9th Circuit Stays Order Pending Cert. Petition In Case Upholding California's "Change Therapy for Minors" Ban

As previously reported, last week the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals denied en banc review of a 3-judge panel's decision that upheld California Senate Bill 1172. The bill bans state-licensed mental health providers from engaging in sexual orientation change efforts with patients under 18.  Now in Pickup v. Brown, (9th Cir., Feb. 3, 2014), the 9th Circuit has agreed to stay its mandate in the case while appellants file a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court. Liberty Counsel issued a press release announcing the stay.

UK Appeals Court OK's Transport Agency Rule Banning Controversial Ad By Christian Non-Profit

In Core Issues Trust v. Transport for London, (EWCA, Jan. 27, 2014), Britain's Court of Appeal upheld a decision by London's public transportation agency to refuse to allow a Christian non-profit organization that supports gays who wish to change their sexual preference to buy ad space on the side of London's buses. The organization wanted to post an ad that read: "Not Gay! Ex-Gay, Post-Gay and Proud, Get Over It". The court held that the policy of the transportation agency to refuse ads that are likely to cause widespread or serious offence or which relate to matters of public controversy or sensitivity does not violated the freedom of expression or freedom of religion provisions (Art. 9 and 10) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Independent reports on the decision. [Thanks to Paul Diamond for the lead.]

Nigeria and Uganda Parliaments Pass Harsh Anti-Gay Laws; Final Approval By President/ Prime Minister Uncertain

Daily Trust reports that last week Nigeria's National Assembly gave final approval to the conference committee's version of the Same-Sex Marriage Prohibition Bill 2011.  It imposes a 14-year prison sentence on same-sex couples who enter a marriage or civil union.  Ten year prison sentences are prescribed for anyone who witnesses or aids or abets a same-sex union.  Section 2 of the bill provides:

Any person, who registers, operates or participates in gay clubs, societies and organisations or directly or indirectly make public show of same sex amorous relationship in Nigeria commits an offence and shall each be liable on conviction to a term of 10 years in prison.

The bill still needs the signature of President Goodluck Jonathan to become law.  Amnesty International on Friday called on the President to reject the bill. (AFP).

Meanwhile, on Friday, Uganda's Parliament passed an anti-homosexuality law described as draconian.  The Guardian reports on some of its provisions:

British campaigner Peter Tatchell noted that the bill extends the existing penalty of life imprisonment for same-sex intercourse to all other same-sex behaviour, including the mere touching of another person with the intent to have homosexual relations.

Promoting homosexuality and aiding and abetting others to commit homosexual acts will be punishable by five to seven years jail.... "These new crimes are likely to include membership and funding of LGBT organisations, advocacy of LGBT human rights, supportive counselling of LGBT persons and the provision of condoms or safer sex advice to LGBT people.

"A person in authority – gay or heterosexual – who fails to report violators to the police within 24 hours will be sentenced to three years behind bars."

He added: "Astonishingly, the new legislation has an extra-territorial jurisdiction. It will also apply to Ugandan citizens or foreign residents of Uganda who commit these 'crimes' while abroad, in countries where such behaviour is not a criminal offence. Violators overseas will be subjected to extradition, trial and punishment in Uganda.

The Guardian adds:

[The bill] was opposed by Ugandan prime minister Amama Mbabazi, who argued that not enough MPs were present for a quorum, a challenge that might yet discourage Museveni from signing the bill into law. The threat of a withdrawal of western aid could also play into his decision.

Canada's First Religious Law School Clears Major Approval Hurdle

In Canada, Trinity Western University, a Christian liberal arts university in British Columbia, cleared a major hurdle this week in its bid to open the country's first private religious law school.  In a December 16 press release, the Federation of Law Societies of Canada announced that it has granted preliminary approval for the school's program. As reported by The Tyee yesterday, the Council of Canadian Law Deans had expressed concern over the school’s mandatory Community Covenant agreement for students, faculty, and staff. (See prior posting.) The Covenant calls for abstention from alcohol, tobacco, illegal drugs, and "sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman." The Deans objected that the Covenant may lead to illegal discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The Federation of Law Societies is considering adding a non-discrimination requirement for all law schools. The proposed new law school now must still obtain approval from British Columbia's Ministry of Advanced Education.

India's Supreme Court Reverses Lower Court's Invalidation of Ban On Homosexual Acts

In Koushal v. NAZ Foundation, (Sup. Ct. India, Dec. 11, 2013), a 2-judge panel of India's Supreme Court reversed a lower court ruling that had held unconstitutional Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code insofar as it bans homosexual sexual acts in private between consenting adults. (See prior posting.) Rejecting the lower court's holding that the statute violated constitutional provisions on equal protection and non-discrimination, Justice Singhvi wrote:

Those who indulge in carnal intercourse in the ordinary course and those who indulge in carnal intercourse against the order of nature constitute different classes and the people falling in the later category cannot claim that Section 377 suffers from the vice of arbitrariness and irrational classification.

The Supreme Court also rejected the lower court's holding that the statute infringes the substantive due process right to privacy:

In its anxiety to protect the so-called rights of LGBT persons and to declare that Section 377 IPC violates the right to privacy, autonomy and dignity, the High Court has extensively relied upon the judgments of other jurisdictions. Though these judgments shed considerable light on various aspects of this right and are informative in relation to the plight of sexual minorities, we feel that they cannot be applied blindfolded for deciding the constitutionality of the law enacted by the Indian legislature.

Responding to the argument that police have misused the law, the Supreme Court said:

Respondent No.1 attacked Section 377 IPC on the ground that the same has been used to perpetrate harassment, blackmail and torture on ... those belonging to the LGBT community.  [T]he mere fact that the section is misused by police authorities and others is not a reflection of the vires of the section. It might be a relevant factor for the Legislature to consider while judging the desirability of amending Section 377 IPC.

Times of India reports on the decision.