Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Sunday, October 04, 2009
Native Hawaiian Cultural Practitioners Challenge Land Management Plan
Missouri Creates New Faith-Based Partnership For Disaster Relief
Bald Eagle Case Transferred To Tribal Court
Brooklyn Judge Criticizes Orthodox Jewish Community's Views On Child Abusers
Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases
In Watson v. Wakefield, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88395 (SD TX, Sept. 25, 2009), a Texas federal district court allowed two Muslim inmates to move ahead with his claim under RLUIPA that his rights were violated when he was barred for six months from attending Muslim services because during a scheduled prayer service he called for the resignation of his unit’s inmate Islamic coordinator. The court concluded that defendants had not shown for purposes of summary judgment that exclusion was the least restrictive means of promoting prison safety and security after a single incident of disruption. The court did however dismiss plaintiff’s First Amendment free exercise claim.
Vega v. Lantz, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88550 (D CT, Sept. 25, 2009), involved free exercise and equal protection complaints, as well as a claim under RLUIPA, alleging a lengthy series of restrictions on a Muslim inmate’s right to practice his religion. A Connecticut federal magistrate judge rejected plaintiff’s complaint that he was denied halal meat and 5-times per day congregate prayer, as well as complaints about several other alleged infringements. The court however permitted plaintiff to move ahead with claims that Friday Jumah services are frequently cancelled, that the Qu’ran was mishandled, that his request to be circumcised for religious reasons was refused, that he was not allowed to purchase a toothstick, and that prayer oils sold in the commissary did not comply with Islamic requirements. The court also held that damages are not available under RLUIPA in claims against officials in their individual capacities.
In Decker v. Hogan, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89048 (ND NY, Sept. 28, 2009), a New York federal district court permitted an atheist civil detainee who was placed in a sexual offender treatment program to move ahead with his First Amendment claim that portions of the program are based on Zen Buddhism and Christianity. The court, however refused to issue a preliminary injunction because plaintiff had not shown a substantial likelihood of success on the merits.
In Lewis v. Foster, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88652 (D DE, Sept. 25, 2009), a Delaware federal district court rejected a claim by a former inmate that while he was incarcerated he was denied access to a razor to shave his head. He claimed that his Hebrew Israelite religion required him to shave his head for an indeterminate time after he came in contact with a dead body, namely his stillborn child.
In Lee v. Gurney, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88883 (ED VA, Sept. 25, 2009), a Virginia federal district court rejected a Sunni Muslim inmate’s First Amendment and Equal Protection contentions, but permitted him to move ahead with his claim under RLUIPA complaining about a ban on group prayer in the prison recreation yard. The court concluded that authorities had not shown for summary judgment purposes that they used the least restrictive means to further a compelling interest in imposing the ban.
In Ramsey v. Goord, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88859 (WD NY, Aug. 19, 2009), a New York federal magistrate judge refused to grant defendants’ motion for summary judgment on a series of related claims by an inmate who declared himself to be Jewish who was temporarily removed from the prison’s kosher food program without any chance to challenge the claimed reasons for his removal. He was charged with giving some of his kosher food to another inmate when it appears that this was done by an inmate porter of the food trays rather than plaintiff. Plaintiff was also allowed to move ahead with his claim that his removal from the program was in retaliation for his providing a statement helping another Jewish inmate in his charges against a prison staff member.
In Ellis v. United States, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89392 (WD PA, Sept. 28, 2009), a Pennsylvania federal district court dismissed a Muslim federal inmate’s negligence claim stemming from the omission of his name from the call-out sheet for the 2006 Eid celebration as well as his free exercise claim based on the denial of Halal meat for the 2006 Eid celebration. The court also adopted a number of recommendations made in the case by a federal magistrate judge (2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90035 (June 2, 2009)) including permitting plaintiff to move ahead with a RFRA claim that his name was omitted for 3 months from the call-out list for Jumu’ah services, an equal protection claim regarding denial of Halal meat for the Eid service, and a retaliation claim. The court agreed to deny a RFRA claim relating to plaintiff’s ability to purchase prayer oil and omission of Halal meat from the Eid service.
In Katz v. McGrew, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89599 (D HI, Sept. 23, 2009), a Hawaii federal district court dismissed without prejudice a claim by a Jewish prisoner seeking a transfer from Hawaii to a mainland federal prison where he could eat and pray in a Sukkah during the Jewish holiday of Sukkot. The court said that case should have been brought as a civil rights claim, and not as a habeas corpus claim.
