Two Muslim Religious Leaders Condemn London Bombings

At least two Middle Eastern Muslim religious leaders have strongly condemned the bombings that occurred today in London, according to a report from Islam Online. From Cairo, Al-Azhar Grand Imam Sheikh Mohammad Sayyed Tantawi said: "Those responsible for London attacks are criminals who do not represent Islam or even truly understand (its message)." He went on to denounced the killing of civilians, including women and children, "without differentiating between combatants and non-combatants." Tantawi, who is the highest spiritual authority for Sunni Moslems around the world, has previously condemned suicide bombings against Israeli civilians.

From Lebanon, a leading Shiite scholar, Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah, said: "These crimes are not accepted by any religion. It is a barbarism wholly rejected by Islam." In addition many government officials and ordinary citizens throughout the Middle East were quoted by Islam Online as denouncing the killings.

Intelligent Design Gains Support of Austrian Cardinal

The controversy over teaching Intelligent Design in the schools is likely to heat up as a leading Catholic Cardinal, Christoph Schonborn, seemingly endorsed the theory today in a New York Times op-ed titled Finding Design in Nature. Schonborn, the Cardinal Archbishop of Vienna, was the lead editor of the 1992 Catechism of the Catholic Church. Minimizing the importance of a 1996 letter by Pope John Paul II that seemed to endorse evolutionary theory, Schonborn said: "Any system of thought that denies or seeks to explain away the overwhelming evidence for design in biology is ideology, not science."

1st Circuit Denies Standing In Challenge To Holiday Displays

Yesterday in Osediacz v. City of Cranston, the US First Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a challenge to a holiday display policy in Cranston, Rhode Island, finding that plaintiff lacked standing. In 2003, the city allowed private parties to place "appropriate" holiday displays on City Hall lawn, subject to approval of the mayor. The trial court had rejected plaintiff's Establishment Clause challenge to the policy, but had found that the policy violated the First Amendment's speech clause by placing standardless discretion in the mayor to approve or disapprove displays. However the Court of Appeals held that because plaintiff had no interest in erecting a display, she would not be subject to the vagaries of the approval process. Because she had no personal interest beyond that of any resident or taxpayer, she lacked standing to maintain the challenge.

More on Judge McConnell's Views

In response to my posting yesterday on Religion Clause opinions of potential Supreme Court nominees, commenters have suggested additional sources on Judge Michael McConnell's views. While not strictly a free exercise or establishment clause opinion, McConnell wrote a concurring opinion in O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao do Vegetal v. Ashcroft, 389 F.3d 973 (10th Cir., Nov. 12, 2004). It involves the standard for granting a preliminary injunction when a practice is challenged under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The US Supreme Court has granted certiorari in the case. [Thanks to Derek L. Gaubatz]

Also, McConnell has written at least 3 law review articles on the religion clauses, Here they are with links to LEXIS: The Problem of Singling Out Religion, 50 DePaul Law Review 1 (2000); Establishment and Disestablishment at the Founding, Part I: Establishment of Religion, 44 William & Mary Law Review 2105 (2003); The Origins and Historical Understanding of Free Exercise of Religion, 103 Harvard Law Review 1409 (1990) . [Thanks to Troy L. Booher]

ADL Objects To Lunchtime Prayer At Naval Academy

The Baltimore Sun this morning reports on a letter sent to the US Naval Academy last month by the Anti Defamation League objecting to organized lunchtime prayer at the Academy. The ADL's June 17 letter objected to the Academy's requiring all the midshipmen to "stand in formation, before lunch, while the chaplain recites a prayer." Chaplains of different faiths rotate in giving the prayer. The Academy said that part of the reason for the prayer is to encourage future officers to understand other religions. In 2003, the ACLU had filed a similar complaint with the Academy.

Bishops Conference Outlines Concerns On Supreme Court Appointment

Spokane Bishop William S. Skylstad, president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, wrote President Bush last Friday regarding the type of person the USCCB would like to see nominated to replace retiring US Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. His letter, which is included in the USCCB's July 6 press release, says in part:

"I urge you to consider for the Court qualified jurists who, pre-eminently, support the protection of human life from conception to natural death, especially of those who are unborn, disabled, or terminally ill. I would ask you to consider jurists who are also cognizant of the rights of minorities, immigrants, and those in need; respect the role of religion and of religious institutions in our society and the protections afforded them by the First Amendment; recognize the value of parental choice in education; and favor restraining and ending the use of the death penalty. "

Chinese Church Leader To Be Tried For Illegally Printing Bibles

The leader of an underground Chinese church who has been in custody for 10 months is scheduled to appear in court in Beijing tomorrow, according to a report by BBC News. Cai Zhuohua, along with his wife and two other church members, has been charged with "illegal business practices" for printing over 200,000 Bibles. Only one company is permitted by the Chinese government to print Bibles. Cai's lawyer, Gao Zhisheng, said that the Bibles were not going to be sold, but were to be distributed free. He continued, "Authorities are always using economics as a pretext to deal with religious and political issues".

New Sudan Constitution Grants Concession to Non-Muslims

Today the AP in a story carried by the Los Angeles Times reports that Sudan's National Assembly has adopted a new Constitution. (See earlier related posting.) The new charter moves the country away from complete Islamic rule. For the first time, the Constitution protects freedom of religion and expression. After a peace agreement with the country's southern rebels, the new Constitution provides that Islamic law will not be applied in the south of the country which is mainly Christian and animist. It also removes the present requirement that the country's President be a Muslim, paving the way for Christian rebel leader John Garang to be sworn in as First Vice President.

Religion Clause Views of Potenital Supreme Court Nominees

In last week's New York Times, Neal A. Lewis wrote In List of Potential Justices, Many Kinds of Conservative suggesting eight leading candidates for replacing Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Seven of the eight are sitting judges. What kind of Religion Clause opinions have the seven written?

For three, I could find none-- Judges John G. Roberts (DC Circuit), Michael McConnell (10th Circuit), and Edith Brown Clement (5th Circuit). [If you know of opinions I have missed, please let me know.] However, here is an article written in 1995 by Michael McConnell while he was a Professor at the University of Chicago Law School, titled The Movement For Religious Rights. It appeared in The American Enterprise.

For the other potential nominees, I was able to find Free Exercise and/or Establishment Clause opinions they authored. Here is a Religion Clause opinion from each:

Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III (Fourth Circuit)- Simpson v. Chesterfield County Bd. of Supervisors, 404 F.3d 276 (April 14, 2005)- dismissal of claim by Wiccan seeking to be added to list of those who could give legislative invocation.

Judge J. Michael Luttig (Fourth Circuit)- Peck v. Upshur County Bd. of Educ., 155 F.3d 274 (Aug. 14, 1998)- upheld single day each school year for distribution of religious and political literature in high schools by private groups. But struck down practice as to elementary schools.

Judge Edith H. Jones (5th Cir.)- Freeman v. Tex. Dep't of Crim. Justice, 369 F.3d 854 (May 7, 2004)- upheld against Free Exercise challenge prison’s policy on holding of religious services.

Judge Emilio Garza (5th Cir.)- Dissent in Doe by Doe v. Beaumont Indep. School Dist., 173 F.3d 274 (April 16, 1999) [LEXIS link]- dissent would reject Establishment Clause challenge to "Clergy in the School" character education program. Note: apparently this opinion was withdrawn after an en banc rehearing reported at 240 F.3d 462 in which opinions were written by others.

Also widely mentioned elsewhere as a possible nominee is Judge Samuel A Alito, Jr. (Third Circuit). Among his opinions is Blackhawk v. Pennsylvania, 381 F.3d 202 (Aug. 20, 2004)- found Free Exercise violation in refusing waiver of a permit fee requirement under the Pa. Game & Wildlife Code for Native American keeping animals for religious purposes.

Recent Church-State Law Review Articles

The Spring 2005 issue of the Journal of Church and State has recently been published. Its table of contents and a few of its features are available online free of charge. The full issue is available on Westlaw. The issue contains 7 articles and reviews of 21 books.

SmartCILP this week lists these new articles of interest:

Thomas C. Berg, Minority Religions and the Religion Clause, 82 Washington Univ. Law Quar. 919-1000 (2004).

