Court Says Kaporos Ceremony Not Covered By Unfair Competition Law

In Animal Protection and Rescue League, Inc. v. Chabad of Irvine, (CA Super. Ct., June 23, 2017) a California trial court ruled that a challenge by an animal rights group to the Jewish pre-Yom Kippur ritual of kaporos should be dismissed.   The suit alleged violations of California's Unfair Competition Law which prohibits unlawful business practices, contending that the manner in which chickens used in the ritual were kept, slaughtered and disposed of violates various state and local laws.  The court held however that the kaporos ceremony is not a "business act or business practice," explaining:

Chabad-Irvine's purchase of chickens for the participants to use in the ... Kaporos ritual does not transform its conduct from that of a synagogue meeting ... the religious and spiritual needs of the community to that of a commercial enterprise....

... [M]any religious services or ceremonies result in donations being solicited and made (e.g. when offering plates or baskets are passed among a congregation during a religious service...). But that does not convert those religious activities, rituals and observances into business practices.

First Liberty issued a press release announcing the decision and also provides links to the pleadings and court orders in the case. Orange County Register reported on the decision.

Israel's Cabinet Suspends Agreement On Egalitarian Prayer Space At Western Wall

As reported by Haaretz and the Jerusalem Post, Israel's Cabinet on Sunday voted to suspend the agreement with Judaism's Reform and Conservative movements and the Women of the Wall movement approved by the Cabinet last year to construct a separate prayer space at the Western Wall for egalitarian prayer. Implementation of the agreement had already been long delayed.  (See prior related posting.)  Now negotiations will begin on a new plan acceptable to the ultra-Orthodox political parties.  Yesterday's move came after pressure from the ultra-Orthodox members Prime Minister Netanyahu's coalition. At the same time, the Cabinet approved continued construction to improve the Robinson's Arch area in the southern part of the Western Wall complex away from the main plaza.This area is currently used for mixed-gender prayer.  With yesterday's decision, attention now moves to the High Court of Justice where a lawsuit filed previously seeks to require the government to provide egalitarian prayer space at the Western Wall.  Some Cabinet members blamed the filing of that lawsuit for yesterday's Cabinet action, saying it undercut the possibility of informal resolution.

Union for Reform Judaism president Rabbi Rick Jacobs reacted strongly to the Cabinet's decision, calling it "an unconscionable insult to the majority of world Jewry."

Israeli Court Says El Al May Not Ask Women To Change Seats To Accommodate Religious Concerns of Male Passengers

According to the New York Times, an Israeli court in Jerusalem yesterday ruled that El Al Airline's policy of asking women passengers to move seats in order to accommodate religious beliefs on modesty of ultra-Orthodox Jewish men violates Israel's anti-discrimination laws.  Requests for seating changes by male passengers who are concerned about inadvertent physical contact have delayed flights in recent years.  According to the Times:

In discussions outside the courtroom, the two sides in the case agreed on a judgment proposed by the judge, declaring that it is forbidden for a crew member to ask a passenger to change seats at the request of another passenger based on gender. El Al agreed to tell its cabin staff in writing about the prohibition within 45 days, and to provide training in how to deal with such situations within six months.

The court also awarded plaintiff, 83-year old Renee Rabinowitz, damages equivalent to $1800(US). [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

New York Appeals Court Dismisses Suit Opposing Kaporos Ritual

In a 3-2 decision, a New York state appellate court has dismissed a mandamus action seeking to require the New York Police Department and the New York City Health Department to enforce various Health Code, animal cruelty and other laws to stop the Orthodox Jewish ritual of kaporos.  The pre-Yom Kippur ritual involves using live chickens (which are later slaughtered) in an atonement ceremony.  In Alliance to End Chickens as Kaporos v New York City Police Department, (App. Div. June 6, 2017), the majority held that mandamus is available only to enforce a non-discretionary duty on the part of government officials.  Here the laws that plaintiffs seek to require defendants to enforce involve judgment and discretion of law enforcement officials.  Justice Gesmer (joined by Presiding Justice Andrias) dissented.

Hebrew Teacher's ADA Suit Barred By Ministerial Exception Doctrine

Grussgott v. Milwaukee Jewish Day School, Inc., (ED WI, May 30, 2017), a Wisconsin federal district court held that the ministerial exception doctrine requires dismissal of a suit by a teacher in a Jewish Day School who claims she was fired in violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act.  The court concluded that plaintiff, who taught Hebrew to second and third graders, and had taught an integrated Hebrew-Jewish Studies curriculum, qualifies as a "minister" for purposes of the ministerial exception doctrine.  In rejecting her argument that her teaching of Hebrew was cultural, not religious, the court nevertheless commented that "a religious organization could abuse this deference by claiming that certain apparently secular activities are actually religious."