In Mayo v. Norris, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89831 (ED AK, Sept. 17, 2009), and Arkansas federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing as frivolous a claim by an inmate who said he is a Disciple of Christ that he requires a one-person cell so he can be separate from those who do not obey the doctrines of Jesus.
In Boles v. Neet, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91474 (D CO, Sept. 29, 2009), a Colorado federal district court accepted a federal magistrate’s recommendations (2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90019 (March 13, 2009) and dismissed a complaint by an Orthodox Jewish prisoner that he was not permitted to wear his yarmulke and talit katan while being transported off prison premises for cataract surgery. (The case was on remand from the 10th Circuit. See prior posting.)
Friday, October 02, 2009
Court Says "Ministeral Exception" Does Not Apply To Suits Under Trafficking Victims Protection Act
the standards that govern what constitutes trafficking and forced labor do not depend on the interpretation of religious doctrine; rather they are secular standards that guarantee that employers cannot deprive employees of fundamental human rights. Thus, unlike analyzing suits brought under federal and state employment laws, exploring the ills that the TVPA is meant to combat -- namely, trafficking and forced labor -- does not require courts to unduly interfere with the internal affairs of religious organizations or get involved in the selection or retention of ministers. Furthermore, a suit under the TVPA is not analogous to a suit under federal and state employment laws, because it is not brought in response to an adverse employment action...
Alabama High Court Says Morality Can Still Justify Commercial Regulation
Court Rejects Protesters' Attempts To Use Chalk Art In Anti-Roe Demonstration
European Court Faults Russia For Refusing To Register 2 Scientolgy Churches
The court noted that member states differed as to whether Scientology should be categorized as a religion. Therefore the court said it would defer to authorities of the country in question as to that issue. Russian officials held that the two churches were religious organizations. It went on to conclude that Russia's "15-year rule" violated the ECHR because it impacts only newly-formed churches that are not part of a strictly hierarchical church structure, and there is no justification for this difference in treatment. A ECHR press release summarized the decision.
Israel Prison Authority Says Prisoners Can Sleep In Sukkah
Washington's Red Mass Is Sunday As Supreme Court Opens Its Term
Barry Lynn, director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, says that Washington's Red Mass was begun after several Supreme Court decisions were handed down that troubled the Church. The Mass is sponsored by the John Carroll Society, a lay Catholic group of legal professionals. Jane Roberts, wife of the chief justice, is an officer of the Society. Currently six of the Justices on the Court are Catholic. Justices of other faiths are invited to the Mass as well, and some, like Justice Breyer (who is Jewish), attend. However Justice Ginsburg, has stopped going because of the subject matter of the sermons. Church officials deny using the Mass to lobby the Court. Last year, 5 Justices attended. (See prior posting.)
New Hampshire Federal Court Rejects Challenge To Pledge of Allegiance
the Pledge of Allegiance is not a religious prayer, nor is it a "nonsectarian prayer" .... and its recitation in schools does not constitute a "religious exercise." The Pledge does not thank God. It does not ask God for a blessing, or for guidance. It does not address God in any way.... Rather, the Pledge, in content and function, is a civic patriotic statement.... Peer or social pressure to participate in a school exercise not of a religious character does not implicate the Establishment Clause, and as a civic or patriotic exercise, the statute is clear in making participation completely voluntary....
The words "under God" undeniably come from the vocabulary of religion, or, at the least, reflect a theistic orientation, but no more so than the benign deism reflected in the national trust in God declared on our currency, or in ceremonial intercessions to "save this Honorable Court" .... It may well be that some, perhaps many, people required to employ U.S. currency, or socially pressured to stand during civic ceremonies, feel offended by what seems to them an imposition of theistic doctrine. But the Constitution prohibits the government from establishing a religion, or coercing one to support or participate in religion, a religious exercise, or prayer. It does not mandate that government refrain from all civic, cultural, and historic references to a God.....When Congress added the words "under God," to the Pledge in 1954, its actual intent probably had far more to do with politics than religion — more to do with currying favor with the electorate than with an Almighty. (God, if God exists, is probably not so easily fooled.) In the intervening half century since the words were added, rote repetition has, as Justice Brennan observed, removed any significant religious content embodied in the words, if there ever was significant religious (as opposed to political) content embodied in those words. Today, the words remain religious words, but plainly fall comfortably within the category of historic artifacts — reflecting a benign or ceremonial civic deism that presents no threat to the fundamental values protected by the Establishment Clause.
