship of Christian Athletes' (FCA) claims against D.C. public schools and two school officials were not moot even though the school system revised its rules to allowed religious student organizations to give preference to members of the organization's religious affiliation. The school had originally revoked recognition of FCA because FCA required that students serving in a leadership capacity subscribe to a Statement of Faith and a policy of sexual purity. The court held that the individual defendants had qualified immunity as to FCA's various 1st Amendment claims, to their claims under RFRA, the Equal Access Act and the Equal Protection Clause. The court said, however:

Chancellor Ferebee and CIO Ruiz are not entitled to qualified immunity as to Counts VI and VII.  FCA alleges that the defendants selectively enforced DCPS’s Anti-Discrimination Policy on the basis of viewpoint (Count VI) and that enforcement of the policy against FCA violated FCA’s First Amendment right to expressive association (Count VII)....

In light of this Supreme Court and circuit case law, the Court concludes that the law was “sufficiently clear” that a “reasonable official” would have known that the challenged actions violated FCA’s First Amendment free speech and expressive association rights....

RFRA Defense to Indictment of Church Leader for Distributing Ayahuasca Fails

In United States v. Codi, (ND AL, Feb. 2, 2026), an Alabama federal district court denied defendant's motion to dismiss a criminal indictment charging her with possession of a controlled substance with an intent to distribute and with conspiracy. Defendant operated a website on behalf of her church, the "Temple of Umi", which sponsored ayahuasca retreats. Defendant claimed that the indictment violated her rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the Equal Protection clause. The court said in part:

... [T]he parties stipulated that the court could - for the purposes of the hearing - assume without deciding that Defendant is able to establish a prima facie case under RFRA. As such, the only issues left to be decided at this stage based on the hearing testimony were (1) whether the government had a compelling governmental interest in enforcing the Controlled Substances Act against Defendant and (2) whether the criminal prosecution of Defendant was the least restrictive means of achieving that interest....

... Defendant had been offered a plea agreement which would allow for pre-trial diversion and tolling of the Speedy Trial Act so long as she took the steps to obtain permission to legally handle DMT - either by filing a lawsuit or applying for a DEA exemption.... Defendant had been given that offer as recently as a week before the hearing and rejected the offer each time it was presented.  The Government argues this shows that prosecution is the least restrictive means necessary because Defendant was provided with a reasonable, less restrictive alternative, but rejected it....

... The Government has shown there is a compelling interest in preventing the diversion of DMT to secular users because, based on the evidence presented during the evidentiary hearing, there is a realistic probability and historical evidence of such diversion....

The Government presented evidence ... that the Temple of Umi is a business open to the public, with a nominal sign-up process. There was also evidence that emphasizes the non-religious benefits of ayahuasca and ayahuasca ceremonies put on by the Temple. In addition, the Government presented evidence that participants in the ayahuasca consumption ceremonies are not screened for their religious beliefs and thus it is easy for secular participants to obtain DMT at these ceremonies....

Journalist Don Lemon Indicted Under FACE Act Because of Church Anti-ICE Protest

As announced by Attorney General Pam Bondi on X last Tuesday:

At my direction, early this morning federal agents arrested Don Lemon, Trahern Jeen Crews, Georgia Fort, and Jamael Lydell Lundy, in connection with the coordinated attack on Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota.

Here is the full text of the January 29 grand jury indictment against journalist Don Lemon and the others. A federal magistrate judge had previously rejected a criminal complaint against Lemon saying that federal officials lacked probable cause to arrest the defendants.  In the Grand Jury indictment, defendants are charged with violating the federal conspiracy statute, 18 USC §241 and with violating the FACE Act 18 USC §248(a)(2). The FACE Act provides for penalizing any person who

(2) by force or threat of force or by physical obstruction, intentionally injures, intimidates or interferes with or attempts to injure, intimidate or interfere with any person lawfully exercising or seeking to exercise the First Amendment right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship; or

The indictment alleges in part:

3. After the service commenced, a group of approximately 20-40 agitators, including all of the defendants named in this Indictment, entered the Church in a coordinated takeover-style attack and engaged in acts of oppression, intimidation, threats, interference, and physical obstruction alleged herein. 

