Settlement Agreed To In NYC Circumcision Regulation Challenge

The New York Observer reported yesterday that New York Mayor Bill DeBlasio's administration has reached a settlement agreement with the ultra-Orthodox Jewish community in a lawsuit (see prior posting) challenging the New York City Health Department's regulations requiring mohels to obtain written consent from parents before using the oral suction method (metzitzah b’peh) of performing a ritual circumcision. Under the settlement agreement reached after long negotiations with rabbinic authorities, the city will use local health care providers to educate the community about the risks of herpes infection in infants. Jewish leaders will help the city identify the mohel who performed the circumcision on any infant who becomes infected with HSV1.  If genetic testing shows the mohel was the source of the infection, the Jewish community will permanently remove him as a mohel, and he will be subject to financial penalties if he continues to perform circumcisions.  However the list of those removed will not be made public.  This arrangement will lead to a settlement of the pending litigation and repeal of the informed consent requirements.

Orthodox Jewish Group Blasts NYC Universal Pre-K Program

The New York Daily News reported yesterday that the Orthodox Union has taken out ads in a number of publications criticizing New York Mayor Bill de Blasio's free universal pre-K program because its full-day schedule does not leave time for religious studies to be added after the end of school.  The OU wants the city to make more seats available in half-day pre-K programs so a religious component can be added during the other half of the day.  A spokesman for the mayor says they have worked closely with Jewish groups in implementing the program and already have thousands of half-day seats available.

Court Allows NYC Muslim Bus Driver To Move Ahead With Challenge To Headwear Policy

In Muhammad v. New York City Transit Authority, (ED NY, Sept. 30, 2014), a New York federal district court denied the Transit Authority's motion for summary judgment in a suit filed against it by a female Muslim bus driver who was reassigned to a less desirable position after she refused to remove her khimar or cover it with a Transit Authority uniform cap. Originally filed in 2004, the lawsuit alleges violations of Title VII and the First Amendment. The court concluded that a reasonable jury could find that the Transit Authority failed to offer plaintiff a reasonable accommodation of her religious beliefs. It also concluded that plaintiff had presented a prima facie case of disparate impact under Title VII and religious discrimination in violation of the First Amendment. Two years ago, the Transit Authority settled a parallel suit brought against it by the U.S. Department of Justice. (See prior posting.)

Cert. Filed In Ban On Church Use of New York City Schools

A petition for certiorari (full text) has been filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in Bronx Household of Faith v. Board of Education of the City of New York, (cert. filed 9/24/2014).  In the case the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision held that the Board of Education of the City of New York did not violate the free exercise clause when in 2007 it changed its rules to bar the use of school facilities by churches for religious worship services. ADF announced the filing of the cert. petition. [Thanks to Jeff Pasek for the lead.]

Jewish Vote In New York City Is Becoming Increasingly Orthodox and Hasidic

Th New York Times reports today that the profile of Jewish voters in New York City area is changing. Within a generation, a majority of New York City's Jews will likely be Orthodox, and a large percentage of those will be Hasidim who often have very large families.  The traditional liberal voting patterns of New York Jews is thus becoming more conservative.  Hasidim often vote in blocks for candidates favored for pragmatic reasons by their sect's grand rabbi. Hasidim often seek more aid for their system of yeshivas (religious schools). Already Hasidic groups have successfully resisted enforcement of the City's new informed consent requirement for circumcisions using the oral suction method, as well as requirements for various secular courses to be offered in their private schools. Top city and state officials are hiring Orthodox or Hasidic political advisers.