Lodi City Council Changes Policy, But Keeps Prayer
Thursday, October 01, 2009
Parties Settle In Lesbian's Suit Against California Clinic
NY Jewish Schools Get No Child Left Behind Tutors For First Time
Many Pakistani Mosques and Madressahs Face Shut Off Of Electricity
Texas State Fair Is Not State Actor In Barring Religious Literature Distribution
Israeli Court Says Chinese Pressured University On Falun Gong Exhibit
Court Rejects Tony Alamo's Free Exercise Defense In Suit By Former Followers
Alamo states that the beatings alleged in the Complaint were merely spankings, which are required by the Bible. Thus, he argues that his alleged conduct in ordering these beatings is protected by the First Amendment’s free exercise clause.... The principle of religious liberty does not give one the liberty to physically attack others.... While an individual’s beliefs that he can beat and falsely imprison Plaintiffs and intentionally inflict emotional distress upon them is protected by the First Amendment, acting on these beliefs is reasonably prohibited by Arkansas law.The Pine Bluff (AR) Commercial reported on the decision yesterday.
Christian Group Sues Challenging Maine's Interpretation of Its Charitable Licensing Law
10 MRS Sec. 8003(5) allows the agency to impose a civil penalty of up to $1500 for each violation of law. Apparently the state, as a condition to granting a renewal of CAN's license as a charitable organization, also required it to admit both that the Governor did not give his consent and that CAN's "correspondence contained an inflammatory anti-Muslim message." Yesterday, Liberty Counsel announced that CAN had filed a federal lawsuit against the state of Maine challenging an interpretation of the state statute that prohibits any mention of the Governor in a charitable solicitation without consent. The suit also claims that CAN's free speech was infringed by "censoring" of its anti-Muslim message.
UPDATE: Here is the full text of the complaint in Christian Action Network v. State of Maine, (D ME, filed 9/28/2009). The Bangor Daily News has more coverage and a link to the text of CAN's mailing.
2nd Circuit: Ministerial Exception Bars Rabbi's Suit Against Her Former Temple
review of Freidlander’s claims ... would require scrutiny of whether she should have ... read more extensively from the Torah at certain services, prepared students for their Bar or Bat Mitzvah more adequately, performed certain pastoral services ... or followed the Temple’s funeral service policies. A reviewing court would also be required to assess whether any failures rose to the level of "gross misconduct or willful neglect of duty".... [S]uch review would involve impermissible judicial inquiry into religious matters.[Thanks to Y.Y. Landa for the lead.]
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Prosecutors Seek To Offer Unusual Religious Analysis In Competency Trial
Amicus Brief Raises Opposition To UN Convention
High School Cheerleaders Cannot Carry Religious Banners On Field
An attorney for the Christian Law Association has been advising those upset with the school's ruling on at least two alternative routes, according to Chattanoogan.com. Barbara J. Weller says that while the students may not continue to put Bible verses on the banners they have been making officially for the games, they can make other banners with Bible verses on them, as long as they make the banners at home and bring them to the games on their own, without the school's approval, permission or participation. She also says that the school should not be able to prohibit banners that merely used the words, "Power, Love, Self Discipline" without reference to the Bible verse that includes them.
UPDATE: At an Oct. 13 meeting, the Catoosa County School Board upheld the superintendent's ruling. (ABP).
Supporters of Sectarian Prayer Threaten Billboards Exposing Council Votes
Court Rejects Copyright Suit Claiming Infringement In Use of Judas Iscariot Trial
The trials depicted in the two works are dramatically different in substance, setting, plot, theme, language, and the overall thrust and feel of the works. Stripped of unprotectible elements—such as the biblical characters and biblical story—the works are not substantially similar.Courthouse News Service reported on the decision yesterday.
German Court Says School Must Provide Prayer Space For Muslim Student
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
New York Appellate Court Voids Church Election of New Pastor and Trustees
Plaintiffs, who objected to Williams as pastor, sued challenging the validity of the 2006 meeting. The appellate court agreed with their challenge, finding that defendants failed to prove who were church members entitled to vote at the meeting. The court declared that the two remaining original trustees were the only valid trustees. It went on to enjoin Williams and his supporters from exercising any authority or control over church property. [Thanks to Y.Y. Landa for the lead.]