One Pleads Guilty To Voter Fraud In Attempt To Get Approval For Townhouses For Hasidic Jews

As previously reported, the village of Bloomingburg, New York has been embroiled in a battle over whether an ultra-Orthodox Jewish community would expand into the town.  Real estate developer Kenneth Nakdimen and his associates sought to build a  396-unit townhouse development there to be marketed to Hasidic Jews.  They faced local opposition which the developers said was fueled by anti-Semitism.  As reported by the Wall Street Journal, the developers were ultimately indicted by the federal government for their voting fraud tactics in seeking to obtain approval for their project.  Yesterday the U.S. Attorney's office for the Southern District of New York announced that Nakdimen has pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to corrupt the electoral process. The announcement describes the basis for the charges:

[B]y late 2013, the first of their real estate developments had met local opposition, and still remained under construction and uninhabitable.  When met with resistance, rather than seek to advance their real estate development project through legitimate means, NAKDIMEN and others instead decided to corrupt the democratic electoral process in Bloomingburg by falsely registering voters and paying bribes for voters who would help elect public officials favorable to their project.

....   NAKDIMEN and others took steps to cover up their scheme to register voters who did not actually live in Bloomingburg by, among other things, creating and back-dating false leases and placing items like toothbrushes and toothpaste in unoccupied apartments to make it seem as if the falsely registered voters lived there.

UPDATE: On June 6, the U.S. Attorney's office announced that a second defendant, Shalom Lamm, has now also pleaded guilty to conspiracy to corrupt the electoral process.

[Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Long Skirts, Title II vs. Title VII

In Jalal v. Lucille Roberts Health Clubs, Inc., (SD NY, May 22, 2017), a New York federal district court dismissed a suit brought by a Jewish woman against a health club which refused to allow her to wear a long skirt while using gym equipment.  In the suit, plaintiff Yosefa Jalal alleged that by refusing to allow her to dress as required by her religious beliefs, the health club violated the public accommodation provisions (Title II) of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The court disagreed, saying in part:

Here, plaintiff fails to allege facts plausibly supporting a minimal inference of discriminatory motivation. Although plaintiff contends that she was treated differently than other Lucille Roberts members on the basis of her religion, the factual allegations only suggest that she was treated differently because she insisted on wearing an article of clothing that, according to defendant, was inappropriate gym attire.... Nowhere does the complaint allege that defendant selectively enforced its dress code against Jewish women.... There is no indication ... that claims grounded solely in disparate impact—and lacking any allegation of discriminatory intent—are cognizable under Title II.

Consumerist reports on the decision.

Meanwhile, JTA reported yesterday on a religious discrimination in employment lawsuit filed in New York state court.  Plaintiff Hadas Goldfarb, an Orthodox Jewish woman who was hired by New York Presbyterian Hospital as a paramedic, was dismissed when when she insisted on wearing a skirt instead of pants as required by the hospital's dress code.  Unlike the public accommodation section of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the employment discrimination provisions (Title VII) require employers to reasonably accommodate an employee's religious exercise. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

$20M Awarded In Sexual Abuse Suit Against Rabbi and His Yeshiva

The New Haven Register reports that yesterday a federal district court jury in Hartford, Connecticut awarded $15 million in compensatory damages and $5 million in punitive damages to plaintiff for sexual abuse he suffered from 2001 to 2005 while a student at Yeshiva of New Haven, an Orthodox Jewish day school. The jury found both Rabbi Daniel Greer and his Yeshiva liable.  According to the lawsuit, the abuse began when plaintiff was 15 and Greer was in his 60's.

EEOC Sues Over Refusing To Accommodate Jewish Employee's Holiday Observance

The EEOC announced on Tuesday that it has filed a Title VII lawsuit against XPO Last Mile, Inc., a delivery company, for rescinding a job offer to Tzvi McCloud who refused to report for his first day of work on Rosh Hashanah.  A company vice president allegedly told McCloud that if he gave him a religious accommodation for his Jewish religious beliefs, he would have to extend accommodations to other employees as well.

Court Dismisses California Law Challenge To Chabad's Kapparot Ceremony

In United Poultry Concerns v. Chabad of Irvine, (CD CA, May 12, 2017), a California federal district court dismissed a suit by an animal rights organization claiming that the annual Kapparot ceremony conducted by an Orthodox Jewish organization violates California's Unfair Competition Law.  The UCL provides civil remedies for “any unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business act or practice.” The complaint alleges that the ritual as implemented by Chabad of Irvine violates the state's ban on "intentional and malicious killing of animals" other than for use as food (California Penal Code Sec. 597(a), 599c).  Chabad charges $27 to each person for furnishing and disposing of the chicken used in the pre-Yom Kippur ceremony. (See prior posting.)

