Christians Fear New Federal Hate Crimes Bill Will Stifle Their Religious Speech

On Tuesday, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee held hearings on H.R. 1592, the "Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007". The Act, among other things, would expand the current hate crime ban to include crimes motivated by the victim's sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or disability. One of the witnesses testifying against the bill (text of statement) was Brad W. Dacus, President of the Pacific Justice Institute. He told the committee that there is an "alarming potential, as evidenced by actual cases and situations, for well intentioned hate crimes legislation to squelch free speech, particularly religious free speech." Yesterday's Christian Post expanded on that theme in an article that focused on concerns that the bill will prevent Christians from speaking out in opposition to homosexuality or disagreeing with another person's religion.

Meanwhile, today's Advocate reports that across from the capitol, hundreds of clergy from all over the country who support passage of the new hate crimes act joined in a rally. They were led by Bishop Carlton Pearson of Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Ghana EPA Targets Noise Pollution From Charismatic Churches

Ghana's Environmental Protection Agency has become concerned with the harmful effect of noise on health and hearing ability. Today's Accra Mail says one significant source of noise pollution that concerns EPA is Ghana's charismatic churches. Ten complaints have been filed so far this year against churches that play loud music, shout, sing loudly and dance all night. Threatening eventual court action, a senior EPA official said that instead of heeding EPA's directives, some of these churches' leaders call the EPA office to insult and curse officials while their "prayer warriors" pray in the background. April 16 was Noise Awareness Day in Ghana.

California's Proposed Student Civil Rights Act Gives Broad Definition to "Religion"

On Tuesday, the California Senate Judiciary Committee approved by a vote of 3-2 and sent to the full Senate for consideration SB 777, the California Student Civil Rights Act. Press attention has focused on the bill's prohibition against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity in schools receiving public funding or whose students receive student financial aid (Equality California press release). There is an exception for religiously-controlled schools where the requirements would be inconsistent with their religious tenets.

Another provision in the bill has gone largely unnoticed. While current California law prohibits religious discrimination in schools, SB 777 for the first time adds a broad definition of "religion" for this purpose. Proposed Sec. 212.3 of the Education Code provides that:

"'Religion" includes all aspects of religious belief, observance, and practice and includes agnosticism and atheism.

Reform Jews Charge Israel's Former Chief Rabbi With Libel

Yesterday in Israel, members of the Reform Jewish movement (including Holocaust survivors) filed a libel complaint with police officials against the country's former Sephardi Chief Rabbi, Mordechai Eliyahu. In a radio interview with the station Kol Haemet on the eve of Holocaust Memorial Day, Eliyahu blamed the creation of Reform Judaism in Germany for the death of 6 million Jews in the Holocaust. YNet News reports Eliyahu explained that while the victims were innocent, "the wrath of God does not distinguish between the righteous and the evil ones". Under Israeli law, a civil action cannot be filed against Eliyahu because his statements were made against an entire group, not one individual. Instead, a criminal complaint had to be filed with the police.

Illinois School's Ban On Anti-Gay Slogan Upheld

On Tuesday, an Illinois federal district court upheld a school's decision to limit the manner in which two evangelical Christian students could express their opposition to homosexuality as others in the school observed the "Day of Silence" to protest anti-gay discrimination. In Zamecnik v. Indian Prarie School District #204 Board of Education, (ND IL, April 17, 2007), the court refused to enjoin a Naperville, Illinois high school from banning T-shirts, buttons and stickers reading "Be Happy, Not Gay". The school took the position that positive statements, such as "Be Happy, Be Straight" would be permitted, but that negative statements violate school rules against derogatory or discriminatory statements against others. The Associated Press reported on the decision yesterday. [Thanks to How Appealing for posting the decision.]

Tajikistan Government's Enforcement Efforts Rile Muslims

In Tajikistan, officially a secular country with a population that is 90% Muslim, several developments indicate tensions between the government and Islam. Yesterday's International Herald Tribune reported that Tajik school authorities are introducing a new dress code that reinforces the ban on wearing the hijab (Islamic head scarf). Meanwhile, IRSN reports on a new enforcement effort aimed at unregistered mosques in the capital city of Dushanbe. The move is aimed at ridding the country of Muslim extremists, but it threatens to alienate moderate Muslims as well. Adding to the tensions was a raid in mid-March by police on Dushanbe's main mosque to enforce the requirement that children under 18 must be in school rather than attend Friday prayer services.

Minneapolis Airport Adopts Sanctions For Cabbies Refusing Service

On Monday, the Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Airports Commission formally adopted its staff's prior recommendation that a 30-day license suspension be imposed on any cab driver who refuses to transport a passenger for reasons other than safety concerns. A second offense would lead to a 2-year suspension. The new rules will primarily impact Muslim cab drivers who have refused to transport passengers carrying liquor. Developments are reported by yesterday's Minneapolis Star-Tribune. [Thanks to Blog from the Capital for the lead.]