Court Rejects Interlocutory Appeal In Minnesota Charter School Case
British Jewish Schools Implement New Admissions Criteria Ordered By Court
Monday, September 28, 2009
Christian Group Creates "Adopt a Liberal" Initiative
Pray earnestly and intensely for them! Pray that the Lord would move upon them and cause them to be the kind of leaders who will encourage others to lead "a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence." We encourage you to seek the Lord's guidance on how to pray for your liberal(s), always allowing Him to temper your prayer with His love and mercy....
Please pray daily for the liberal(s) of your choice, so each can become a good influence on our Nation's culture. Prayer is powerful! It allows God to change the minds of those for whom we are praying. In fact, we fully expect that many of our adoptees will "graduate" from this prayer program with vivid testimonies of God having changed their lives and worldviews!
Woman's Caning Sentence Upheld On Appeal In Malaysia
Victoria Government Agrees To Broad Religious Exemptions In Discrimination Law
2010 National Religious Moot Court Announced
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Recent Articles and Books of Interest
- Jeffrey M. Lipshaw, Can There Be a Religion of Reason? A Response to Leiter's Circular Conception of Religious Belief, (Suffolk University Law School Research Paper Series, Sept. 27, 2009).
- Mostapha Benhenda, Liberal Democracy and Political Islam: The Search for Common Ground, Politics, Philosophy & Economics, Forthcoming).
- Umar Aimhanosi Oseni, Towards the Effective Legal Regulation of Waqf in Nigeria: Problems and Prospects, (September 25, 2009).
From SmartCILP:
- Stephen M. Johnson, Is Religion the Environment's Last Best Hope? Targeting Change in Individual Behavior Through Personal Norm Activation, 24 Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation 119-164 (2009).
- Chad G. Marzen, The Role of Custom in Canon, Jewish, and Islamic Law: Supplemented, Superseded, or Supplanted by Written Law?, 35 Ohio Northern University Law Review 813-827 (2009).
- Anne Orford, Jurisdiction Without Territory: From the Holy Roman Empire to the Responsibility to Protect, 30 Michigan Journal of International Law 981-1015 (2009).
- Nicholas C. Rigano, Fraudulent Conveyance Law: Destroying Free Exercise Rights at a Church Near You, 17 American Bankruptcy Institute Law Review 165-187 (2009).
Recent Books:
- Anne Marie Lofaso, Religion in the Public Schools: A Road Map for Avoiding Lawsuits and Respecting Parents' Legal Rights (Americans United for Separation of Church & State, 2009), reviewed on AU's website. [Link is to full text of book.]
- David Nash (ed.), Blasphemy in Britain and America 1800-1930, (4 vols.) (Pickering & Chatto Publishers, forthcoming April 2010).
China Issues New Report on Its Ethnic Policy-- Claims Religious Freedom
Freedom of religious belief in China means that every citizen has the freedom to believe or not to believe in any religion," said the white paper issued by the Information office of the State Council.... [A]ll normal religious activities, including those of ethnic minorities, are protected by law.... Venues for religious activities are found all over China, basically satisfying the needs of religious believers.... [T]he Chinese government also helps religious groups build seminaries to train clergymen of ethnic minorities, subsidizes the repairs of some religious venues in minority areas, and gives allowances to poor religious believers of ethnic minorities, according to the white paper.The White Paper comes in the wake of a letter earlier this month (full text) from two members of the U.S. House of Representatives to Jon Huntsman, the new U.S. ambassador to China, raising concerns about reported plans by China to take new steps against "house churches" leading up to the Oct. 1 marking of the 60th anniversary of Communist Party rule in China. (Christian Post, Sept. 10.)
Illinois Supreme Court Says Limitiations Extension Cannot Be Applied Retroactively
Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases
In Davis v. Hightower, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85505 (ND FL, July 13, 2009), a federal magistrate judge recommended rejection of a Wiccan inmate's claim that his free exercise rights were infringed when authorities confiscated 9 "religious healing stones" from his property which he used to help heal his peptic ulcer.
