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.

Court Refuses to Enjoin Coinage Containing "In God We Trust" Motto

In Clayman v. Bessent, (SD FL, Jan. 8, 2026), a Florida federal district court denied plaintiff's request for a preliminary injunction prohibiting the federal government from designing or producing any coins or currency containing the "Divine Name" of God. Plaintiff contends that the national motto on coins and currency violates the Establishment Clause and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. His complaint focuses on a proposed new coin that would carry the likeness of Donald Trump and the motto In God We Trust. The court said in part:

The United States of America will celebrate its 250th anniversary this year on July 4, 2026. The Declaration of Independence refers to "Nature's God." The Pledge of Allegiance refers to "one Nation under God." 4 U.S.C. § 4. The use of the word God on coins began in 1864 on the two-cent coin. "In God We Trust" began to appear on U.S. paper currency in 1957, as required by Public Law 84-140. By statute, all coins must contain the "in God we trust" language. See 31 U.S.C. § 5112. In light of this history, statutory authority, and case law, there is simply no basis for this Court to grant the broad injunctive relief sought by Plaintiff.

Supreme Court Review Sought by High School Pro-Life Group Over Free Speech Rights

 A petition for certiorari (full text) was filed yesterday with the U.S. Supreme Court in E.D. v. Noblesville School District, (Sup. Ct., cert. filed 1/28/2026). At issue in the case is a high school's refusal to permit a student pro-life group to post flyers in the school because of the political content of the flyers. The dispute eventually led to the suspension of the pro-life group for several months. The 7th Circuit upheld the school's action. The petition for review filed with the Supreme Court sets out the Question Presented in part as follows:

The Seventh Circuit upheld the school’s censorship under Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, ... on the theory that a “reasonable observer could easily conclude that the flyers reflected the school’s endorsement.”... In so doing, it exacerbated a deep, longstanding circuit split over when Hazelwood’s reduced speech protection applies. 

The question presented is: 

Whether Hazelwood applies (1) whenever student speech might be erroneously attributed to the school, as the Fifth, Seventh, and Tenth Circuits have held; (2) when student speech occurs in the context of an “organized and structured educational activity,” as the Third Circuit has held; or (3) only when student speech is part of the “curriculum,” as the Sixth and Eleventh Circuits have held.

ADF issued a press release announcing the filing of the cert. petition.

4th Circuit: School Gender Identity Guidelines Do Not Violate Teacher's 1st Amendment Rights

 In Polk v. Montgomery County Public Schools, (4th Cir., Jan. 28, 2026), the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, affirmed a Maryland federal district court's denial of a preliminary injunction sought by a substitute teacher who objected on free speech and free exercise grounds to the school district's Guidelines for Student Gender Identity. The court rejected plaintiff's free exercise claim, concluding that the Guidelines are neutral and generally applicable and that they satisfy the rational basis standard. The majority said in part:

... Polk believes that gender is rigid, based on her understanding of Christianity.  And referring to her students by a gender that is not consistent with the student’s gender assigned at birth places a requirement on Polk, that she says is at odds with her faith....

Distilled to its core, the thrust of Polk’s appellate position is that, because persons who hold religious views are those most impacted by the Guidelines, they cannot be deemed “neutral.” But that logic turns the well-established neutrality analysis on its head.  As the court explained, the Complaint “alleges no facts from which the Court could infer religious animus.” ...  That a certain religious practice is incidentally burdened by the Guidelines is not sufficient. Rather, the Guidelines must be motivated by religious hostility....

The majority also rejected plaintiff's free speech claim, saying in part:

 ... [W]e agree with the district court that the Guidelines’s mandate does not concern the speech of a private citizen, but establishes the official duties of a public-school teacher.  More pointedly, how a teacher addresses a particular student in a particular classroom — and whether a teacher communicates with a student’s parent — is merely a part of that teacher’s job description....

 ... And “[w]hen an employee engages in speech that is part of the employee’s job duties, the employee’s words are really the words of the employer.  The employee is effectively the employer’s spokesperson.” ...

Judge Wilkinson dissented, contending that the Guidelines violated plaintiff's free speech rights.  He said in part:

In holding instead that the Free Speech Clause does not provide even qualified protection to Ms. Polk’s speech, the majority leaves teachers completely vulnerable to becoming the unwilling mouthpieces of government messaging. Although transgender rights advocates may now cheer the majority opinion, they will find today’s cure in truth a poison when states enact legally indistinguishable policies preventing teachers from using preferred pronouns in schools. And because nothing prevents school systems from pushing this newfound control much further than mere pronoun usage, I respectfully dissent....

This case is, without question, about compelled speech—a detail to which the majority gives short shrift....

... My qualm with the majority is simply that we cannot categorically write all in-class speech out of the First Amendment. Garcetti has its place, but chiefly with regard to core curricular functions. Speech at the noncurricular margins of a teacher’s job should remain subject to the same standards that we have always applied. This is no jurisprudential revolution....

 Ms. Polk’s case is one of many plaguing our nation’s educational system. Across all levels of education—elementary to college—LGBT rights, DEI, antisemitism, systemic racism, and innumerable other issues have made our schools hotbeds of vehement sociopolitical debate. Silencing voices and compelling affirmations to government preferred messaging do nothing to temper the vitriol; on the contrary, such actions foster further hostility....