California Enacts Special Exemption To Allow Abbot To Be Buried On Monastery Grounds

In California, Gov. Jerry Brown yesterday signed SB 124 which grants a special exemption to allow Abbot Theodor Micka, a co-founder of Holy Cross Monastery, to be buried on the monastery’s grounds. (Press release from Sen. Ellen Corbett.) Holy Cross is the only Orthodox Christian monastery in the San Francisco Bay Area. As reported by the San Francisco Chronicle, 75-year old Micka, now seriously ill, has lived at the monastery for nearly 35 years, and one of his last wishes was to be buried there.  The special exemption was needed because state law only allows burial permits to be issued for burial in a cemetery. [Thanks to James Sonne for the lead.]

Transcript and Summaries of Hobby Lobby Arguments In Supreme Court Today

The full transcript of the oral arguments earlier today in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores and Conestoga Wood Specialties v. Sebelius is now available from the Supreme Court's website.  Extensive reports on the oral arguments are available from Lyle Denniston (SCOTUS Blog) and the Washington Post,

UPDATE: Here is the audio of the oral arguments.

Fired Buddhist Employee Sues Claiming Failure To Accommodate Religious Beliefs

Courthouse News Service yesterday reported on a Title VII  religious discrimination lawsuit filed in Texas federal district court by the former director of marketing communications for a wireless network services company. Plaintiff Jef Mindrup, a Buddhist, claims he was fired because he refused to comply with a request by the company's co-founder that he add Biblical verses to the company's daily newsletter. His lawsuit alleges that the company "fail[ed] to accommodate plaintiff on the basis of his religion by requiring him to proselytize the Christian religion, a religion other than his own."

Court OK's Firing of 3 By Adventist University For Violating Church Doctrine

Last week the Riverside, California Press-Enterprise reported on a March 5 decision by a Riverside County Superior Court judge dismissing a lawsuit against Seventh Day Adventist-affiliated La Sierra University by the school's former vice president of development; former Arts and Science dean, and a former biology professor.  The three were pressured by the University's board president into resigning after they made derogatory remarks about church officials and violated church teachings on the consumption of alcohol.  School officials found out about remarks the three made when a conversation between them that had been recorded fell into officials' hands. (Transcript of conversation.) The trial court said in part: "the church is entitled to make its own decisions about how to respond when employees of a church-run school are deemed to have violated SDA (Seventh-day Adventist) doctrine."

A comment on the decision published by ReligiousLiberty​.TV contends:

While the official line was that the three plaintiffs had been caught drinking alcohol on an audio recording the real motivation had more to do with the heretofore untouched issue of creationism.  Two of the plaintiffs were outspoken critics of the Adventist view of literal creationism and the lawsuit revealed the concerns that church leadership has had regarding the way that Adventist beliefs had been downplayed at La Sierra.

UPDATE: Here is the full transcript of the March 5 summary judgment hearing in the case, Kaatz v. Graham.

City Council Members Have Legislative Immunity In Suit Over Zoning Vote

In American Islamic Center v. City of Des Plaines, (ND IL, March 24, 2014), an Illinois federal district court held that city council members are entitled to absolute legislative immunity from a suit against them for their vote against a zoning map amendment that would have permitted an Islamic center to build in an area currently zoned for manufacturing.  The Islamic Center's free exercise and equal protection claims can proceed only against the city itself. The court held that it need not decide at this juncture whether the Illinois Tort Immunity Act applies to claims under the Illinois Religious Freedom Restoration Act.  It permitted plaintiff to proceed with its claim that the zoning decision was arbitrary and capricious in violation of the state constitution.