2nd Circuit: NYC Ritual Circumcision Informed Consent Rule Is Subject To Strict Scrutiny Analysis

In Central Rabbinical Congress of the United States & Canada v. New York City Department of Health & Mental Hygiene, (2d Cir., Aug. 15, 2014), the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court's denial of a preliminary injunction against New York City's informed consent regulations governing metzitzah b’peh, a method of ritual circumcision used by some Orthodox Jewish mohels. (See prior posting.) The regulation, concerned about the possible spread of herpes, requires signed written consent from a parent before direct oral suction may be used in any circumcision. The Second Circuit disagreed with the district court's conclusion that the regulation is neutral and generally applicable and is thus subject only to rational basis scrutiny. The appellate court remanded for the district court to now rule on the likelihood of success on the merits using strict scrutiny, but added:

Acknowledging the weighty interests at stake in this litigation (the plaintiffs’ in the free exercise of their faith and the Department’s in the health of newborns and in informed parental consent concerning risks these newborns face), we express no view as to whether plaintiffs have satisfied this [strict scrutiny] standard, believing that careful adjudication will benefit in the first instance from the district court’s comprehensive analysis.

Reuters reports on the decision.

New York City Health Department Orders 2 Mohels To Stop Controversial Circumcision Method After Infections

The Forward reported this week that the New York City Health Department has prohibited two mohels from performing Jewish religious circumcisions using the direct oral suction method (metzitzah b’peh) after infant boys allegedly contracted herpes infections from the two. The Health Department refuses to name the mohels  for privacy reasons.  New York City Health Department regulations adopted in 2012 require mohels to obtain written informed consent before using the controversial method for a circumcision. (See prior posting.) Only one of the two mohels targeted by the Health Department was able to produce the consent form for the infected infant.

NYC Pre-Kindergarten Funding Requires Religious Schools To Draw Fine Church-State Lines

The New York Times reported Monday on the fine church-state lines being drawn by religious schools hosting Mayor de Blasio's government-funded pre-kindergarten programs. Brief guidelines issued to the schools allow the teaching of culture, but not religion. Religious texts may be presented objectively as part of a secular program of instruction.  The Times describes the accommodation reached by some schools:

The biblical story of Noah’s Ark will be taught, without mention of who told Noah to build it. Challah, the Jewish bread eaten on the Sabbath, will be baked, but no blessings said over it. Some crucifixes will be removed, but others left hanging.

(See prior related posting.) [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

De Blasio's Universal Kindergarten Church-State Rules Unsatisfactory To Both Sides

In New York City, Mayor Bill de Blasio has created a free, full-day pre-kindergarten program, offered in part through community-based organizations, as a major initiative. (Implementation Plan.) Hamodia reported last month that the mayor has made a number of concessions in order to attract Orthodox Jewish schools to participate in the program. The New York Daily News reported yesterday that the New York Civil Liberties Union is concerned that some of these cross the church-state separation line:

Guidance provided to religious schools by city officials in May allows them to screen potential teachers based on their religion “to the extent permitted by law,” use religious texts “when presented objectively” and give lessons in other languages such as Yiddish and Hebrew.

Nevertheless, according to The Forward yesterday a number of ultra-Orthodox schools may opt not to participate in the program.  They are particularly concerned about the ban on staff leading blessings after meals, and about the length of the required school day which will make it difficult to add hours for religious instruction at the beginning or end of the school day. Regulations for a similar program offered by New York state outside of New York City are more flexible, and some New York City Jewish schools are looking at whether they can apply to this program instead.

Court Rejects Challenge To New York Vaccination Requirements

In Phillips v. City of New York, (ED NY, June 4, 2014), parents who object to vaccinating their children on religious grounds challenged New York's law that allows religious exemptions.  Even though most of the children involved received an exemption, plaintiffs complain that the state requires them to detail their religious beliefs in order to qualify.  Schools also apparently require unvaccinated children to remain home when any classmate contracts a vaccine-preventable disease. The court dismissed plaintiffs' free exercise, substantive due process and equal protection challenges to the law.

Anti--SLAPP Motion Granted To Dismiss Suit Growing Out of Ground-Zero Mosque Controversy

Forras v. Rauf, (D DC, April 18, 2014), is a remnant from the widely publicized battle over attempts in 2010 to construct a mosque and community center two blocks from Ground Zero in lower Manhattan.  New York City first responder Vincent Forras sued to prevent building of the mosque, claiming that it would be a nuisance, would inflict emotional distress and amounted to an assault.  In response to the complaint in that suit, Imam Feisal Rauf and the other defendants moved to dismiss, filing a memorandum of law that, among other things, said that Forras equates Islam with terrorism and has become "America's Spokesman of Bigotry." The suit was ultimately dismissed.