David A. Fraser, A Passive Collaboration: Bureaucracy, Legality, and the Jews of Brussels, 1940-1944, 30 Brooklyn J. Int'l. L. 365-420 (2005).

Lee Ann Rabe, A Rose By Any Other Name: School Prayer Redefined As a Moment of Silence Is Still Unconstitutional, 82 Denver Univ L. Rev. 57-78 (2004).

Ellen S. Reinstein, Turn the Other Cheek, or Demand an Eye for an Eye? Religious Persecution in China and an Effective Western Response, 20 Connecticut Jour. Int'l. Law 1-37 (2004).

New Progressive Christian Group Supports Church-State Separation

The Christian Alliance for Progress (CAP) is a new grassroots progressive religious movement. The Inter Press Service News Agency reported yesterday that the group began organizing 4 months ago and has attracted 4000 members. According to the article: "CAP's core principles include commitments to economic justice, environmental stewardship, equality for homosexuals, effective prevention -- but not criminalisation -- of abortion, peaceful solutions to international disputes, and universal health care for all U.S. citizens."

Last week CAP delivered The Jacksonville Declaration, challenging the stance of the Christian right, proclaiming in part: "We do not support your agenda to erode the separation of church and state, to blur the vital distinction between your interpretation of Christianity and our shared democratic institutions. Moreover, we do not accept what seems to be your understanding of Christian values. We reject a Christianity co-opted by any government and used as a tool to ostracize, to subjugate, or to condone bigotry, greed and injustice."

NPR On the Scopes "Monkey Trial"

National Public Radio yesterday marked the 80th anniversary of the Scopes "Monkey Trial". The audio of a very interesting piece by Noah Adams is available on its website, as is a Timeline of the trial and other coverage of the evolution-creationism debate.

New Articles From Federalist Society Journal

The new May 2005 issue of Engage: The Journal of the Federalist Society's Practice Groups carries three articles of interest to church-state lawyers:

James P. Kelly III, Human Rights, Education, Religion, and Parental Choice in Education

Robert D. Ault & Larry J. Obhof, It's Not Just the Test That's a Lemon, It's How Some Judges Apply It

Book Review by James A. Sonne of Carl H. Esbeck, Stanley W. Carlson-Thies, and Ronald J. Sider, The Freedom of Faith-Based Organizations to Staff on a Religious Basis

Universal Declaration of Human Rights Banned In Maldives

In a startling move reported today by Minivan News, the President of the Maldives has banned copies of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights from being distributed in the country. The Maldives has signed onto the Universal Declaration, and the Maldives Human Rights Commission has been distributing copies for the last year. However, now the Maldivan High Council on Islamic Matters has issued a press release claiming that Articles 16 and 18 of the Universal Declaration contravene the Maldivan Constitution. Those articles provide for freedom of religion, freedom to change religions, and for equality for men and women, and for people of all religions. The Maldives Constitution declares Islam the religion of the Maldives. In an understatement, the Minivan News commented that "the President may be trying to 'play the religious card' by banning the document".

Sunday Hunting Pressed In Pennsylvania

The Clarion News reports today that religious arguments are being used by both sides in connection with three bills pending in the Pennsylvania legislature to allow hunting on Sunday. Currently, Sunday hunting is permitted for foxes and coyotes, and on noncommercial regulated hunting grounds. HB 417 would expand it to woodchucks, with the landowner's permission; HB 934 would allow Sunday hunting on regulated commercial hunting grounds; and HB 904 would totally repeal the ban on Sunday hunting. Opponents focus on having a day for religious pursuits. Proponents say that the current ban discriminates against those who have other days as their days of rest.

Serbia Delays Trial of Mosque Arsonists Again

Forum 18 today says that prosecutors in Serbia are dragging their feet in bringing 11 young people to trial for burning a mosque in the city of Nis. It has been 15 months since the attack, and yesterday a municipal court hearing was postponed for a sixth time. Most of the delays were caused by the non-appearance of some of the accused or their lawyers. When a trial finally takes place, it will be for "group violence", and not for "initiating religious hatred".

Swaziland Constitution Falters Over Religion Issue

Swaziland's King Mswati III has refused to sign the new Constitution passed by Parliament and has sent it back for reconsideration according to today's South Africa Mail & Guardian. One of the two provisions he objects to in the long-awaited Constitution is a clause that makes Christianity the official religion in the country, even though Sec. 4 of the document goes on to provide that this does not prevent the existence or practice of other religions. (See prior related posting.)

Plaintiff in Nebraska 10 Commandments Case Outed; Fears for His Safety

In 2001, ACLU Nebraska brought suit against the city of Plattsmouth challenging a 10 Commandments monument in a public park. The plaintiff represented by the ACLU was identified in the suit only as "John Doe" because of threats he had received. Yesterday, the Omaha World-Herald identified the man, as well as the type of car he drives and its license plate. The article also discussed his writings about religion and the threats that have been made against him. Today, the Sioux City Journal reports on the continuing concerns the man has for his safety and the possibility that he may move from Plattsmouth now that his identity has been revealed.

Plaintiff in VA Flag Salute Case Is Deeply Religious

The Washington Post today carries a profile of Edward R. Myers of Sterling, Virginia, a religious Mennonite who now attends a Catholic church. In 2002, he brought suit challenging the use of "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. The case is now before the US Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Says Myers: "To me, it's heresy. Government is about keeping civil order. Church is about loving and worshiping God. You don't mix . . . loving God because of free choice with something that's about duty and where you were born."

Baghdad Barbers Being Killed by Sunni Radicals

In Baghdad, barbers are being assassinated by Sunni religious hard-liners. Shaving violates Islamic law, and Sunni radicals claim that clean-shaven men want to look like American soldiers. The Brisbane, Australia Courier-Mail reports today that at least 20 barbers have been killed over the last two months. Some barbers have stopped removing facial hair. Others have gone underground. Many men are venturing into northwestern Sadr City for a shave since this area is Shiite and no killings of barbers have taken place there.

Religious Tax Protesters Sentenced to Prison

The Philadelphia Inquirer reported today that 3 members of a 30-member New Jersey religious group were sentenced to prison for failing to pay some $300,000 in federal income taxes. Their refusal to pay was based on religious grounds. They object to their money being used to fund warfare. The prison sentences, imposed last Friday, range from 6 to 27 months.

Prayer By Jury Does Not Taint Death Penalty Recommendation

In State v. Williams, 2005-Ohio-3366 (June 30, 2005), an Ohio appellate court rejected a claim that a jury's decision to recommend the death penalty was tainted by the fact that the jury prayed together before their deliberations. At the beginning of the second day of deliberations in the penalty stage in William's trial on murder, rape and robbery charges, one of the jurors led the others in a prayer asking for guidance in the decision they were about to make and peace in their hearts after the decision was made. The Court held that since Williams made no showing that the prayer affected the jury's decision, he lacked standing to assert a First Amendment claim challenging the prayer. It also held that the prayer did not deny Williams any of his rights under the First, Eighth or Fourteenth Amendments.

Prisoner's Complaints About Kosher Meals Rejected

In Morton v. DeShambo, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13003 (USDC WD MI, May 3, 2005), which recently became available, a federal Magistrate in Michigan has recommended that a prisoner's claim regarding accommodation of his religious needs be dismissed. Morton, an inmate at Alger Maximum Correctional Facility claimed that prison officials and staff were intentionally creating problems with Kosher food trays in order to force Jewish prisoners of their Kosher diets and save money for the prison. Plaintiff also claimed the right to a vegan Kosher diet. The Magistrate found that mistakes by the food service staff were isolated and not intentional.

False Image of State Religious Display

It is difficult enough for the average citizen to decide on the appropriateness of real attempts by government to place religious displays on public property. Today's New York Times Magazine cover carries this image to accompany Noah Feldman's article, A Church-State Solution. However, when you look for the source of the photo, Page 10 of the Magazine reads: "On the cover: Photomontages by Jason Fulford for the New York Times. Digital manipulation by Statik Digital." Translated, I think this means that the photo is not real and the "One God Only" sign has been digitally added. This surely does not help the public debate.