4. As a result of defendants’ conduct, the pastor and congregation were forced to terminate the Church's worship service, congregants fled the Church building out of fear for their safety, other congregants took steps to implement an emergency plan, and young children were left to wonder, as one child put it, if their parents were going to die....

As reported by NBC News: 

... Lemon ,,, said from inside the church, “We’re not part of the activists, but we’re here just reporting on them.”

Protesters say the church’s pastor, David Easterwood, is the acting director of an ICE field office in the city.,,,

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Hakan Ibrahim Apaydin, Prophet and King Figures in Sacred Texts: Theological Inconsistencies and the Problem of Textual Construction, (January 02, 2026).
• David M. Engel, Village Law in a Changing World: Justice and Alienation in Thailand, (January 15, 2026).
• Russell Bell, Unfalsifiable Claims and Unaccountable Power: Why Theocracy Requires Thought Control, (January 21, 2026).
• Mathew Akinlabi Onifade, Epistemic Injustice in Africa: A Philosophical Dialogue with the Science of Religion, (November 17, 2025).
• Steven Collis, Public Employees as a Reflection of a Religiously Diverse Culture, (99 Notre Dame L. Rev. Reflection 229 (2024)).
• Lawrence O. Gostin, The Supreme Court's 2026 Term-Public Health in Jeopardy, (JAMA Health Forum, volume 7, issue 1, 2026).
• Samuel Singer & Gillian Smith, From Mistake to Malice: Misgendering in Canadian Legal Proceedings, (January 19, 2026).
• Gokula Krishnan B, India’s Transgender Policy in Global Context: A Comparative Study with South Asia., (Social Science & Humanities Open, 2026).
• Jeffrey A. Pojanowski, Natural Law and Reading Positive Law: Moments of Moral Judgment in Legal Interpretation, (American Journal of Jurisprudence, Volume 71 (forthcoming 2026)).
• Julia Hunter, Transgender Rights Federalism: Protecting Gender-Affirming Care in State Court, (UC Law Journal, Volume 77 (Forthcoming April 2026)).
• Jason Brownlee, Efforts to Weaponize Title VI against Pro-Palestine Speech on University Campuses, (December 31, 2024).

From SSRN (Islamic Law):

• Abu Hayyan Saeed,, Islamic History , Fact or Fiction, (January 02, 2026).
• Sharat Fatema Angelic & Majdah Zawawi, Shurb Al-Khamr Under Islamic Criminal Law: Harm, Punishment, and Modern Legal Challenges, (January 04, 2026).
• Samiul Hasan, Executives in the Muslim Majority Countries: Practices and Lessons for Harm Prevention, (January 16, 2026).
• Ekaterina Ryzhkova, Religion As the Basis and Force of the Financial Policy of Muslim Countries, (November 25, 2025).
• Haseeb Fatima Saikhu & Rasham Armab Saikhu, Systematic Analysis of Inheritance Rights of Khuntha (Simple Hermaphrodite) and Khuntha Mushkil (Problematic Hermaphrodite) under Islamic Law and Pakistani Legal System, (Manchester Journal of Transnational Islamic Law & Practice Volume 21, Issue 4: 148-164, 2025).
• Sharat Fatema Angelic, Validity of Muslim Marriage Conducted via Video Call: An Islamic Jurisprudential Analysis, (January 16, 2026).
• Timur Kuran & Fasih Zulfiqar, Uneven Modernization in the Muslim World, (Annual Review of Economics, volume 18 (2026)).
• Arun Muralidhar, A Sharia-Compliant, Heterogeneous-Agent, Asset Pricing Model: With Asset Allocation and Risk-Adjusted Performance, (January 24, 2026).
• Shahid Mahmood, Artificial Intelligence and Human Identity: (Islamic Ethical Challenges), (January 06, 2026).
• Ming Sen Thong, Blockchain for Islamic Social Financing and Islamic Financial Institutions, (January 04, 2026).

From SmartCILP:

• BYU Law Review, Volume 50 (2024-2025), Issue 5.