Appeals Court Approves Transgender Name Change Over Trial Judge's Religious Objections

In In the Matter of the Application of James Dean Ingram To Change His/Her Name, (OK App., March 21, 2014), the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals reversed a trial court judge's refusal to allow transgender petitioner, who was in the process of a sex transition from male to female, to change her name from from James Dean Ingram to Angela Renee Ingram.  The appeals court held that the trial judge abused his discretion when he concluded that the name change was sought for an illegal or fraudulent purpose.  According to AP, the trial court judge, Oklahoma County District Judge Bill Graves, citing Biblical passages, had said:   "[A] sex change cannot make a man a woman or a woman a man.... The DNA code shows God meant for them to stay male and female."  The Oklahoma ACLU issued a press release announcing the Court of Civil Appeals' decision. In 2012, the appeals court reversed a similar denial by the same judge. (See prior posting.)

Britain's Law Society Taking Heat For Guidance To Lawyers On Drafting Wills For Muslim Clients

The Telegraph reports today that members of Britain's Parliament are calling for an investigation by the House of Commons into a March 13 Practice Note issued by The Law Society to assist British solicitors whose clients ask them to draw up wills that comply with Sharia law. (Full text of Sharia succession rules Practice Note.) Some are accusing The Law Society of giving its stamp of approval to wills that deny women an equal share of an estate and exclude "illegitimate" children or unbelievers.  The Law Society says it was merely responding to requests from lawyers for guidance in helping Muslim clients carry out their wishes.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Daniel Schick, Keeping Up with the Principle of Neutrality: Why Courts Should Not Extend Elmbrook's Mistaken Establishment Clause Analysis, (Mississippi Law Journal, Vol. 84, Forthcoming).
• Philip Hamburger, Equality and Exclusion: Religious Liberty and Political Process, (March 10, 2014).
• Ronan McCrea, European Law and the Prohibition of the Veil, (March 4, 2011).
• Andra le Roux-Kemp, A Question of Life and Death, (Comparative and International Law Journal of Southern Africa 2013 46(1), 74-89).
• W. Cole Durham, Robert Theron Smith & William C. Duncan, A Comparative Analysis of Laws Pertaining to Same-Sex Unions, (March 14, 2014).
• James E. Wheeler, God, Guns and Others: Why Restrictions on Carrying Firearms in Church Conflict with a Moral Duty to Defend Others, (March 11, 2014).
• Benjamin L. Berger, Belonging to Law: Religious Difference, Secularism, and the Conditions of Civic Inclusion, (Osgoode Legal Studies Research Paper No. 16 (2013)).
• Benjamin I. Berger, The Virtues of Law in the Politics of Religious Freedom, (Journal of Law and Religion, Vol. 29, No. 3, 2014).
• Malick W. Ghachem, Religious Liberty and the Financial War on Terror, (First Amendment Law Review, Vol. 12, No. 1, 2013).

From SmartCILP:

• Max Guirguis, A Coat of Many Colors: The Religious Neutrality Doctrine From Everson to Hein, [Lexis link],  43 Stetson Law Review 67-118 (2013).

Background Sources For Tomorrow's Supreme Court Arguments in Hobby Lobby/ Conestoga

Tomorrow the U.S. Supreme Court hears oral arguments in the Hobby Lobby Stores and Conestoga Wood Specialties, Inc. cases-- two high profile religious freedom challenges by for-profit businesses to the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage mandate.  For those who want an introduction, a refresher, or further resources on the numerous and difficult legal and political issues involved in the cases, here are some sources:

• All briefs (parties and amici) in Hobby Lobby.
• All briefs (parties and amici) in Conestoga Wood Specialties.
• Lyle Denniston, Argument preview: Religion, rights, and the workplace (Scotus blog).
• Scotus blog's Contraceptive Mandate Symposium.
• Becket Fund's Resource Page on Hobby Lobby.
• Marty Lederman's Compendium of posts on Hobby Lobby and related cases from Balkinization blog.