UPDATE: I should add that the article itself contains 3 additional digitally altered photos, albeit slightly less believable ones. One commenter suggests that the cover photo would be recognized as altered and seen as humorous by readers. I guess it is a comment on the extremes to which the issue of religious displays has moved that I am skeptical that the photos will be universally viewed in this way. Since the article's author urges seriously, and not humorously, that a solution to the current debate includes offering greater latitude for religious speech and symbols in public debate, I wonder if he thinks the photos are appropriate ones to accompany the article. However, I am willing to entertain the possiblity that on this one, my usual sense of humor has taken leave of me.

A Legal Alternative- Religious Signs on Private Property

One of the most difficult concepts for non-lawyers is the sharp Constitutional line between governmental action and private action. Today's Winston-Salem Journal reports on the increasing use of private property for the posting of religious symbols. Increasingly, religious slogans and Biblical passages are posted on private land along well-traveled roadsides and on billboards. For example, on a scenic route to Daniel Boone National Forest in Kentucky, a roadside landowner has posted a sign reading "Warning / Jesus is coming / RU Ready?". Everyone agrees, there are no constitutional problems here.

Public Art Exhibits and the Ten Commandments

While some people are interpreting the Supreme Court's Ten Commandments cases to allow more relgious monuments on public property than a fair reading would indicate (see prior posting), others are leaning too far in the other direction. The Daily Freeman reported on Saturday that the mayor of Kingston, NY has ordered an artist to remove her sculpure from the annual art show held for three months each year on the court house lawn. At issue is a wooden sculpture of a horse, titled "Atticus". The problem is that the Ten Commandments, psalms and other biblical references are carved into the pieces of driftwood from which the sculpture is made.

UPDATE: Officials and the artist, Rita Dee, have agreed to move the sculpture across the street to the grounds of the Old Dutch Church, according to the July 6 Record Online.

A Minor Mea Culpa on the O'Connor Statistics

Marty Lederman has pointed out two errors in my posting yeterday detailing the Religion Clause opinions that Justice O'Connor wrote. Due to a data base glitch I did not catch, I failed to include Agostini v. Felton in which she also wrote a majority opinion. Second, in Westside Community Bd. of Edu. v. Mergens, while she wrote the opinion for the Court, it was a majority opinion only as to the statutory issue, and was a plurality opinoin on the 1st Amendment issue. Yesterday's posting was updated and corrected this evening.

Religion Already An Issue In O'Connor Succession

Only hours after Sandra Day O'Connor announced her retirement from the US Supreme Court, issues of religion have begun to find their way into the debate about her successor, according to a report by the Christian Communication Network. A new Catholic-based organization, Fidelis, has begun an advertising campaign focusing on claimed religious bigotry in recent judicial confirmation hearings. They point to statements made during the hearings on William Pryor, as well as more recent statements by Democratic National Chairman Howard Dean. Fidelis' president Joseph Cella said: "Catholics and all people of faith must join together and defend Supreme Court nominees who will likely be attacked because of their faith and deeply-held beliefs."

O'Connor Retires; Review of Her Religion Clause Opinions

[UPDATED AND CORRECTED] Today the United States Supreme Court announced that Justice Sandra Day O'Connor is retiring, effective upon the nomination and confirmation of her successor. In her formal letter of retirement sent to the President, she said: "It has been a great privilege, indeed, to have served as a member of the Court for 24 Terms. I will leave it with enormous respect for the integrity of the Court and its role under our Constitutional structure." In the Rose Garden this morning, President Bush delivered remarks thanking Justice O'Connor and indicating that he is moving ahead to select a nominee to replace her in time for confirmation hearings and a vote before the Court's next term begins.

I thought it would be useful to review all the opinions that Justice O'Connor has written in First Amendment Free Exercise and Establishment Clause cases. Interestingly, she has only written the majority opinion in two of these cases, and a plurality opinion in a third, over her entire 24 years on the Court. The rest are concurrences or dissents. Here are the cases in which she has written, with links to the opinions:

Van Orden v. Perry (dissenting opinion)
McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky (concurring opinion)
Elk Grove Unif. School Dist. v. Newdow (concurring opinion)
Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (concurring opinion)
Mitchell v. Helms (concurring opinion)
Agostini v. Felton (majority opinion)
Capitol Square Review Bd. v. Pinette (concurring opinion)
Rosenberger v. University of Virginia (concurring opinion)
Bd. of Educ. of Kiryas Joel v. Grumet (concurring opinion)
Zobrest v. Catalina Foothills School Dist. (dissenting opinion)
Westside Community Bd. of Edu. v. Mergens ( plurality opinion)
Employment Division v. Smith (concurring opinion)
Hernandez v. Commissioner (dissenting opinion)
Allegheny County v. Greater Pittsburgh ACLU (concurring opinion)
Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Assoc. (majority opinion)
Bowen v. Kendrick (concurring opinion)
Corporation of Presiding Bishop v. Amos (concurring opinion)
Witters v. Wash. Dept. of Services for Blind (concurring opinion)
Goldman v. Weinberger (dissenting opinion)
Bowen v. Roy (concur in part & dissent in part)
Wallace v. Jaffree (concurring opinion)
Grand Rapids School Dist. v. Ball (concur in part & dissent in part)
Estate of Thornton v. Calder (concurring opinion)
Aguilar v. Felton (dissenting opinion)
Lynch v. Donnelly (concurring opinion)

No Moses In Ohio's New Depiction of History Of Law

Discussions about the Ten Commandments on court house walls have often proceeded from the assumption that any mural depicting lawgivers through history would naturally include Moses among them. So it was refreshing to see a story in the June 27 issue of the Ohio State Bar Association Report titled History of Rule of Law Captured In Painting Collection In Supreme Court of Ohio Library . Six original 4x8 foot oils depicting "the history of the development of the rule of law", commissioned by the Ohio State Bar Association, have been installed in the law library of Ohio's new Supreme Court Building. They depict Hammurabi, Ramses the Great, Draco, The 10 Tables of Roman Law, the signing of the Magna Carta, an allegorical painting of developments in France from Louis XVI to Napoleon, the signing of the US Constitution, and Lady Justice Leading the People (an allegory of liberty, patriotism and the civil rights struggle). But not a mention of Moses or the Ten Commandments. It's nice to see that good lawyers can make their historical point without unnecessarily raising constitutional questions in the process.

Calls For Civil Code Grow In India After Notorious Rape Case

In India, there are rising calls among the right wing Hindu Sangh Parivar for the enactment of the Uniform Civil Code to govern family and personal matters, according to a report in today's South Asia Tribune. This new push stems from protests against rulings by conservative Muslim authorities in the northern Indian state of Uttar Pradesh after a Muslim woman was raped by her father-in-law. The history is reviewed in an article today from South Africa News 24. Originally local clerics ruled that the rape had annulled the woman's marriage, and ordered that she marry her father-in-law who raped her. They were overruled in part by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB). It merely ordered the 28-year old Imrana Ilahi to separate from her husband. The husband is to raise their children. Many groups, including the All India Muslim Women's Personal Law Board, have strongly criticized the ruling.

The AIMPLB also said that the father-in-law who has been arrested, but claims that the sexual relations were consensual, should be stoned to death.

Humanist Congress To Meet In Paris

Reuters reports today that the World Humanist Congress will meet next week in Paris. Coinciding with the 100th anniversary of the French Law on Separation of Church and State, the meeting will focus on the challenge to secular states from religions and religious politicians.

"A Church-State Solution"

Already available online is an article that will appear this coming Sunday (July 3) in the New York Times Magazine. Written by NYU Law Professor Noah Feldman, the article titled A Church-State Solution argues that the clash between "values evangelicals" and "legal secularists" should be resolved by permitting greater latitude for religious speech and symbols in public debate. However, on the other side, there should be a stricter prohibition than now on state financing of religious institutions and activities. Discussion of Feldman's thesis is appearing on SCOTUS blog.

GTMO Treatment Of Detainees' Religious Needs Defended Before Congress

Yesterday three senior officers from the Guantanamo Bay Joint Task Force testified before the House Armed Services Committee on the protection of detainees' religious practices at the GTMO military detention center. An article from the American Forces Press Service summarized the testimony.

Command Sergeant Major Anthony Mendez testified that a loudspeaker at the camp signals the Muslim "call to prayer" five times a day. Those who choose to can take advantage of the prayer caps, beads and oil given to them. They can pray toward Mecca in the direction designated by arrows painted in each detainee cell and all common areas. For good behavior, they get traditional Islam prayer rugs as well. Every detainee is issued a personal copy of the Koran.