Meanwhile, however, Forras filed this lawsuit against Rauf and the other defendants alleging defamation, false light, assault, and intentional infliction of emotional distress from the statements they made in their memorandum of law seeking dismissal of the original lawsuit. Forras moves to dismiss under the D.C. Anti-SLAPP Act which provides for rapid dismissal of a lawsuit that is filed to chill speech about public issues.  The court granted the motion, finding that Forras had not shown a likelihood of succeeding on the merits of his claims.  The judicial proceedings privilege would defeat the defamation and false light claims.  Plaintiffs also failed to show that they are likely to succeed on their other claims, including their claim that the statements in the original court proceedings "put a de facto Fatwah on Plaintiffs."

New York City Churches Still Holding Out Hope For Continued Use of Public School Space

The battle by New York City churches to continue to use public school buildings on weekends for religious services is not over despite the Second Circuit's recent decision upholding the school board's rule change barring such use. On Tuesday, appellants in Bronx Household of Faith v. Board of Education of the City of New York filed a petition (full text) for an en banc rehearing by the full Second Circuit.  According to an ADF press release, "The filing automatically puts the panel’s ruling on hold, which means that congregations will be able to continue meeting through Easter and the remainder of Passover while the 2nd Circuit decides what to do with the petition." Meanwhile, as reported by World, there continues to be speculation that New York Mayor Bill de Blasio will move to reverse the policy the school board adopted under his predecessor's administration and allow churches to continue to use school space.

2nd Circuit: No Free Exercise Problem In Denying School Space For Church Worship Services

In Bronx Household of Faith v. Board of Education of the City of New York, (2d Cir., April 3, 2014), the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, reversed the district court and held that the Board of Education of the City of New York did not violate the free exercise clause when in 2007 it changed its rules to bar the use of school facilities by churches for religious worship services. Board policy permits outside groups to use school space for other purposes during non-school hours merely for the cost of custodial services. The majority held that strict scrutiny is not required when the Board acts in order to avoid the risk of violating the Establishment Clause. It concluded that:

the better rule allows the Board, if it makes a reasonable, good faith judgment that it runs a substantial risk of incurring a violation of  the Establishment Clause by hosting and subsidizing the conduct of religious worship services, to decline to do so.

The majority also concluded that the Board's policy does not require it to become unconstitutionally entangled with religion in deciding what constitutes religious worship.

Judge Walker dissented, arguing that strict scrutiny should apply because the Board regulation "is neither neutral nor generally applicable in its treatment of religion." He concludes that the Board does not have a compelling interest in avoiding an Establishment Clause violation because it is clear that allowing churches to use facilities on the same neutral basis as others does not violate the Establishment Clause.

The decision is the latest in the long-running battle over church use of school space on Sundays. The 2nd Circuit in a previous decision upheld the Board's rule change against a free expression challenge. (See prior posting.) The Wall Street Journal reports that lawyers for Bronx Household of Faith plan an appeal, but that remarks by Mayor Bill DeBlasio suggest that he might be willing to change the Board policy adopted under the predecessor administration.

NY Appellate Court Upholds $1.6 M Religion- Sexual Orientation Discrimination Verdict

In Salemi v. Gloria's Tribeca Inc., (NY App. Div., March 20, 2014), a New York appellate court upheld a jury verdict of $1.6 million in a suit alleging employment discrimination on the basis of religion and sexual orientation in violation of the New York City Human Rights Law.  Plaintiff worked as chef and manager of a restaurant.  The court concluded that the jury had ample evidence to find that plaintiff's employer:

discriminated against her based on her religion and sexual orientation by, amongst other things, holding weekly prayer meetings at the restaurant ... which the staff viewed as mandatory, fearing that they would lose their jobs if they did not attend, repeatedly stating that homosexuality is "a sin," and that "gay people" were "going to go to hell" and generally subjecting her to an incessant barrage of offensive anti-homosexual invective.... Additional evidence demonstrated that ... plaintiff was retaliated against for objecting to [her employer's] offensive comments, choosing not to attend workplace prayer meetings, and refusing to fire another employee because of his sexual orientation.