6th Circuit, Critical of U.S. Marshals, Still Upholds Qualified Immunity In Seizure For Planned Parenthood Judgment

In Bray v. Planned Parenthood Columbia-Willamette, Inc., (6th Cir., March 21, 2014), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in an opinion highly critical of the U.S. Marshals Service and others nevertheless upheld the dismissal on qualified immunity grounds of a suit against two U.S. Marshals over a raid they conducted.  Planned Parenthood had obtained an $850,000 judgment against Michael Bray, a minister and anti-abortion activist who authored the book A Time To Kill,  and  previously spent 4 years in prison for his connection with bombings of abortion clinics.. (Background.) This lawsuit grew out of the execution of a writ to seize property to satisfy Planned Parenthood's judgment.  The writ specifically authorized seizure of Bray's computers, cameras, books and writings. Representatives of Planned Parenthood went along with the marshals  The 6th Circuit said:

If the facts alleged in the complaint are true, this case involves an incident that is more like home raids by Red Guards during China’s Cultural Revolution than  like what we should expect in the United States of America. A surprise raid was made on a judgment debtor’s home to enforce an order of execution on property of the debtor. The order was ostensibly for the purpose of obtaining property of value to be seized, but was obviously focused instead on all means for the debtor to express ideas....

Nonetheless, the officers are protected from suit by the doctrine of qualified immunity, because these constitutional rights were not clearly established at the time of the violations.... [T]he legal and factual scenario presented in this action is not identical to any the Sixth Circuit or the Supreme Court has previously addressed....

Couple Awarded $5.3M For Lengthy Denial of Utilities By FLDS Church

Last Thursday, a jury in an Arizona federal district court awarded damages totaling nearly $5.3 million to Ronald and Jinjer Cooke who sued after towns controlled by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in 2008 denied them access to water, sewers and electricity for the home they were building.  The Salt Lake Tribune reports the Cookes argued that the mostly polygamous towns of Colorado City, Ariz., and Hildale, Utah discriminated against them because they are not members of the FLDS Church. They eventually got electicity and sewage, but are still being denied water. The cities say that the Cookes moved in as a test case for the state of Utah's efforts to reform the trust that holds FLDS land in the cities. (See prior related posting.)

NYT Profiles Obama's Early Catholic Connections As Meeting With Pope Approaches

In anticipation of President Obama's March 27 visit to the Vatican, today's New York Times carries a long front-page article titled: The Catholic Roots of Obama’s Activism. Here is an excerpt:

[I]n the spring of 1987, Mr. Obama — himself not Catholic — was already well known in Chicago’s black Catholic circles. He had arrived two years earlier to fill an organizing position paid for by a church grant, and had spent his first months here surrounded by Catholic pastors and congregations. In this often overlooked period of the president’s life, he had a desk in a South Side parish and became steeped in the social justice wing of the church, which played a powerful role in his political formation.

This Thursday, Mr. Obama will meet with Pope Francis at the Vatican after a three-decade divergence with the church. By the late 1980s, the Catholic hierarchy had taken a conservative turn that de-emphasized social engagement and elevated the culture wars that would eventually cast Mr. Obama as an abortion-supporting enemy....  A White House accustomed to archbishop antagonists hopes the president will find a strategic ally and kindred spirit in a pope who preaches a gospel of social justice and inclusion..... 

But the Vatican — aware that Mr. Obama has far more to gain from the encounter than the pope does, and wary of being used for American political consumption — warns that this will hardly be like the 1982 meeting at which President Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II agreed to fight Communism in Eastern Europe.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Tennyson v. Carpenter, (10th Cir., March 18, 2014), the 10th Circuit held that a federal district court wrongly dismissed as frivolous a Christian inmate's RLUIPA, 1st Amendment and retaliation claims growing out his suspension from the prison's "Praise Team" choir after choir music binders he kept in his cell were confiscated, and he filed a grievance over the incident.

In Oliver v. Harner, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34137 (SD IL, March 17, 2014), an Illinois federal district court permitted an African-American inmate to proceed with his free exercise and equal protection complaints that the Caucasian chaplain and Caucasian warden denied him a kosher diet that conforms to African Hebrew Israelite beliefs. However the court denied a temporary restraining order and dismissed without prejudice plaintiff's conspiracy claims.

In Halloum v. Ryan, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35077 (D AZ, March 18, 2014), an Arizona federal district court permitted a Muslim inmate to proceed with his complaint that his free exercise rights were infringed when he was denied a religious shaving waiver. A number of other claims were dismissed, including complaints that the chaplain rejected donated copies of the Qur'an and Muslim inmates were denied communal prayer on two mornings during Ramadan.

