A second former Port Allen police officer has filed a lawsuit alleging Police Chief Esdron Brown consistently forced his religion on his officer corps through mandatory meetings, and further claimed the chief used God's will as reasoning for unjust promotions.
Robert Cannon Jr.,... , filed a federal civil rights case ... alleging the chief's repeated mention of religion and religious-focused meetings created a hostile work environment.
WARNING TO OUR FRIENDS IN BOSSIER SCHOOLS (Please share):
Last night we received very credible information that atheist litigation groups in CA have contacted private investigators in our area to try to hire them to obtain hidden video of Christian student groups and activities at Benton High School and potentially other Bossier Parish schools.
Unfortunately, this is to be expected now that these groups perceive the Bossier Parish School District as an ATM machine for attorney fee awards in what they believe will be easy Establishment Clause lawsuits. They are wrong, as our district is following the law--even as we fight vigorously to defend religious freedom. Sadly, Bossier schools will have to endure this legal harassment from the atheist groups for a while now, so everyone needs to be prepared.According to an AP report, Americans United for Separation of Church and State says it has not hired private investigators, and the school district's attorney says he has no first hand knowledge of this kind of activity.
Drag Queen Story Time entails a group of male University of Louisiana at Lafayette students reading books to young children while dressed in women’s clothing. Library staff will select the books, which are to be appropriate for children ages three to six. It is scheduled for Oct. 6 at the main branch downtown.The attorney filing the lawsuit for the religious groups is Christophe Sevier, who has filed numerous suits around the country contending that homosexuality is a "religion." (See prior posting). Commenting on the Louisiana lawsuit, Sevier said:
The evidence would suggest that the self identified transgendered. They are using a government facility to show that the governments backs their worldview to then target children, to indoctrinate them under a faith based ideology.
The Corner Bar is known as a gathering spot for homosexuals. Roy believes that homosexuality is a sin. He preaches against homosexuality, as well as drinking alcohol, the use of drugs, fornication, and other topics.... On this night, they gathered at a telephone pole across the street from the Corner Bar. Roy was wearing an orange jump suit to demonstrate that he is a “prisoner of Christ” and to pose the questions to others, “Whose prisoner are you?”. At various times, he was also carrying a sixfoot cross made of cedar 4 x 4s. He normally approaches people and says something short to “startle” them or “stop” them. He cannot “afford to” be concerned about other people’s feelings because it might alter his message. Roy tells people that they are “going to Hell,” uses the terms “homosexual” and “whore,” and will tell people that “their father is the devil.” He raises his voice, shouts, and uses “strong Biblical language” to convey his message.
Sergeant Booth issued a citation to Roy for disturbing the peace based upon Falcon’s complaint to him, in which she said Roy followed her across the street, called her names, and scared her. Falcon’s complaints were corroborated by Falcon appearing scared and by her direct identification of Roy. Sergeant Booth did not issue a citation to Roy for preaching in a public forum. Viewed from the standpoint of an objectively reasonable police officer, Booth had probable cause, and is entitled to qualified immunity.Plaintiff's claims for injunctive and declaratory relief and attorneys' fees were set for trial.
America is no stranger to anti-Semitism, which is often rooted in prejudice against a person based on his heritage/ethnicity without regard to the person’s particular religious beliefs. Jewish citizens have been excluded from certain clubs or neighborhoods, and they have been denied jobs and other opportunities based on the fact that they were Jewish, with no particular concern as to a given individual’s religious leanings. Thus, they have been treated like a racial or ethnic group that Title VII was designed to protect from employment discrimination based on membership in that group.AP reports on the decision.
Not all burdens on religion are unconstitutional and the court may consider important governmental interests in assessing a limitation of a party’s First Amendment rights....
It was Breanna’s delay in filing her motion that required the hearing on the continuance to be held on the asserted holy day. In addition, Breanna’s claim that she was unable to file her motion sooner because of “confusion” about the date of the holy day is not plausible, since she could have consulted a calendar or a religious official to determine the date well before the afternoon prior to the hearing which had been scheduled two months earlier.
[T]he trial court found that Ms. Dicharry's "reluctance to have her child vaccinated arises from a personal, moral, or cultural feeling against vaccination for her minor child." The trial court found that "[ t]hese views and feelings are more in the nature of a secular philosophy than a religious belief." Considering the record, we find no manifest error in the trial court's factual determinations.
Wendy Vitter, nominated by President Trump for a federal judgeship, tried Wednesday to walk back several controversial comments she made about abortion and birth control.
Questioned by skeptical Democrats at her confirmation hearing, she maintained she could "put aside" her long-held "pro-life" advocacy, and as a judge enforce the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision on abortion rights.