In dismissing the lawsuit, the court said:

The Court cannot find, and Plaintiff does not cite a single case in which the acceptance of a donation in connection with the performance of religious ritual has been treated as a “business act” under the UCL. Moreover, the Court finds that Defendant Chabad of Irvine does not participate nor compete as a business in the commercial market by performing a religious atonement ritual that involves donations. For these reasons, the Court finds that Plaintiff fails to state a claim against Chabad of Irvine for a violation of the Unfair Competition Law (B.P.C. § 17200 et seq.)

First Liberty Institute issued a press release announcing the decision.  Jewish Press reported on the decision.

Suit Challenges Zoning Laws As Discriminatory Against Orthodox Jews

Agudath Israel of America filed suit this week in a New Jersey federal district court contending that zoning ordinances enacted this year by the Township of Jackson, New Jersey were motivated by discriminatory animus against the Orthodox Jewish community and were designed "to prevent that community from being able to have the necessary educational institutions to teach their youth, and to discourage that community from residing in Jackson Township."  The complaint (full text) in Agudath Israel of America v. Township of Jackson, New Jersey, (D NJ, filed 5/8/2017), alleges in part:

The Ordinances are the latest action taken by the Township in a long campaign to erect a wall on its border with Lakewood Township, where many Orthodox Jews live, in order to discourage them from moving into Jackson. Its Mayor has told residents “Don’t sell” to the Orthodox Jewish community, its Township Council President said that a suggestion that Orthodox Jews move into communities such as Jackson was “reprehensible”....

The Lakewood Scoop reports on the lawsuit.

Trump Declares May As Jewish American Heritage Month

The Times of Israel and JTA both report that on Friday President Trump issued a Proclamation designating May as Jewish American Heritage Month.  Similar Proclamations have been issued by presidents since 2006.  The Proclamation, which specifically mentions Trump's daughter Ivanka, his son-in-law Jared and his grandchildren all of whom are Jewish, reads in part:

During Jewish American Heritage Month, we celebrate our nation’s strong American Jewish heritage, rooted in the ancient faith and traditions of the Jewish people. The small band of Dutch Jews who first immigrated in 1654, seeking refuge and religious liberty, brought with them their families, their religion, and their cherished customs, which they have passed on from generation to generation.

When the full text of the Proclamation becomes available on the White House website, I will link to it.

UPDATE: Here is the full text of the Proclamation.

Criminal Complaints Filed Against JCC Bomb Threat Perpetrator

The Department of Justice announced that on Friday criminal complaints were filed against Michael Kadar, a dual American-Israeli citizen living in Israel, who allegedly telephoned bomb threats to Jewish institutions around the U.S. earlier this year. According to the Criminal Complaint filed in federal district court in Florida:

Beginning on January 4, 2017, and continuing until March 7, 2017, an individual, later identified as KADAR, made at least 245 threatening telephone calls involving bomb threats and active shooter threats. A significant portion of the threats targeted Jewish community centers ("JCCs"), and other historically Jewish institutions such as Jewish schools and Anti-Defamation League offices.

A Criminal Complaint was also filed against Kadar in a Georgia federal district court charging him with making a series of "swatting" calls to public schools and residences in Athens, Georgia.  The Forward reports on developments. [Thanks to Michael Lieberman for the lead.]

UPDATE: In Israel today, Kadar was charged in a Tel Aviv Magistrate's Court with various other crimes, including an attempt to extort a U.S. Senator, Ernesto Lopez. (Haaretz).

Case Charging HUD With Antisemitism In Investigation Moves Ahead

In Township of Lakewood, New Jersey v. Castro, (D NJ, April 3, 2017), a New Jersey federal district court refused to dismiss on the pleadings a lawsuit against the Department of Housing and Urban Development alleging that its investigation of the housing assistance program in Lakewood, New Jersey reflected hostility toward Jews and the practice of Orthodox Judaism. Among other things, the court found that "Plaintiffs’ allegations plausibly suggest HUD’s conduct imposed a substantial burden on Plaintiffs’ exercise of their faith, in violation of the RFRA...." HUD's action ultimately resulted in administration of housing funds being transferred away from Lakewood.

Challenge To Boca's Zoning For Chabad Again Dismissed For Lack of Standing

As previously reported, last July a Florida federal district court dismissed on standing grounds a challenge by residents and taxpayers of Boca Raton to zoning changes by the city that permitted a Chabad (Hasidic Jewish) group to construct a religious center.  Plaintiffs, who identified themselves as Christians, claim that the city's actions violated the Establishment clause, the equal protection and due process clauses, and the Florida Constitution. Subsequently plaintiffs filed an amended complaint attempting to find standing by describing plaintiffs as citizens and residents of the United States residing in Boca Raton, and as members of the Christian religion.  In Gagliardi v. City of Boca Raton, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46805 (SD FL, March 27, 2017), the court again found that plaintiffs lack standing, saying in part:

Far from the particularized and concrete injury required to confer standing, Plaintiffs have simply reasserted, again and again, a list of conjectural injuries to the whole of the area surrounding the proposed Chabad site, and potentially beyond.