In Browning v. Seifert, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35232 (ND WV, March 18, 2014), a West Virginia federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35237, Jan. 28, 2014) and allowed an Orthodox Jewish inmate to proceed against most of the defendants on his complaint that he was denied him a kosher diet, the ability to wear religious apparel, and the right to worship weekly and on special holidays.

In Irby v. Cain, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35419 (MD LA, March 17, 2014), a Louisiana federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35123, Feb. 19. 2014) and dismissed an inmate's claim that he was retaliated against for refusing to attend a religious call-out at prison. The court concluded that the action taken against the inmate was merely de minimis adverse action.

In Roberts v. Schofield, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35222 (MD TN, March 18, 2014), a Tennessee federal magistrate judge refused to grant preliminary injunction to stop the implementation of a vegan-type Kosher diet in Tennessee prisons.

In Bush v. Donovan, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35325 (SD CA, March 17, 2014), a California federal district court dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint that, among other things, he was denied a Qur'an and hindered in the practice of his Muslim faith.

In Long v. Stanislaus County Superior Court, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35407 (ED CA, March 17, 2014), a California federal magistrate judge, relying on 11th Amendment immunity, dismissed (with leave to amend) an inmate's claim against a state court for forcing him to violate his religious objections to participating in psychology. The state court had ordered him to be evaluated by psychologists, given medication and placed in a mental hospital.

Trial Court Erred In Allowing Police To Remove Pastor At Request of Dissident Group

As reported by the Colorado Springs Gazette, in St. John’s Baptist Church Governing Body v. Sutton a Colorado state court of appeals on Thursday held that a state trial court judge acted improperly when he issued an order allowing police to remove a pastor from his pulpit.  The order came at the request of a dissident group in St. John's Baptist Church which formed a separate Governing Board in 2011 and ordered the pastor out. The Court of Appeals said in part:

The [trial] court made a decision regarding ecclesiastical internal governance and organization; it determined for the church who represented its interest, a governing decision belonging only to the church.

The Court of Appeals said that ownership of the church's property should be determined by the trial court through an examination of  deeds, articles of incorporation, bylaws and other documents. (Note: because of policies of the Colorado Court of Appeals, the full text of its unpublished opinions may not be posted on any electronic database.)

District Court Invalidates Michigan Ban on Same-Sex Marriage; 6th Circuit Stays Order

In DeBoer v. Snyder, (ED MI, March 21, 2014), a Michigan federal district court held that Michigan's state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage violates the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause.  The case began as a constitutional challenge to Michigan's adoption laws which only allow single persons or married couples to adopt.  Plaintiffs were a same-sex couple who were precluded from marrying under Michigan law.  The court invited plaintiffs to amend their complaint to challenge the Michigan Marriage Amendment which the court saw as the underlying reason plaintiffs could not jointly adopt children. Plaintiffs did so, and the court held a two-week trial, largely devoted to expert testimony about whether children raised by heterosexual parents did better than those raised by same-sex couples. The court's opinion discusses the expert testimony at length, ultimately concluding that the state has no rational basis for preventing same-sex couples from marrying. ACLU of Michigan issued a press release announcing the decision.

Ten minutes after the district court's March 21 opinion was handed down, Michigan state attorney general Bill Schuette filed an emergency motion asking the 6th Circuit to stay the district court's order, pending appeal. (Detroit Free Press.) On March 22, the 6th Circuit issued an order directing plaintiffs to respond by March 25, and a second order temporarily staying the district court's judgment until March 26 "to allow a more reasoned consideration of the motion."

Meanwhile, clerk's offices in four Michigan counties opened Saturday morning to allow same-sex couples to obtain licenses, and, according to AP, over 300 licenses were issued before the 6th Circuit called a halt to their issuance by its stay.  The attorney general's office declined to say whether the state would recognize these marriages, saying "the courts will have to sort it out."