Mauwee v. Donat, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86148 (D NV, Sept. 18, 2009), involved claims that prison officials desecrated the prison's sweat lodge area by allowing non-Indians to use it. A Nevada federal district court concluded that damage claims are not permitted under RLUIPA and that plaintiffs' claim for equitable relief was precluded by qualified immunity. It also concluded that objections to changes in sweat lodge procedures were now moot since those changes had been rescinded. The magistrate's recommended findings in the case are at 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86141 (May 28, 2009).
In Kinney v. Curtin, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86225 (WD MI, July 29, 2009), and in Thomas v. Bergh, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86893 (WD MI, Aug. 21, 2009), a Michigan federal magistrate judge recommended that the court uphold decisions to deny plaintiffs participation in their prison's kosher food program because plaintiff had not shown that his beliefs were sincerely held.
In Parks v. Smith, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87147 (ND NY, Sept. 23, 2009), a New York federal district court accepted most of the magistrate's recommendations (2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87210, Aug. 17, 2009) allowing a Jehovah's Witness inmate to move ahead with his claim that authorities violated his free exercise rights and his rights under RLUIPA when they disciplined him for attempting to mail a photograph of himself in a meditation pose to a company for use in a personal ad. Prison authorities claim that the pose is in fact a gang signal. The court rejected the magistrate's holding that plaintiff's free exercise and retaliation claims were duplicative. He might be able to show retaliation based on religion even if he did not succeed in his claim that his rights were infringed when authorities classified his meditation pose as a gang signal.
In Strope v. McKune, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86886 (D KS, Sept. 22, 2009) and Strope v. Cummings, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86885 (D KS, Sept. 22, 2009), a Kansas federal district court rejected claims that Assembly of Yahweh inmates were not given adequate time for worship. It also rejected claims that certain foods served to those on the kosher diet were routinely spoiled, and that other foods were not included. UPDATE: The 10th Circuit affirmed (June 11, 2010).
In Shepard v. Peryam, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87189 (SD FL, Aug. 20, 2009), a Florida federal magistrate judge recommended that the court reject claims by a Muslim pre-trial detainee that he was denied religious services, prayer beads, a prayer rug, a Kufi (prayer cap), and a Kosher diet.
In Floyd v. Leslie, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87758 (ND IN, Sept. 23, 2009), and Indiana federal district court allowed an inmate to move ahead with his complaint that a prison officer denied him access to Satanist religious material that belonged to him, but the court dismissed plaintiff's claim against the prison's chaplain.
In Jenkins v. Vail, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87730 (ED WA, Aug. 31, 2009), a federal district court (rejecting a magistrate's recommendations, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87769, July 22, 2009) refused to grant a preliminary injunction to a Muslim inmate who would not participate in work or educational programming on the ground that his sincerely held religious beliefs prevent him from supporting a non-Islamic government.
Moorish American Corrections Officers Can Move Ahead With Discrimination Allegations
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Guardian Ad Litem Has Immunity As To Comments On Mother's Religious Views
Christian Group Complains About Ganesh Statue At Calgary Zoo
Christian Reformed Church Gets Title To Property Over Breakaway Congregation
Friday, September 25, 2009
Hasidic Congregation Gets Reversal of Damage Award, But Loses On Other Issues
It appears that originally the 3,000-member Congregation Yetev Lev ("CYL") owned a synagogue building, surrounding parking lots and a nearby residence that was used as living quarters by its rabbi. In some fashion, Bais Yoel Ohel Feige ("BYOF") took ownership of the residence and began to use it as a synagogue. It also filed a suit under Art. 15 of New York's Real Property Actions & Proceedings Law to confirm its ownership of the premises. CYL brought several counterclaims. One asserted that BYOF's use of the property violated the town's zoning code. The appellate court agreed and upheld a trial court's injunction because the zoning code, as amended in 2007, requires a site plan review by the Village Zoning Board for operating a place of worship in a residence.
The appellate court however reversed the trial court's award of nearly $745,000 in damages on another counterclaim by CYL which complained that individuals attending services at BYOF had continuously used CYL's parking area. The appellate court concluded that there was no evidence that BYOF had instructed its members where to park and that, in any event, CYL had not put up signs attempting to restrict who could use its lots. Also testimony as to how many BYOF members parked there was speculative. Finally the appellate court held that CYL retained an implied easement to access the basement and roof of the residence area to install and repair water, sewer and utility lines and HVAC equipment that apparently served CYL's building. [Thanks to Y.Y. Landa for the lead.]