Russian Officials Forcing Sochi's Rabbi To Leave The Country

Interfax reports that Rabbi Ari Leib Edelkopf who has led the Jewish community in the Russian city of Sochi is being forced to leave Russia.  Edelkopf, a U.S. citizen since 1978, obtained a Russian temporary resident permit in 2015. The next year he applied for Russian citizenship.  In December of 2016 the Krasnodar Territory police carried out a background check in processing the application and received information, still undisclosed publicly or to Edelkopf, that led police to cancel his temporary resident permit on the ground of "his actions creating a threat to Russia's security." The Sochi's Central District Court upheld the decision, as did the appellate collegium of the Krasnodar Territory Court. At the 18-minute appellate hearing, officials refused to disclose the basis for the action against Edelkopf, claiming it is a state secret.

Belgian Court Rules Kosher Slaughter Is Protected Religious Right

Jerusalem Post reported yesterday that a court in Belgium has ruled that restricting kosher slaughtering of animals "excessively and unreasonably restricts freedom of religion and seriously harms the fundamental laws of human rights and religious rights in Belgium."  The Conference of European Rabbis announced yesterday that the constitutional court of Belgium’s southern Wallonia region handed down the ruling after several legislators in the parliament of Wallonia introduced legislation to subject kosher slaughtering to the general requirement of Belgian law that animals be stunned before slaughter. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

In Israel, Retailer Takes Criticism For Catalog Aimed At Ultra-Orthodox Jews

As U.S. law struggles to balance free exercise rights with legal non-discrimination mandates, this story from Israel yesterday demonstrates that new permutations may well arise.  The Forward and Jewish News Online report that the Swedish furniture retailer Ikea is receiving criticism for the catalog its Israeli affiliate distributed hoping to attract Haredi (ultra-Orthodox Jewish) customers.  The catalog contains no photos of women.  Only men and boys in clothing usually worn by religious Jews are shown using Ikea furniture. It is not unusual for Haredi newspapers to exclude photos of women.

Jewish Groups Criticize Trump's Response To Questions About Anti-Semitism

JTA reports that the American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League have issued statements criticizing President Donald Trump's response at his news conference yesterday to a question from reporter Jake Turx of Ami Magazine regarding anti-Semitism.  Here is a transcript of much of the exchange taken from the White House's full transcript of the news conference:

Q    ... [W]hat we are concerned about, and what we haven’t really heard be addressed is an uptick in anti-Semitism and how the government is planning to take care of it.  There have been reports out that 48 bomb threats have been made against Jewish centers all across the country in the last couple of weeks.  There are people who are committing anti-Semitic acts or threatening to --

THE PRESIDENT:  You see, he said he was going to ask a very simple, easy question.  And it’s not.  It’s not.  Not a simple question, not a fair question.  Okay, sit down.  I understand the rest of your question.

So here’s the story, folks.  Number one, I am the least anti-Semitic person that you’ve ever seen in your entire life.  Number two, racism -- the least racist person.  In fact, we did very well relative to other people running as a Republican....

... See, he lied about -- he was going to get up and ask a very straight, simple question.  So you know, welcome to the world of the media.  But let me just tell you something -- that I hate the charge.  I find it repulsive.  I hate even the question because people that know me -- and you heard the Prime Minister, you heard Netanyahu yesterday -- did you hear him, Bibi?  He said, I’ve known Donald Trump for a long time, and then he said, forget it.

So you should take that, instead of having to get up and ask a very insulting question like that.

The AJC's statement also criticized Trump's non-responsiveness to a similar question at his news conference (full transcript) on Wednesday with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.

Jewish School's Challenge To Zoning Decision Is Ripe For Litigation

In Congregation Kollel, Inc. v. Township of Howell, N.J., (D NJ, Feb. 16, 2017), a New Jersey federal district court rejected a township's lack of ripeness defense in a suit by an Orthodox Jewish organization that is attempting to construct a classroom building, dormitory and faculty housing for a Talmudic academy.  The township rejected the academy's permit application and instead insisted that it apply for a zoning variance. Plaintiffs, believing that the land use decision was based on religious animus towards the Orthodox Jewish faith, sued claiming violations of RLUIPA, the Fair Housing Act, the 1st and 14th Amendments and state law.  The township argued that the suit should not be decided until plaintiffs had applied for a zoning variance.  The court held, however, that a variance application would not result in development of any additional factual record and that (except for one state law claim) plaintiffs can move ahead with their suit.