Army Brigadier General Jay Hood said they respect Muslim dietary practices, only serving food permitted under Muslim law and flying in Halal certified food. During Ramadan, meal schedules are adjusted to meet fasting requirements. Detainees are offered figs and honey at appropriate times.

Roy Moore Could Be 2006 Focus For Church-State Face-Off

It appears that former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore could become the lightning rod for church-state issues next year. At the Southern Baptist Convention Pastors' Conference ten days ago, he was greeted enthusiastically by his audience, as he spoke about "judicial tyranny" A report today in the Florida Baptist Witness offers these excerpts from his speech:

--There are consequences to what is happening in America today. The separation of church and state, a concept that has no basis in any U.S. founding documents – including the Constitution – does not mean a “separation of God and government". In fact, the doctrine is “biblically based”. In the Israelite nation God established the priestly and government functions to be separate – with the tribe of Levi handling the role of priests and the tribe of Judah in the role of civil leadership. God chose two separate bloodlines to keep those jurisdictions separate. The separation of church and state mandates an acknowledgement of God.--

Meanwhile, in the exhibit hall, attendees admiringly looked at the original Ten Commandments monument that Moore had been ordered to remove from the Alabama Supreme Court's rotunda.

Moore now heads his own advocacy group, the Foundation for Moral Law. He has written a book titled So Help Me God, and offers to sell autographed copies of it. All of this appears to be in preparation for a run by him for Governor of Alabama in 2006. The Swing State Project blog reported earlier this year that Moore plans to challenge incumbent Governor Bob Riley in the Republican primary. Indeed, earlier this month, the Boston Globe laid out the following nightmare scenario for the national Republican Party:

"Moore, a Republican who enjoys widespread support in his home state, is poised to run against a vulnerable Republican governor. If he wins, some party strategists speculate, he could defy a federal court order again by erecting a religious monument outside the Alabama state Capitol building. With the 2008 presidential race looming, President Bush would then face a no-win decision: either call out the National Guard to enforce a court order against a religious display on state grounds or allow a fellow born-again Christian to defy the courts."

That, says the Globe, is only the beginning. Moore would then be positioned to run for President in 2008, backed by conservatives who criticize George Bush's stands on issues such as gay marriage and the Terri Schiavo affair as being too moderate.

Turkish Parliament Rejects Veto Of Permissive Stance On Religion Courses

The Turkish Parliament yesterday overrode a veto by President Ahmet Necdet Sezer of amendments to Turkey's Penal Code that reduce the punishment for running a religion course without government authorization. According to a report today from Aljezeera, the amendments are seen as appeasing Islamists in the ruling Justice and Development Party. The President claimed that the change violates Turkey's secular principles. He can still send the law to the Constitutional Court for a ruling.

Judge Will Continue To Wear 10 Commandments Robe

Alabama Circuit Judge M. Ashley McKathan says that this week's US Supreme Court decisions will not change his seven month old practice of wearing a judicial robe inscribed with each of the Ten Commandments to show that biblical law is a foundation of the American legal system. According to today's Andalusa Star News, the judge said: "I have been wearing my robe since [the decisions] came down and will continue to do so if providence will allow."

Rastafarian Prisoner's Free Exercise Claim Regarding Dreadlocks Proceeds

In Stewart v. Berge (USDC WD WI, 6/23/2005), a Wisconsin federal district judge permitted a prisoner who is a Rastafarian to proceed with a Free Exercise claim based on the refusal of prison officials to take him to a medical appointment unless he cut his dreadlocks or removed his braids. While doubtful that petitioner would succeed in his claim, the court refused to dismiss it until the government showed the purpose for its prohibition on long hair when prisoners are being transferred between facilities.

Religious Discrimination Suit Against DE Elementary School

The Delaware Cape Gazette reported Tuesday on a law suit filed by a Muslim mother against the Cape Henlopen, DE school officials alleging religious harassment of her three daughters. The suit alleges that after 9-11, and continuing into 2004, a fourth-grade school teacher insisted on informing her students that Muslims were terrorists. At one point, the teacher, in front of other students, told plaintiff's daughter to transfer to another class. This led to harassment by fellow students. The school environment caused severe depression, anxiety and panic attacks in the student. The suit also alleges that Christian religious beliefs were discussed in school while denying expression of Islam. The suit seeks damages and new procedures for tracking and resolving discrimination and harassment claims.

Enforcement Efforts Against FLDS Having Effect

The New York Times today carries a long story on what has happened to the empire of the Fundamentalist Church of Latter Day Saints now that authorities in Arizona and Utah have begun to take action against the sect, known for advocating polygamy. With its leader, Warren Jeffs, in hiding, a Utah Probate Court stands ready to appoint former FLDS members, including two women who fled from it, as trustees of extensive property held in a trust by FLDS. I have previously posted a number of stories about FLDS (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)

Mayor Saved From Resigning After Cert. Denial

On Tuesday, the US Supreme Court denied certiorari in the case of Great Falls, SC v. Wynne (4th Cir., 2004) which had banned explicitly sectarian prayers at town council meetings. The Anderson, SC Independent Mail reported yesterday that this saved Anderson mayor Richard Shirley from having to carry through on his threat to resign if the Supreme Court prohibited him from using the name of Jesus Christ in invocations before city council. Anderson's City Council uses a rotation system, giving each council member the opportunity to lead the invocation as he or she desires. Apparently in the case involving Great Falls, members of the public were sometimes prevented from participating in council meetings if they were not present to hear the prayer. Anderson has no such restriction.

No Free Exercise Violation In Furnishing "Morning After" Pill To Minor

In Anspach v. City of Philadelphia, (USDC ED PA, 6/27/2005), the federal district court rejected parents claim that their Free Exercise of Religion was violated when a city-operated health clinic furnished their 16-year-old daughter (at her request) with the "morning after" pill. Among other things, parents failed to claim that their daughter was forced to take the pills, or that she was prevented from consulting with her parents or religious advisors, had she desired to do so. They also failed to allege that she was in fact pregnant at the time. The court also rejected other constitutional claims based on rights of parental guidance and family privacy.

Contempt Motion Against LA Abstinence Program Denied

Last Thursday, a Louisiana federal district court denied a motion by the ACLU of Louisiana to hold the Governor's Program on Abstinence in contempt of a 2002 order to keep religion out of the program. The Associated Press this week reports that the challenge was based on material on the program's web site in a question and answer section, and in a "Wedding Skit" on the website. The "Ask the Experts" section contained statements such as: "Abstaining from sex until entering a loving marriage will... [make you] really, truly, 'cool' in God's eyes." In his opinion in ACLU of Louisiana v. Foster, Judge Porteous found that the main purpose of the material on the web site was not to advance religion, and that it did not create excessive entanglement of government with religion.

New International Religious Liberty Institute

Andrews University, a Seventh Day Adventist college in Michigan, has announced the inauguration its new International Religious Liberty Institute. Its first event was a conference on "Religious Liberty: Sowing Freedom and the Gospel".

New Survey on First Amendment Attitudes

On Monday, the First Amendment Center announced the release of this year's annual State of the First Amendment Survey. The survey includes numerous questions about attitudes toward First Amendment religion issues-- including posting of the 10 Commandments and prayer in schools. The survey was conducted in May 2005 by New England Survey Research Associates, and has a margin of error of +/-3%.

Cert Denied In Other 10 Commandments Cases

The McCreary County case which the Supreme Court decided on Monday involved the posting of the Ten Commandments in two court houses. When the 6th Circuit below decided the cases, they had been consolidated with a third case, Harlan County v. ACLU of Kentucky, which involved posting of a similar display in a school. The Lexington Herald-Leader reports that yesterday the Supreme Court denied certiorari in the Harlan County case, as well as in three Ohio cases involving Ten Commandments postings in schools and a court house.