New IRS Exempt Organization Head Speaks On Priorities

BNA Daily Report for Executives (subscription required) reports on the first public comments by Tamera Ripperda, the Internal Revenue Service's new director of Exempt Organizations.  Speaking yesterday at the Washington Non-Profit Legal and Tax Conference, she said that a key focus for IRS this fiscal year is to reduce the backlog of applications for tax exemptions.  Her goal is to close the oldest cases-- mostly applications under Section 501(c)(3)-- by the end of June. Examination of non-profits will focus on protection of charitable assets, activities that jeopardize exempt status, and international issues, and will involve an expanded use of data analytics.

Georgia Legislature Allows Guns In Churches That Want Them; Reduces Penalty For Carrying In Other Churches

As it wound up its legislative session, the Georgia General Assembly yesterday gave last minute final passage to HB 60 as amended which expands the places in which persons holding weapons-carry permits may bring firearms.  The bill, among other things, allows firearms to be carried in houses of worship if "the governing body or authority of the place of worship" permits it. However, the bill provides a minimal punishment for a person who holds a weapons carry licence and brings a weapon into a place of worship that has not opted permit firearms.  The person may not be arrested and may be fined not more than $100. The final version passed the Senate by a vote of 37-18 and the House by a vote of 112-58. The bill now goes to the governor for his signature. Atlanta Journal Constitution reports on the bill's passage.

Court Grants Stay Pending Appeal In Kentucky Same-Sex Marriage Case

In Love v. Beshear, (WD KY, March 19, 2014), a Kentucky federal district court granted a stay pending appeal to the 6th Circuit of its prior decision requiring recognition of same-sex marriages validly performed in other states. Previously the court had stayed its order only until March 20. (See prior posting.)  The state argued that failure to extend the stay would result in "chaos."  In granting the further stay pending appeal, the court found persuasive arguments on both sides, but said that it was strongly influenced by the U.S. Supreme Court's action in granting a stay in the Utah same-sex marriage case.  The district court said in part:

Perhaps it is difficult for Plaintiffs to understand how rights won can be delayed. It is a truth that our judicial system can act with stunning quickness, as this Court has; and then with sometimes maddening slowness. One judge may decide a case, but ultimately others have a final say. It is the entire process, however, which gives our judicial system and our judges such high credibility and acceptance.... It is best that these momentous changes occur upon full review, rather than risk premature implementation or confusing changes. That does not serve anyone well.

Louisville Courier-Journal reports on the decision. [Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

Muslim Woman Sues Gym For Refusing To Allow Head Covering

The Albuquerque Journal reported yesterday on a religious and racial discrimination lawsuit filed in New Mexico state court by a Muslim woman (who is also African-American) who was not permitted to enter a Planet Fitness gym because she was wearing a head covering. A Planet Fitness attorney says the gym did not know the head covering was for religious purposes and that it violated the gym's dress code that prohibits jeans, work boots, bandanas, skull caps and revealing apparel. Plaintiff Tarainia McDaniel, who holds a two-year membership in the gym, says she was told that while the dress code was sometimes waived, it could not be in her case because her head covering was red. The lawsuit alleges racial and religious discrimination in violation of the New Mexico Human Rights Act and the New Mexico Unfair Practices Act.

Appeals Court Upholds Religious Restrictions As To Children In Divorce Case

In In re the Marriage of Suzanne Paulsen and Timothy Paulsen, (WA App., March 19, 2914), a Washington state appeals court upheld a trial court's parenting plan that was entered along with a decree dissolving the marriage of the Paulsens. Among other restrictions on the father, the appeals court upheld the trial court's award to the mother, Suzanne Paulsen, of sole decision-making power as to the children's religious upbringing.  It also affirmed the trial court's ban on the father, Timothy Paulsen, engaging in prayer or discussion of religious matters with the children.  The religious restrictions, as well as visitation restrictions, were justified by evidence that Timothy, as a junior high school teacher, had sexually abused students, using religion and prayer as a technique to weaken their defenses to his sexual approaches.