Religious Groups Active On Several Issues At G-20
4th Circuit Says Westboro's "Utterly Distasteful" Picketing Is Protected By 1st Amendment
The court held that additionally no reasonable reader could interpret any of the signs, or the Internet posting, as asserting actual and objectively verifiable facts about Snyder or his son. They are merely "imaginative and hyperbolic rhetoric intended to spark debate about issues with which the Defendants are concerned." Judge Shedd, concurring in the judgment, would have avoided the constitutional issue by holding that Snyder failed to introduce sufficient evidence at trial to support the jury verdict in his favor.
Today's Baltimore Sun reports on the decision and reactions to it. Meanwhile this week Westboro members began a campaign to picket synagogues in Brooklyn, New York just before Yom Kippur. Westboro spokesperson Shirley Phelps-Roper told the The Brooklyn Paper that their efforts could be seen as an "obey your God rally." Also, last week, just before Rosh Hashanah, Westboro picketers turned up outside the University of Oklahoma's Hillel Foundation. According to the AP, Phelps-Roper said the church stopped there as part of a "love campaign" to critize Jews for "killing Christ."
Capitol Visitor Center Hosts Premiere of Film On Religion In America
This Sunday Is Second "Pulpit Freedom Sunday"
UPDATE: ADF reports that 83 churches from 30 states and D.C. participated in the 2009 Pulpit Sunday.
Court Dismisses Prof's Dismissal Complaint Under Ecclesiastical Abstention Doctrine
Illinois High Court Upholds Bequest To Grandson Who Married Within the Faith
The Supreme Court, however, focused on the fact that Feinberg's wife exercised a power of appointment she had been given under the terms of her husband's testamentary trust. She had directed that upon her death her two children and the grandson who had then married within the faith receive the assets that were currently in trusts. This eliminated many of the hypothetical concerns that had influenced the Court of Appeals' decision and eliminated any influence on future marital decisions of potential beneficiaries. No "dead hand" controlled the future conduct of beneficiaries because the wife locked in the identity of the beneficiaries by making a bequest "to reward, at the time of her death, those grandchildren whose lives most closely embraced the values she and Max cherished."
The Supreme Court also rejected constitutional claims, saying:
Because a testator or the settlor of a trust is not a state actor, there are no constitutional dimensions to his choice of beneficiaries. Equal protection does not require that all children be treated equally; due process does not require notice of conditions precedent to potential beneficiaries; and the free exercise clause does not require a grandparent to treat grandchildren who reject his religious beliefs and customs in the same manner as he treats those who conform to his traditions.AP reports on the decision and gives additional background.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Funeral Director Loses On Most of Her Religious Discrimination Claims
House Committee Holds Hearings On Employment Non-Discrimination Act
The testimony by Rabbi David Saperstein, Director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, endorsed the the bill's anti-discrimination provisions as stemming "from a core teaching shared by an array of faith traditions." he said that the religious institutions exemption has broad based support. However Craig L. Parshall, Senior Vice-President of the National Religious Broadcasters, criticized the religious institutions exemption as inadequate. More broadly, he argued:
Neither the Congress nor the courts have jurisdiction over the religious beliefs of people of faith. Holding the faithful in contempt because they advance unpopular religious doctrines itself evidences a form of cultural discrimination. Christian ministries that object to those sexual preferences which are in clear violation of the standards of the Bible are standing on a long and well-worn road.... The rights to preach and practice those beliefs spring from a Bill of Rights that is two hundred and twenty years old....
Polish Court Fines Catholic Magazine For Its Attack On Woman Seeking An Abortion
Polygamy Charges Dismissed By British Columbia Supreme Court
Spanish Judge Works Out Compromise With Witness Wearing Burka
Here Are Religious Liberty and Church-State Issues From Senate's Health Care Reform Bill
Extensive attention has been given to issues relating to abortion services. A lengthy summary of the abortion provisions in the bill are in the Chairman's Mark at pp. 28-30 of that document. The provisions would:
- ensure that state laws prohibiting or requiring coverage or funding for abortions, and state laws involving abortion-related procedural requirements, are not preempted. The provision similarly provides that Federal conscience protections and abortion-related antidiscrimination laws would not be affected by the bill.