Analysis: Van Orden and Stevens' Hints As To "Charitable Choice"

While there is much in yesterday's various Van Orden opnions from the Supreme Court that is worthy of note, I would like to focus on one excerpt from Justice Stevens dissent because of its implications for the future in battles over "charitable choice". (See prior post for discussion of the McCreary County opinion.) In discussing the history of the monuments erected by the Fraternal Order of Eagles, Stevens says (pp. 9-10):

"The desire to combat juvenile delinquency by providing guidance to youths is both admirable and unquestionably secular. But achieving that goal through biblical teachings injects a religious purpose into an otherwise secular endeavor. By spreading the word of God and converting heathens to Christianity, missionaries expect to enlighten their converts, enhance their satisfaction with life, and improve their behavior. Similarly, by disseminating the"law of God"—directing fidelity to God and proscribing murder, theft, and adultery—the Eagles hope that this divine guidance will help wayward youths conform their behavior and improve their lives. In my judgment, the significant secular by-products that are intended consequences of religious instruction—indeed, of the establishment of most religions—are not the type of "secular" purposes that justify government promulgation of sacred religious messages."

"Though the State of Texas may genuinely wish to combat juvenile delinquency, and may rightly want to honor the Eagles for their efforts, it cannot effectuate these admirable purposes through an explicitly religious medium. "

Isn't the argument that Justice Stevens is rejecting exactly the argument made by many proponents of "charitable choice" today?

Analysis: Quotations of Note from McCreary County

It is time to look beyond result to some of the doctrinal implications of yesterday's Ten Commandments decisions. Here are a few of the things said along the way in McCreary County that merit further attention. A second posting will look at excerpts from Van Orden.

From Justice Souter's majority opinion:
Putting some bite into the "purpose" inquiry: "The Counties would read the cases as if the purpose enquiry were so naive that any transparent claim to secularity would satisfy it.... There is no precedent for the Counties' arguments.... [T]he secular purpose required has to be genuine, not a sham, and not merely secondary to a religious objective." (pp. 15-16) This is important because at least some lower courts have been ready to uphold governmental action motivated by religious considerations so long as some minor secular justification could be uncovered as well.

Diminishing the importance of symbolic expression: "Displaying that text [of the Ten Commandments] is thus differ­ent from a symbolic depiction, like tablets with 10 roman numerals, which could be seen as alluding to a general notion of law, not a sectarian conception of faith. Where the text is set out, the insistence of the religious message is hard to avoid in the absence of a context plausibly suggesting a message going beyond an excuse to promote the religious point of view."(pg. 20). Justice Souter is old enough to remember the aphorism: "The medium is the message". Is it really only text that sends a message today?

Reaffirming neutrality: "Given the variety of interpretative problems, the princi­ple of neutrality has provided a good sense of direction: the government may not favor one religion over another, or religion over irreligion, religious choice being the preroga­tive of individuals under the Free Exercise Clause. The principle has been helpful simply because it responds to one of the major concerns that prompted adoption of the Religion Clauses. The Framers and the citizens of their time intended not only to protect the integrity of individ­ual conscience in religious matters... but to guard against the civic divisiveness that follows when the Government weighs in on one side of religious debate...." (pg. 28). Given the fundamental challenge to Establishment Clause principles in recent years, this is a useful primer on behalf of a majority of the Court.

From Justice Scalia's dissent in McCreary:
Notion of a religious peoplehood: "[I]n the context of public acknowl­edgments of God there are legitimate competing interests: On the one hand, the interest of that minority in not feeling "excluded"; but on the other, the interest of the overwhelming majority of religious believers in being able to give God thanks and supplication as a people, and with respect to our national endeavors. Our national tradition has resolved that conflict in favor of the majority."(pg. 16) Rarely have proponents of governmental expression of religion so candidly acknowledged an interest in the government cementing a national (or state-wide) religious community.

Commentary On Getting It Right and Reading It Wrong

On balance, it seems to me that the Supreme Court got it more right than wrong yesterday in its Ten Commandments opinions. The atmosphere of the 1950's was substantially different than that of the past decade. While characterizing the motivations of the Fraternal Order of Eagles and Cecil B. DeMille in their distribution of monuments in the 1950's may be difficult, it is not difficult to characterize the motivations of those posting the commandments in Kentucky courthouses. They were attempting to reclaim a Christian America. The scrambling to hide that motivation is something that only lawyers could ignore. The net effect of the rulings will be to prohibit new monuments today motivated by Christian evangelism, while keeping the bulldozers away from scores of courthouse lawns around the country.

There is evidence, however, that evangelicals are already misreading the opinions. The Washington Post reported that within hours of the decisions, the Christian Defense Coalition announced a campaign to erect monuments similar to the one in Texas in 100 cities across the country as a way to preserve the country's Christian heritage. And the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette reports a rush by Indiana legislators to place the Ten Commandments on Indiana's statehouse lawn. It is the motivation, not the location or form of the depiction, that is key to yesterday's holdings. Only willful blindness could lead to a different conclusion.

Editorials On Supreme Court's 10 Commandments Rulings

In no particular order, here are links to a sampling of editorials on yesterday's Ten Commandments decisions from today's newspapers: New York Times; Washington Post; Austin American Statesman; Atlanta Journal Constitution; Salt Lake Tribune; Indianapolis Star; Minneapolis Star Tribune; Baltimore Sun; Seattle Post Intelligencer; Chicago Tribune.

Commentary On Ten Commandments Decisions Available

Extensive commentary on today's US Supreme Court "Ten Commandments decisions" will be available on SCOTUS Blog's special discussion site. Click here. I plan to let the dust settle and weigh in tomorrow with my comments.

US Supreme Court Strikes Down Ten Commandments In KY Court Houses, But Upholds Texas Capitol Display

UPDATED: In a 5-4 decision today, the US Supreme Court in McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky held that the Kentucky display of the Ten Commandments in two court houses violates the Establishment Clause, according to a report by CNN. Justice Souter's opinion for the court said that the predominant purpose of these displays was the advancement of religion. Though he said that in other contexts, like the frieze in the US Supreme Court, a neutral display that honors the nation's legal history would be permissible. Justice O'Connor wrote a concurring opinion. Justice Scalia wrote the dissent. The full opinions are available online.

However, also in a 5-4 decision, the Court upheld the display of the Ten Commandments on the lawn of the Texas state capitol in Van Orden v. Perry. Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote the majority opinion. Here is the full text of the various opinions in the case.

As an aside, I predicted this result (albeit cautiously) in an earlier posting.

(Also thanks to SCOTUS Blog for some of these leads.)

Illinois Expands Hate Crime Definition

Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich yesterday signed into law SB 287 (full text) according to a report from the Associated Press. The new law expands the definition of hate crimes to include the use of electronic communications to harass a person because of religion, race, gender, sexual orientation, disability or national origin.

Russian Prosecutor Pursues Jewish Organization For Distributing Classic Writing

In a move reminiscent of Stalinist times, the Russian State Prosecutor has ordered an investigation of Russia's Congress of Jewish Organizations because the group has distributed an abbreviated Russian translation of the Shulkhan Arukh, a classic code of Jewish law compiled in the 16th century. According to a report in today's Haaretz, the Prosecutor is looking into whether statements in the work regarding the treatment of non-Jews constitute racist incitement and anti-Russian material. The inquiry, which has been reported widely in the Russian press, follows an increase in anti-Semitic incidents in Russia.

UPDATE: On Tuesday, June 28, the Russian State Prosecutor announced that he is cancelling this investigation, according to a report in Haaretz.

Police Officer Allegedly Targets Druid Couple In Traffic Stop

In Greer, SC, a couple claims that their Druid bumper stickers triggered their traffic stop, according to yesterday's World Net Daily. The policeman who ticketed them, they say, attempted to talk them out of their religious beliefs. After arresting them on charges of driving with a suspended license, operating a vehicle with an improper tag and failing to have proof of insurance, the officer sent a card and a letter to their home saying that their problems would continue unless they listened to the word of the Baptists.

Native American Sweat Lodges In Prisons

Accommodating the vast array of religious ritual requests from prisoners, now that the Supreme Court has upheld RLUIPA, will be a continuing challenge for correctional officials. Saturday's New York Times carried an interesting in-depth description of one accommodation that seems to be working-- the Native American Sweat Lodge at northern Connecticut's MacDougall-Walker Correctional Facility. Many states, though, are still concerned about the security problems posed by sweat lodges.