In particular, Vitter sought to distance herself from a brochure she had appeared to endorse while leading a panel at a pro-life conference in 2013. The panel was called "Abortion Hurts Women," and the brochure promoted a variety of unsubstantiated claims linking birth control pills to breast cancer, cervical and liver cancers, and "violent death."
People of Jewish heritage are protected as a distinct race under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Sharre Tefila Congregation v. Cobb, 481 U.S. 615 (1987). As such, employment discrimination against an individual based upon his Jewish ethnic heritage is prohibited under 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2.Yahoo Sports and the Bayou Brief report on the lawsuit.
3. School officials throughout the Bossier Parish School System regularly deliver or promote the delivery of Christian prayers at school-sponsored events. Prayers begin and often end graduation ceremonies, sporting events, sports teams’ practices and banquets, pep rallies, and student-council meetings. Many of these school-sponsored events are also held in churches, including within the sanctuary or other rooms bearing religious iconography, thus creating an atmosphere closer to Sunday school than to public school.
4. What is more, some Bossier Parish teachers proselytize during class, pray aloud for students, require young students to memorize sectarian prayers, and tell students of all religious backgrounds that to be a good person one be Christian. Bossier Parish teachers and administrators have also placed religious displays in their classrooms and offices, advertised events sponsored by local churches, and incorporated religious teachings, beliefs, or doctrine, like Creationism, into the curriculum. Further, some Bossier Parish teachers, staff, and administrators have endorsed and conferred special favors on sectarian religious clubs and have developed practices that expose the private beliefs of students who do not wish to participate in these organizations, subjecting these children to coercive pressure to join, and ostracization by their classmates if they do not.Americans United issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.
The right to religious expression, in particular, has been increasingly challenged and misunderstood in recent years, and many people have been led to believe our elementary and secondary schools must be “religion-free” zones. To the contrary, both federal and state laws specifically protect religious freedom rights in public schools. Thankfully, Congress and our state legislature still recognize the fundamental importance of religious liberty—the first freedom listed in the Constitution’s Bill of Rights.
2 ... [T]he Webster Parish School District has a longstanding custom, policy, and practice of promoting and inculcating Christian religious beliefs by sponsoring religious activities and conveying religious messages to students, including by broadcasting prayers daily over school speakers.
3. So engrained is official promotion of religion at Webster Parish schools that virtually all school events—such as sports games, pep rallies, assemblies, and graduation ceremonies—include school-sponsored Christian prayer, religious messages and/or proselytizing. Graduation ceremonies are frequently held in houses of worship, and at times they resemble religious rituals that include Bible verses and Christian prayers.The ACLU issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit. Shreveport Times reports on the lawsuit.
[T]he Governor's Executive Order constituted an unconstitutional interference with the authority vested solely in the legislative branch of our state government by expanding the protections that currently exist in anti-discrimination laws rather than directing the faithful execution of the existing anti-discrimination laws of this state.The Times-Picayune reports on the decision.
In essence, the validity of Roy’s First Amendment as-applied claim “hinges on probable cause for [his] [summons]—a fact question for the jury.” .... Accordingly, this claim cannot be resolved on summary judgment.... If Sergeant Booth had probable cause to arrest Roy under §12:153, “there could be no First Amendment violation.”... However, if a jury finds there was no probable cause for Roy’s arrest, his First Amendment claim may be considered as well.The court however dismissed a facial challenge, as well as a due process challenge, to the same Ordinance.
conduct in connection with the practice of law that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know involves discrimination prohibited by law because of race, color, religion, age, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status, or disability. This rule does not prohibit legitimate advocacy when race, color, religion, age, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status, or disability are issues,nor does it limit the ability of a lawyer to accept, decline or withdraw from a representation in accordance with Rule 1.16.This is a narrower version of ABA Model Rule 8.4(g) which the ABA House of Delegates adopted in 2016. Last week, the Louisiana Attorney General's Office issued Attorney General's Opinion 17-0114 which concludes that the ABA version of the Model Rule is likely unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and that while Louisiana's proposed version seeks to avoid many of the constitutional problems, it still suffers from some of the same vagueness and overbreadth issues as does the ABA rule.
Lawyers participate in a wide variety of associations that engage in expressive conduct which could run afoul of ABA Model Rule 8.4(g), including faith-based legal organizations and activist organizations that promote a specific political or social platform....
ABA Model Rule 8.4(g) could also result in lawyers being punished for practicing their religion. The United States Supreme Court specifically noted in Obergefell v. Hodges that "those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned." However this type of advocacy appears to be prohibited by ABA Model Rule 8.4(g).... Under Rule 8.4(g), a lawyer who acts as a legal advisor on the board of their church would be engaging in professional misconduct if they participated in a march against same-sex marriage or taught a class at their religious institution against divorce....AP reports on the Attorney General's Opinion.