- abortions (beyond those for which federal funds can already be used) cannot be a mandated benefit as part of a minimum benefits package but a qualified health plan would not be prohibited from providing additional coverage. Federal funds continue to be prohibited from being used to pay for abortions unless the pregnancy is due to rape, incest, or if the life of the mother is in danger.
- no tax credit or cost-sharing credits may be used to pay for abortions beyond those for which federal funds may already be used. Insurers participating in any state-based exchange that offer additional abortion coverage must segregate from any premium and cost-sharing credits an amount of each enrollee's private premium dollars that is determined to be sufficient to cover the provision of those services.
- in each state exchange, at least one plan must provide additional abortion coverage and at least one plan must not provide such coverage.
- health benefits plans participating in state exchanges would be prohibited from discriminating against any individual health care provider or health care facility because of its willingness or unwillingness to provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions.
- Pg. 31: Exemptions from the requirement to have health coverage would be allowed for religious objections that are consistent with those allowed under Medicare.
- Pg. 32: Exemptions from the excise tax on those who do not purchase health insurance policies will be made for any health arrangement provided by established religious organizations comprised of individuals with sincerely held beliefs (such as those participating in Health Sharing Ministries),.
- Pg. 76: states can apply for funds to provide incentives to Medicaid enrollees who successfully complete healthy lifestyle programs. In designing plans, States may collaborate with community-based programs, non-profit organizations, providers, and faith-based groups, among others.
Many of the proposed amendments are also of interest to those concerned with religious liberty and church-state issues. Here is a summary with an indication of the pages at which they appear:
- Pg. 36: Rockefeller Amendment #C22: $80 million annually would go to non-profit, community-based, and faith-based organizations as well as to states to cover the administrative costs of system and policy improvements that expedite enrollment and retention in the Children's Health Insurance Program.
- Pg. 79: Kerry-Hatch Amendment #C-14 (pg. 79): No qualified health plan offered through a State Exchange may deny benefits for religious or spiritual health care.
- Pg. 201: Hatch Amendment #C-10: Restores funding for abstinence education.
- Pg. 203: Hatch Amendment #C-12: Prohibits federal funds from being used to pay for assisted suicide and offers conscience protections to providers or plans refusing to offer assisted suicide services.
- Pg. 204: Hatch Amendment #C13: Non-discrimination on abortion and respect for right of conscience.
- Pg. 205: Hatch Amendment #C14: Prohibits federal funds under the Act from being used for elective abortions and plans that cover such abortions.
- Pg. 310: Enzi Amendment #C12: Prohibits requirement that a health plan cover abortions except in the case where the mother‘s life is in danger or the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest.
- Pg. 311: Enzi Amendment #C13: Prohibits federal funds to be used to pay for any abortion or cover any part of the cost of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion, except in the case where the mother‘s life is in danger or the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. But individuals may purchase supplemental abortion coverage with non-federal funds.
- Pg. 312: Enzi Amendment #C14: Prohibits any provision in the bill from overturning or preempting constitutionally permissible laws or regulations of a State, that place limitations or procedural requirements on abortions, including any state law requiring parental notification or consent for the performance of an abortion on a minor.
- Pg. 313: Enzi Amendment #C15: Prohibits the federal, state or local governments, health care providers or plans that receives federal funds from discriminating against an individual or institution on the basis that they do not perform or participate in specific surgical or medical procedures or prescribe certain pharmaceuticals in violation of the moral, ethical, or religious beliefs of the individual or entity.
Yesterday the Interfaith Alliance released letters it sent to Sen. Orrin Hatch objecting to his Amendment #C-10 and to Sen. Michael Enzi objecting to his Amendment #C-15.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Litigation Over Church Property Was Costly For Both Sides In Colorado Springs
Canadian Appeals Court Permits Religious Groups' Intervention In Prostitution Law Challenge
Today Is 20th Annual "See You At The Pole"
Baptist Joint Committee Executive Director J. Brent Walker, writing Monday at the Washington Post's On Faith, suggests guidelines for conducting programs. They include a warning that: "students should avoid being lulled into a civil religion trap. Joining hands in a circle facing the quintessential symbol of our country, the American Flag, makes this a real risk. Yes, we are told in Scriptures to pray for our leaders. Students should understand they are not praying to Caesar, but to God." Jamison Foser at Media Matters criticizes Walker's suggestions, saying that SYATP undermines the spirit, if not the letter, of church-state separation.