Tulsa Zoo To Add Creationism Display

The newest battleground for creationism may be the nation's zoos. The Dallas Morning News reported yesterday that, in response to pressure, the Tulsa, Oklahoma zoo board has voted to put up a creationism display along side its long-standing display on evolutionary science. A local architect who leads creationist tours of the zoo has helped design a prototype of the display-- all the verses from Genesis 1 to 2:3, illustrated with color photographs. But zoo officials are working on a broader display that will add other cultural viewpoints as well.

Limit On Changing MA Blaine Amendment Upheld By 1st Circuit

On Friday, in Wirzburger v. Galvin, the US 1st Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a series of constitutional challenges, including a Free Exercise challenge, to provisions in the Massachusetts state constitution relating to initiatives. Plaintiffs wished to use the initiative process to repeal Massachusetts' prohibition on state aid to religious schools (the state's version of the Blaine Amendment, Art. 46). While Art. 48 of the Massachusetts Constitution permits amendment by initiative, it excludes from that process any amendment to the prohibition on aid to religious schools and any amendment that relates to religion, religious practices, or religious institutions. The court found that those exclusions did not violate plaintiffs' freedom of expression or free exercise of religion nor did the exclusions deny plaintiffs equal protection of the laws.

Part of plaintiffs' argument turned on whether the challenged provisions were motivated by anti-religious animus. The court found there was widespread anti-Catholic prejudice behind the original Anti-Aid Amendment in 1855; but it was revised in 1917 with the support of most of the Catholic delegates to the Constitutional Convention. Then the prohibition on amending the Anti-Aid clause through initiative was passed with similar broad support. Nothing showed that this was motivated by Anti-Catholic animus.

New London Decision May Pose Special Risk for Churches

Last Monday, the US Supreme Court decided the case of Kelo v. New London, which upheld broad eminent domain powers of state and local governments. (4 Justices dissented.) Now some religious leaders are suggesting that the decision poses special threats for religious institutions. In a report carried Friday by Beliefnet, Jared Leland of the Beckett Fund for Religious Liberty suggested that because properties owned by non-profit institutions do not generate tax revenues, they will be particularly attractive targets for local governments to take for economic redevelopment.

Judge Questions EEOC Religious Discrimination Consent Decree

On June 13 the video rental chain Blockbuster agreed with the EEOC to a consent decree in a case charging that a Blockbuster manager in Scottsdale, AZ, had refused to permit an Orthodox Jewish employee wear his yarmulke at work. The store must pay a $50,000 penalty and modify its employee handbook and operating procedures. So far, this seems unremarkable. But, according to yesterday's East Valley Tribune, the federal judge who signed the consent decree was hesitant to do so, suggesting that under the 1985 US Supreme Court case of Estate of Thornton v. Caldor, Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act as applied here might be unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause. But the EEOC attorney involved said that the 1985 case involved a statute that did not have exceptions for accommodations that unduly burden the employer.

Op Ed: US Senate Bill Gives Native Americans Religious Veto

In a Seattle Times op-ed today, University of Tennessee Anthropology Professor Richard L. Jantz calls attention to an upcoming hearing before the US Senate Indian Affairs Committee on Senate Bill 536 (Sec. 108). It will amend Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) to give Native American tribes broader control over pre-historic human remains found in the United States. According to Prof. Jantz, the amendment "would automatically give tribes the authority to control all evidence that may contradict their particular religious beliefs and give tribes complete veto power over scientific research on those remains." Those supporting the amendment claim that provisions in the Act limiting tribes' control to remains with which they can show a cultural affiliation will prevent the problem. Dr. Jantz disagrees. The amendment would codify an interpretation that the government unsuccessfully argued for in Bonnichsen v. US, a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Case decided act year.

Ohio Bill Calls For Posting Mottos Mentioning God In Schools

On Tuesday, in another try to find ways to post references to God in school classrooms, the Ohio House of Representatives passed House Bill 184 and sent it on to the Ohio Senate. The bill provides that if a reasonably sized copy of the US motto"In God We Trust", or the Ohio motto "With God, All Things Are Possible", is donated to a school district, or if money is donated to purchase copies, the district must accept the donation and display the motto in a school classroom, auditorium, or cafeteria. By the way, in 2001, in ACLU v. Capitol Square Review & Advisory Bd., the federal 6th Circuit Court of Appeals (en banc) upheld Ohio's official motto against an Establishment Clause attack.

Book Review

Findlaw today carries a book review by Noah S. Leavitt of two books on church-state issues, Marci Hamilton's God vs. The Gavel and Kent Greenawalt's Does God Belong In the Public Schools?

Copyright Used To Attempt To Silence Criticism of Religious Prophecies

Can copyright laws be used to stifle legitimate criticism of a religion's beliefs? A press release today from Watchtower Whistleblower traces attempts by the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania to shut down a website that carried quotes from past Jehovahs Witness publications in order to show that Witness' prophecies had not come true. After halting operations for a few days last month, the website, http://quotes.watchtower.ca is back in operation, at least for the time being.

Taiwan To Regulate Religious Release of Animals

Expanding on their religious duty to save any animal that is trapped, it has become a custom in China for Buddhists to buy various animals and then free them in a religious ceremony in order to bring good fortune. This practice has caused increasing ecological and environmental problems. Today, CNA News reports that in Taiwan, the Cabinet-level Council of Agriculture has proposed new regulations on freeing animals for religious purposes that will conserve the island's ecological system. Scientists and conservationists have become increasingly concerned about the 200 million animals that are released in Taiwan each year. Problems include both the inability of captive-bred animals to survive and damage caused by the introduction of non-native species.

Prisoner's Claim For Lost Religious Items Permitted To Continue

In Crump v. May, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12013 (D.DE, 6/16/2005), the federal district court in Delaware has permitted a prisoner to proceed with his claim that while being moved between prison facilities, his Koran and Kufi were taken and never returned to him. It held that this raised a First Amendment Free Exercise claim, while the negligent loss of his jewelry and personal items did not. Claims as to loss of non-religious items were dismissed as not raising a due process issue; the appropriate remedy was an action in state court.

In Britain: Can Religious Belief Be Invoked To Refuse To Trim Trees?

Claims for religiously-motivated exemptions from general regulations take many forms. This report comes from yesterday's London Daily Mail via Beliefnet. In Gosport, Hampshire in England, rules under Britain's Anti-Social Behaviour Act give local authorities the power to order homeowners to trim back trees and hedges over 6 and one-half feet tall if they obstruct a view or block out light. Trina Horey is refusing her neighbor's demand that she cut back her 15 foot-high conifer trees, citing religious beliefs. She says she cannot trim the conifers without getting the trees' permission first. "As a pagan, I don't believe in harming living trees. We have to ask its permission to prune a tree and we never rip it out from the root."

Air Force Academy Investigation Report Issued

The special team headed by Lt. Gen. Robert A. Brady, selected by the Air Force to look into problems of religious intolerance at the Air Force Academy, filed its report today. A release issued by the Air Force describes some of the report's findings: a lack of operational guidance on what is appropriate, the failure of the Academy to address issues of religious accommodation, and the youth and inexperience of the student body. The Air Force has promised to release the full text of the report, and this posting will be updated to link to it as soon as it is available.

UPDATE: Now available online-- (1) Cover Letter Transmitting Report; (2) the 100-page Report of the Headquarters Review Group Concerning the Religious Climate at the U. S. Air Force Academy; and (3) Summary of Complaint Analysis Against Brig. Gen. Weida.

NJ Anti-Discrimination Law Exempts Religious Colleges

A New Jersey Court of Appeals held today that Seton Hall University, a Catholic college, could deny recognition to a gay and lesbian student group on the ground that recognition is inconsistent with the teachings of the Catholic Church. In the full opinion in Romeo v. Seton Hall University , the court held that New Jersey's Law Against Discrimination exempts from its provisions "any educational facility operated or maintained by a bona fide religious or sectarian institution". It also rejected waiver and breach of contract claims put forward by the student group. A report on the decision is in today's Star-Ledger. (Thanks to Steven Sholk for the lead.)