EU Compromise On Religious Hatred Ban Reached

European Union justice ministers meeting in Luxembourg on Thursday gave in to Britain's objections and narrowed a proposed EU ban on incitement to religious hatred so that it will apply only if the incitement has racist intent. Reuters reports that this change assures that religion could still be criticized where the criticism is not racially motivated. However individual countries will still be permitted to punish religious hatred more broadly as well as to enforce individual laws against Holocaust denial.

UPDATE: A UPI report says that the EU's draft proposal has been worded so that it includes a ban on denying the Nazi Holocaust of World War II and the genocide in Rwanda in 1994. The European Jewish Press says that the proposal bans: "publicly condoning, denying, or grossly trivialising crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes" as defined by international crime courts and in the charter of the Nuremberg court.

National Episcopal Church Gets Only Limited Intervention In Property Dispute

In Diocese of Central New York v. St. Andrews Episcopal Church, (NY S.Ct., April 10, 2007), a New York trial court permitted only limited intervention by the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society of the Episcopal Church in a property dispute between a break-away Syracuse church and its parent Diocese. DFMS failed to demonstrate that it had a direct legal interest in the property of St. Andrews church. However it did show that there were common issues of law or fact in this case and DFMS's claim of an express or implied trust over the property of St. Andrews. In limiting the scope of the intervention, the court required that DFMS be represented by the same attorneys as are representing the Diocese and that DFMS may not conduct separate discovery without permission of the court. Transfigurations blog says that this is the first case in the country where the Episcopal Church was granted only limited participation in the litigation between a Diocese and a local parish.

City-Backed Financing For St. Louis U. Arena OK Under State Constitution

City-backed financing for St. Louis University's new basketball arena survived a state constitutional challenge yesterday as the Missouri Supreme Court held that the Jesuit-backed University is not "controlled by a religious creed" as that term is used in Art. IX, Sec. 8 of Missouri's constitution. In St. Louis University v. The Masonic Temple Association of St. Louis, (MO Sup. Ct., April 17, 2007), the court held that the constitutional ban on appropriating funds to support any educational institution controlled by any religious creed was not violated by the "tax increment financing" provided by the city of St. Louis. A mere historical link to a particular religion does not amount to control. Here, while the SLU's president is a Jesuit, "he is bound by the decisions of an independent, lay board of trustees". The religious component does not dictate the institution's oversight and administration. The court also rejected federal establishment clause challenges to the financing.

Judge Teitelman, dissenting, argued that a determination of religious control should be made only after the facts are developed at trial, rather than at the summary judgement stage as the majority does here. He also argued that, contrary to the majority's holding, an institution could be controlled by a religious creed even if proselytism is not one of its primary purposes. The Associated Press reported on the decision yesterday. (See prior related posting.)

10th Circuit Rules Largely In Favor of Summum "7 Aphorisms" Monuments

In decisions yesterday, the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals dealt with requests by members of the Summum faith that they be permitted to put up a display of their Seven Aphorisms in parks in two separate Utah cities. In each case, the city park already had a Ten Commandments display in it. Today's Salt Lake Tribune reports on the decisions.

In Summum v. Pleasant Grove City, (10th Cir., April 17, 2007), the court of appeals held that Summum was entitled to a preliminary injunction permitting it to erect its monument in a city park that already featured a number of displays relating to the city's pioneer history as well as a 10 Commandments monument donated by the Fraternal Order of Eagles. Holding that a park is a traditional public forum, the court rejected the city's attempt to restrict park monuments on the basis of their historical relevance to the city, saying that the city offered no reason why this was a "compelling" interest that would permit content based restrictions on monuments. While the city might create content-neutral restrictions on aesthetic grounds, it has not done so here.

The second case, Summum v. Duchesne City, (10th Cir., April 17, 2007), was more complicated. Here, apparently the only display already in the city's park was a 10 Commandments monument, and the city attempted to avoid Summum's request by transferring the land under the Ten Commandments display to a private party. Initially the land was transferred to the Lion's Club, and-- after questions were raised about the propriety of that transfer-- the land was re-transferred to private individuals. Also a fence was put up around the Ten Commandments with a sign saying that the land did not belong to the city. Summum requested transfer to it of a similar size piece of land in the park.

The court held that the issue here is not whether the city is endorsing the Ten Commandments in violation of the Establishment Clause, but rather whether the Ten Commandments monument remains a part of the park as a "public forum". Finding that the initial land transfer to the Lion's Club was invalid under state law because of lack of consideration and conflict of interest (the mayor was president of the Lion's Club), the court held that the land remained part of the public forum after that purported transfer. That being the case, the city needed a compelling interest to reject Summum's request to build its monument in the same public forum. It failed to demonstrate that interest.

