Administrative Law Judge Sues Over Requirement To Watch LGBT Diversity Training Video

According to yesterday's Houston Press, a Social Security Administrative Law Judge has filed a federal court lawsuit claiming religious discrimination after the agency refused to accede to his religious objections to viewing a 17-minute LGBT diversity training video.  In the lawsuit, ALJ Gary Suttles claims that the refusal by the Houston office's chief administrative law judge to grant him a religious accommodation and her insistence that he watch or read a transcript of the video created a hostile work environment.

1st Circuit: No Qualified Immunity In Establishment Clause Suit Against Puerto Rico Police Officials

In Marrero-Mendez v. Calixto-Rodriguez, (1st Cir., July 19, 2016), the U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with a Puerto Rico federal district court that Puerto Rico police officials could not claim qualified immunity in a suit against them challenging opening of police formation meetings with Christian prayer. When plaintiff, an open atheist, complained to his commander about the prayers, the commander told him to stand aside, and shouted to the police formation that plaintiff was standing apart because "he doesn't believe in what we believe in." When plaintiff filed an administrative complaint, he was reassigned to duties that effectively demoted him.  The court concluded:

However complex the nuances of the Establishment Clause doctrine may be for cases without the direct coercion present in this case, a reasonable officer in March 2012 would have known that appellants' conduct amounted to direct and tangible coercion, a paradigmatic example of an impermissible establishment of religion.

Judge Censured For Pressuring Staff To Engage In Prayer and Religious Activity

The ABA Journal reported yesterday on a decision last month by the State of New York Commission on Judicial Conduct censuring Bronx County Judge Mary Brigantti-Hughes for repeatedly using her court staff to perform child care and personal tasks and for asking her staff to pray with her in chambers, attend religious events outside regular working hours and photocopy religious materials. In In re Proceeding in Relation to Mary Brigantti-Hughes, (Dec. 17, 2013), the Commission held that the judge's activities went beyond merely using empty court space during the lunch hour for Bible study or religious meetings that had been approved by the Office of Court Administration. The Commission said:

repeatedly asking her staff to join her in [prayer] sessions misused the prestige of her judicial position, added an element of implicit coercion and crossed the line into impropriety.... Moreover, inviting members of her court staff to attend church-related events after court hours ... was also implicitly coercive.... By creating an environment in which some staff felt pressure to engage in religious activities, her actions impinged on the important separation between church and state, one of the most basic tenets of the federal and state constitutions.