Australian Pastors Ordered To Apologize For Vilifying Islam

In Australia, the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal has just issued a 140-page opinion (full text) and ordered a Remedy (full text) in the case of Islamic Council of Victoria v. Catch the Fire Ministries. According to a report today from News.com.au, the suit was the first to be heard under the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act of 2001. Plaintiffs alleged that two pastors had made statements disparaging Islam in a speech, a newsletter and on a website. The lengthy statements included claims that Islam was inherently violent and that Muslims were planning to impose their faith on Australia. The court ordered the Pastors to publish an apology in specified newspapers, in their newsletter and on their website. The Remedy order set out the text of the required statement. It also requires the Pastors to agree that they will not make similar statements in the future. At least one of the defendants, viewing this as a freedom of speech issue, says he would rather go to jail than apologize. The case is being appealed to the Supreme Court of Victoria.

Md. Federal Trial Judge Upholds 10 Commandments Monument

Just days before the US Supreme Court is expected to rule on the constitutionality of placing the Ten Commandments on public property, a federal district judge in Baltimore upheld a Ten Commandments monument in a city park in Frederick, Maryland. In this case, in the face of a challenge to the monument in 2002, the city had sold the monument and the strip of park land on which it stood to the Fraternal Order of Eagles. According to a report in today's Baltimore Sun, Judge Quarles opinion held that no reasonable observer, aware of the history and context, would see the monument as a government endorsement of religion.

UPDATE: The full opinion in Chambers v. City of Frederick is now available.

President Addresses Southern Baptist Annual Meeting

Yesterday, President Bush addressed the Southern Baptist Convention Annual Meeting by satellite from Washington. The meeting is being held in Nashville, TN. The text of his full remarks, as well as a video of his presentation, are available online from the White House website. His speech included the following call for Congressional enactment of his faith-based initiative:

"Because faith-based groups should never have to forfeit their religious liberty to get federal dollars -- and that's an important concept -- we want your help, we want your love, but at the same time, you do not have to forget the mission of faith or ignore the mission of faith that calls you to action in the first place. And that's why the executive order I signed should be codified into federal law. Congress needs to pass charitable choice legislation to forever guarantee equal treatment for our faith-based organizations when they compete for federal funds."

New Church-State Scholarship

Cardozo Prof. Marci A. Hamilton's review essay of Jeffrey Stout's book, Democracy and Tradition, appears in the April 2005 issue of the Minnesota Law Review. The article "What Does "Religion" Mean in the Public Square?" is at 89 Minn. L. Rev. 1153 (2005). (Thanks to SmartCILP).

UPDATE: Also posted earlier this month on SSRN is Michael J. Perry, A Right to Religious Freedom? The Universality of Human Rights, the Relativity of Culture, to appear in Roger Williams Univ. L. Rev., Vol. 10, pp. 349-89 (2005).

CAIR Seeks Use of Koran For Muslim Witnesses' Oaths In NC

The Council on American-Islamic Relations is asking courts in North Carolina to permit Muslims to be sworn as witnesses using the Koran rather than the Bible. Today's Charlotte Observer says that the Administrative Office of the Courts has ruled that use of the Koran is permissible. However, judges in Guilford County refuse to use the Koran. They have turned down an offer by Greensboro's Islamic Center to donate copies of the Koran to the court. The issue now moves to consideration at judicial conferences in North Carolina this week.

AF Academy Issues Lead To Ugly Charges On House Floor

An ugly exchange broke out on the House floor yesterday as Congress debated the Defense Appropriations Bill. At issue, according to the report in today's Washington Post, was the language Congress would use in calling for the Air Force to report on the charges of religious intolerance at the Air Force Academy. After Democrats introduced an amendment calling for the Air Force Academy to develop a plan to prevent "coercive and abusive religious proselytizing", Indiana Representative John Hostettler said:

"The long war on Christianity in America continues today on the floor of the House of Representatives" and "continues unabated with aid and comfort to those who would eradicate any vestige of our Christian heritage being supplied by the usual suspects, the Democrats. Like a moth to a flame, Democrats can't help themselves when it comes to denigrating and demonizing Christians."

Eventually Hostettler withdrew his remarks under threat of a ruling by the chair that he had violated House rules by disparaging another member. The Democratic amendment was ultimately defeated and was replaced by a milder Republican version calling for the Air Force to report on how it is promoting religious tolerance. The full text of the debate is available in yesterday's Congressional Record.

Introduction of "Pledge and Prayer Amendment" Expected

The Hill reported yesterday that Oklahoma Representative Ernest Istook plans to introduce a Constitutional amendment to permit religious expression in public schools and on public property. It is expected that he will propose the measure soon after the US Supreme Court decides its pending Ten Commandments cases. Istook's Pledge and Prayer Amendment "would allow the display of the Ten Commandments and other historical religious documents on public property", "allow greater freedom for students who wish to pray" and "allow students to recite the entire Pledge of Allegiance" — including the line "one nation, under God". The proposal already has 45 co-sponsors and Istook is looking for more through a "Dear Colleague" letter he is circulating. Istook has introduced similar amendments in the past.

House Holds Hearings on Vietnam Religious Freedom as Prime Minister Arrives

Today Prime Minister Phan Van Khai of Vietnam will visit the United States. His arrival marks the tenth anniversary of the creation of diplomatic relations with Vietnam. In anticipation of the visit, yesterday the House Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Operations held hearings on Human Rights in Vietnam. Witnesses emphasized ongoing issues of religious freedom and religious persecution in that country. Testimony of witnesses is available online (scroll to June 20, 2005 hearings). (See prior related post.) At his press briefing yesterday, President Bush's Press Secretary, Scott McClellan said that talks between the President and the Prime Minister will focus on Vietnam's bid to join the World Trade Organization, accounting for Americans who remain missing from the Viet Nam War, as well as religious freedom and human rights concerns.

Anticipating concerns, Prime Minister Khai wrote an op-ed piece in today's Washington Times. In reviewing a number of developments in his country, Khai wrote: "Vietnam is a country of many religions. Major religions in the world like Buddhism, Catholicism and Protestantism are all present in Vietnam. They exist in harmony with traditional beliefs and indigenous creeds. Indeed, religion is central to the identities of many of my fellow countrymen. It is our consistent policy to regard beliefs and religion as a basic spiritual need of the people. The freedom of religion and of non-religion is respected and protected. We are working with religious groups in Vietnam to strengthen our society. We welcome and appreciate the participation by religious organizations in national construction, national defense and endeavors to improve people's lives."

UPDATE: After Prime Minister Khai's visit to the White House, he and the President issued a joint statement (full text) that included the following: "The two leaders agreed on the importance of continuing an open and candid dialogue on issues of common concern, including human-rights practices and conditions for religious believers and ethnic minorities. The President welcomed Vietnam's efforts to date and encouraged further progress."

CLS Suit Against University of Toledo Settled

The Alliance Defense Fund reported last week that a settlement has been reached in a suit filed by the Christian Legal Society against the University of Toledo. One of a series of claims around the country against law schools by the CLS (see prior posting), the suit challenged attempts by the University to apply its non-discrimination policy to CLS. CLS requires anyone seeking to become a member to subscribe to its Statement of Faith. CLS interprets the Statement to prohibit homosexual conduct and heterosexual sex outside of marriage by those who wish to become full members of the organization.

The ADF reports: "University of Toledo officials agreed to accept the CLS chapter’s constitution and to recognize the group as an official registered student organization. The university also agreed to allow all student organizations to include references and citations to religious texts, such as the Bible, in their constitutions and bylaws. The university further acknowledged that religious student organizations are not required to abide by non-discrimination policies that would force the groups to accept leaders and members who do not agree with their beliefs."

Last year, Ohio State University reached a similar settlement with CLS.

In Ohio, Stem Cell Issue Posed As Battle Between Religious Traditions

In budget debates over the last few weeks, Ohio's legislature has become embroiled in the stem-cell research issue. This weekend, the Conference Committee placed back into the budget bill language that will totally prohibit the use of so-called Third Frontier state funding for stem cell research. What is particularly interesting here, however, are the arguments used by a leading proponent of stem cell research, State Senator Eric Fingerhut. In addition to the usual countering of religious opposition with secular arguments, Fingerhut increasingly used religious arguments to advance the cause of such research. Quoted in the Warren Tribune-Chronicle last week, Fingerhut said:

"There is one religious perspective that is opposed to [stem cell research]. I respect that perspective, but it does not represent the religious view of a majority of Ohioans. My faith [Jewish] and many Protestant denominations all believe the same God that created embryos also created the skill of scientists to do research and commands us to try to save life through this research. There is an ethical and moral obligation to do the research, and I do not believe the state should take the position of one religious domination over another. God created stem cell research.''