In response to defendant's argument that he was expressing his religious beliefs, the court said that the jury was properly instructed that he could do so provided he did not discriminate against his employees based on religion or sexual orientation. Courthouse News Service reports on the decision.

Muslim Couple Claims Discrimination When Forced Off Empire State Building Deck For Praying

Huffington Post and OnIslam report yesterday on a lawsuit filed in federal district court in New York by a Muslim couple who claim that they and their two children were forcibly escorted off the observation deck of the Empire State Building, down the elevator and out of the building, for engaging in Muslim prayer.  They say they chose an area on the observation deck where there was little foot traffic to observe their 11 p.m. prayers last July.  A guard poked the husband and told him that  he was not allowed to pray while at the Observatory. The suit alleges they were targeted because they were Muslim, wearing traditional Muslim attire and engaged in Muslim prayer. It goes on to allege that owners of the building and their security personnel "have an unlawful policy, custom, practice, procedure and/or rule, whether express or implied, of barring patrons from exercising their religious beliefs in the Empire State Building and/or the Observatory."

Jewish Employee's Discrimination Claim Against New York City Dismissed

In Brodt v. City of New York, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29229 (SD NY, March 6, 2014), a New York federal district court dismissed claims by a former employee of the New York City Department of Information Technology & Telecommunications that he was denied a permanent position and eventually fired under the pretext of budget limitations when in fact the actions were based on his being an observant Jew. The court held that the facts alleged do not plausibly show discriminatory animus or a hostile work environment. According to the court, the comments by his supervisor that plaintiff should pray for him and his comments about plaintiff's nine children were simple teasing or isolated incidents. His supervisor's constantly rubbing plaintiff's yarmulke was merely annoying conduct.

New York City Settles Discrimination Suit Over Modest Dress Signs In Hasidic-Owned Stores

Yesterday the New York City Commission on Human Rights settled a suit it had filed in August 2012 against seven businesses in the Williamsburg section of Brooklyn charging them with religious and gender discrimination. The businesses, owned by Hasidic Jews,  posted signs calling for modest dress by those entering the store.  Failed Messiah blog reports that under the proposed settlement agreement the Commission says it will drop its charges and store owners will agree that if they post signs in their windows, they will say that while modest dress is appreciated, everyone is welcome to enter free from discrimination. The stores' attorney says that the exact wording of future signs is still being worked out. (See prior related posting.)

Losing NYC Political Candidate Sues Winner Over Mural Allegedly Intended To Act As A Curse

In an unusual lawsuit filed Thursday, Gwen Goodwin, a losing candidate in the September 10 Democratic primary for New York City Council, is seeking $1 million in damages from her successful rival, Melissa Mark-Viverito, and from the landlord of the apartment building in which Goodwin lives. The suit stems from a 5-story tall mural described (and pictured) by today's New York Post as a "bodiless rooster atop wooden poles" which was placed on the apartment building wall and extends to the window of Goodwin's 5th floor apartment. The mural would have been seen by those in the neighborhood from a Caribbean culture as a black magic curse or death threat. The mural, unveiled in a Sept. 1 ceremony, was part of Los Muros Hablan (“The Walls Speak”), a project headed by Mark-Viverito to celebrate Latino culture through murals. The complaint (full text) in Goodwin v. Mark-Viverito, (NY County Sup. Ct., filed 1/2/2014), claims that the mural was deliberately planned by Mark-Viverito and Goodwin's landlord to inflict emotional distress on Goodwin. (Goodwin, who lives in a rent-stabilized apartment, has been sued a number of times by her landlord.) She claims that the mural distracted her and caused her to lose energy which disrupted her performance in the primary.