By the way, the blog Stem Cellular has an archive page devoted solely to the issue in Ohio.

AJC Supports Cert In Case On Religious Drug Rehabilitation Programs

Today the American Jewish Congress announced that it has filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court supporting the granting of certiorari in the case of Hanas v. Michigan. At issue is whether the Michigan courts violated the First Amendment rights of a practicing Roman Catholic drug user by requiring him to attend a pervasively religious evangelical Protestant drug rehabilitation program in order to avoid jail or obtain an expungement of his criminal record. The original petition for certiorari was filed in January by the ACLU of Michigan.

House Bill Would Withhold Funds For Removal of 10 Commandments In Indiana

In January 2005, a federal district court ordered a 10 commandments monument removed from the Gibson County court house lawn in Princeton, Indiana. Now, in order to thwart that ruling, a provision has been placed in the Department of Justice's appropriation bill by a vote of the House of Representatives last Wednesday to prohibit the US Marshals Service from using any funds to carry out the court order. In reporting on this development today, the Mt. Carmel Republican Daily Register quotes Indiana Congressman John Hostettler, who had sponsored the of the legislation, as saying: "The Founders certainly never intended for federal court rulings that violate Americans' rights to be blindly funded and enforced by the other two branches. The bill we passed today employs the Legislature's power of the purse to check a federal court that's attempting to turn a constitutional right into a constitutional prohibition."

Bar Council In India Denies Nun Right To Practice Law

In Kerala, India, a nun has been denied enrollment as an advocate by the Bar Council on the ground that she is already engaged in another profession. Web India 123 reports today that Sister Teena Jose is going to court to contest the ruling, arguing that her position as a sister is a matter of religion, not a profession.

President At Natl. Hispanic Prayer Breakfast

Last Thursday, President Bush delivered remarks at the National Hispanic Prayer Breakfast, held at the Andrew Mellon Auditorium in Washington, D.C. This is the third "national" prayer breakfast the President has addressed this year. In May he spoke at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast (see prior posting), and in February he addressed the annual National Prayer Breakfast. After the 2004 National Prayer Breakfast, the New Republic's Easterblogg raised some provocative questions about the institution of prayer breakfasts. Some of the criticisms may be cheap shots, like this description of the event: "hundreds of dignitaries and big-shots get together to proclaim their deep prayerful concern for the downtrodden while being served by impoverished Salvadorans and Mexicans". But as prayer breakfasts proliferate, the critique is worth re-reading.

European Convention Seen As Requiring Recognition of Humanist Marriages

Scotland's Registrar General has interpreted the European Convention on Human Rights to require him to recognize Humanist wedding ceremonies. According to a report today in DeHavilland, previously Humanists needed to go through a valid civil ceremony (before their Humanist ceremony) in order to have their marriage legally recognized. The British Humanist Association has written to the Lord Chancellor urging the application of this ruling to England and Wales as well, or, alternatively, the introduction of new legislation to achieve this result in those jurisdictions. (Full text of letter.)

Conflict On Trial Tactics Among Intelligent Design Proponents

There appears to be dissension in the ranks of Intelligent Design proponents. According to the York Daily Record today, the Dover Pennsylvania Area school board, which is in federal court defending its decision to teach Intelligent Design, essentially fired three of its experts when they insisted on bringing their own lawyers to their depositions.

Commentary: Church-State, Dean Rudenstine and Understanding "Religion"

Church-state issues often involve fundamentally different understandings of the nature of religious faith. That fact became clear yesterday when the New York Law Journal reported on recent remarks by Cardozo Law School Dean David Rudenstine. Rudenstine’s remarks have prompted a lively debate in the blogosphere. Dean of the law school at religiously-affiliated Yeshiva University, Rudenstine was reported to have said in a speech to pre-law advisors:

"Faith challenges the underpinnings of legal education. Faith is a willingness to accept belief in things for which we have no evidence, or which runs counter to evidence we have."

Mark Sargent, at Mirror of Justice blog, takes Rudenstine to task: “Many of us in the Catholic center and left are deeply frustrated by the religious right's cooptation of the religious voice in public life. We believe that the Bush/DeLay/Frist type of "Christian nationalism" is deeply antagonistic to the Catholic Tradition. I believe that it even verges on a kind of blasphemy, as it wraps the cross in the flag. But for Rudenstine to argue that there is no place for faith in public discourse … [leads to] impoverishing the quality of debate within law schools and marginalizing (or excluding) those students who seek to integrate faith, reason and public responsibility in their lives. This constitutes a kind of secularist fundamentalism that is as unsophisticated, un-nuanced and dogmatic as any religious fundamentalism. In my opinion his statements are also unworthy of the great Jewish ethical and social traditions that is Yeshiva's legacy….”

It seems to me that Rudenstine commits a more fundamental error. He assumes that religious faith is about things for which the accumulation of evidence is possible. Faith should be about fundamental values, not about historical facts or scientific theories. The first true act of religious faith expressed in Genesis is not the blind acceptance of facts for which we have no evidence. It is Abraham’s decision to act as lawyer for the inhabitants of Sodom. Abraham invokes his values to challenge God over God’s own decision to destroy the innocent along with the wicked (Genesis 18). The abhorrence of “guilt by association” is a basic religious value. An evidentiary hearing is irrelevant to whether that proposition is one that should be at the basis of a legal system. It is that foundational value, and not the historical accuracy of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, that is the lesson of religious faith.

Some of the responses that take issue with Dean Rudenstine’s remarks reflect the same misunderstanding that Rudenstine himself holds. On Prawf Blog, entering law teacher Kaimi Wegner argues that Rudenstine is wrong, by saying: “I'm going to teach my classes, go to conferences, write my articles. Hopefully I'll do well. In any case, the question of whether or not I believe in God is going to have as much relevance in my classroom discussions as the question of whether I cheer for the Yankees or the Red Sox. I'm not going to ask my students "do you believe in God?" on exams. I'm going to ask about law, and I'm going to teach about law. And hopefully, my students will do the same. It's not my job to quibble about theology with my students -- I'm there to teach them law, and they should be prepared to learn on the same terms.”

I hope that values inspired by faith are relevant to Prof. Wegner’s classroom discussions. The codes of ethics that have guided lawyers over the years have always recognized that lawyers need not limit their advice to their clients to technical legal issues. Model Rules of Professional Conduct 2.1 states: “In rendering advice, a lawyer may refer not only to law but to other considerations such as moral, economic, social and political factors, that may be relevant to the client's situation.” The values of faith might well have impelled a lawyer in 1950 to urge his or her client to consider the moral implications of operating segregated facilities. In subsequent decades, faith might have impelled a lawyer to suggest to a client that a plant closing has social as well as economic implications. Faith could encourage a lawyer to suggest to a client that anti-pollution efforts need not be limited to the minimum required by law. And all of these might in the long run also have led to very good business decisions.

Of course, not everyone agrees with this conception of religious faith. And the challenge to courts is how to deal with claims that a religion requires one to believe facts that contradict scientific or historical evidence. The first step is for courts to understand the nature of the problem.

Evolution-Sticker Briefs Available Online

Briefs in the Cobb County, Georgia evolution disclaimer-sticker case pending in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals are available from the website of the National Center for Science Education. (See prior related post.) (Thanks to Dispatches From the Culture Wars blog for the lead.)

Gull Lake Rejects Intelligent Design In Science; OKs It For Social Studies

Some time ago, I posted information on the attempts by two 7th-grade teachers in the Gull Lake, Michigan school district to bring intelligent design into the classroom over the objection of school administrators. The Thomas More Law Center took up the teachers’ cause. Now Ed Brayton at his blog, Dispatches From the Culture Wars, reports that earlier this week, the Gull Lake school board refused the teachers’ request that they be allowed to continue teaching intelligent design. In doing so, the board followed the nearly unanimous recommendation of a special committee that studied the issue, of district science teachers and of the District Curriculum Council. The Board, however, accepted the special committee’s recommendation that Intelligent Design could be appropriately taught in a properly-approved high school level elective course in social studies, humanities, political science or philosophy. (Thanks to Logos blog for the lead.)