The court then remanded the case to the trial court to determine if the second transfer of the property under the Ten Commandments to private parties was valid. After deciding that, the district court is to decide the "forum status" of the park and decide whether Summum is entitled to an injunction. (See prior related posting.)

Custody Decision May Not Consider Parent's Religious Beliefs On High Schooling

In Gove v. Petty, (WI Ct. App., April 17, 2007), a Wisconsin state appellate court reversed a trial court's decision that had removed a high school age child, Basyl, from custody of her Amish mother. The trial court had transferred custody on health and education issues to Basyl's father, with the mother retaining limited joint custody rights. The father wanted the child to receive a traditional high school education, while the mother, based on her Amish beliefs, had agreed only to home school the child. The court of appeals held that the trial court should not have considered the parents' different views on schooling Basyl in making its custody decision. The appellate court said: "we do not believe Basyl’s placement or custody could be changed on the singular basis that her sole legal custodian practices a religion that rejects higher education." The court remanded the case to the trial court for a determination using only permissible factors. Yesterday's Appleton (WI) Post-Crescent covers the decision. [Thanks Ann Althouse to via Religionlaw listserv for the lead.]

French Court Finds Favorable Lease To Mosque Violates Church-State Limits

In France, the Marseille administrative court on Tuesday ordered renegotiation of a lease of city land, finding that its mere 300 Euros per year rent amounted to a disguised subsidy of religion that violates French law on separation of church and state. The order came in a suit brought by the right wing National Front (FN), the Movement for France (MPF) and the National Republican Movement (MNR), challenging the lease for land on which a Great Mosque will be built in Marseille. France 24 reported yesterday that city officials promised a revised lease would be submitted to city council in June. Meanwhile, funds to actually build the mosque must be raised from private sources, with foreign funding limited to 20% to 30% of the total.

British Muslim Teacher Loses Appeal On Wearing Veil [Corrected]

As previously reported, on March 30 Britain's Employment Appeal Tribunal handed down its decision in Azmi v Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council, an appeal by a Muslim school teacher who had been suspended for refusing to remove her veil when working directly with children. The full opinion is now available online. The Tribunal found that the teaching assistant had not been discriminated against directly on the ground of religion or belief under Britain's Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations or Council of Europe Directive 2000/78/EC. While she had been discriminated against indirectly, the discrimination was not unlawful because it was proportionate in support of a legitimate aim. (See prior postings 1, 2.) Today's London Times published a summary of the decision.

Religion Clause Is 2 Years Old Today !

Today is the second birthday of Religion Clause blog. As I blow out the candles, I want to thank all of you, my readers, for your interest and for the leads many of you have furnished. I am particularly pleased with the broad spectrum of professionals in the fields of church-state relations, religious freedom and civil rights that have become regular readers. One of my goals was to create a resource for individuals on all parts of the religious and political spectrum. From the e-mails I receive, I think that I have had some success in this regard.

I am pleased to announce that in addition to its availability directly through the Internet and in RSS feeds, Religion Clause is now also featured as a part of Newstex.

A birthday is always a time to reassess. I invite you to let me know about the features of Religion Clause that you like and dislike and any changes you would suggest. There are several issues I have considered, and I particularly invite your comments on these. Should the mix between U.S. and foreign coverage be changed? Should there be changes in the typical length or number of postings? Is the weekly summary of prisoner cases useful; would a listing of the cases without summaries be just as useful?

Religion Clause was created because there was no central news source for legal and political developments on church-state and religious freedom issues. Should Religion Clause keep its news focus, or should it move more toward analysis and opinion? Should I bring in guest bloggers to do some of that? I invite your comments either as a Comment to this posting or by e-mail.

Thanks again especially to those of you who read this blog regularly. Please continue to recommend it to others who you think may be interested in its coverage.

Russia Lessens Reporting Burdens for Churches

Forum 18 reported today that "following sustained lobbying by religious representatives, the [Russian] government has markedly simplified the financial accounting procedure for religious organisations demanded by the so-called NGO Law." Churches had complained about the burdens that the new law created. (See prior postings 1, 2.)

Detailing the changes, Forum 18 in a separate report said that the new rules merely ask religious groups about the sources of their income-- including whether funds are received from Russian or foreign organizations or foreign governments; but not about funds from Russian individuals or the Russian government. Groups now do not need to list their meetings and conferences, or number of participants, nor must they describe their advertising of their activities. Religious organizations still must supply information about members belonging to their governing body.

NY Restaurant Sues Kosher Supervisor Over Charges Published On Blog

A well-known kosher steak house in Manhattan has filed a $10 million lawsuit against its former masgiach (kosher standards supervisor) for accusing the restaurant of failing to meet kashrut (kosher) standards. Yesterday's New York Post reports that the restaurant, Le Marais, has sued its former employee Jacky Bitton, who was famous in his own right previously. Bitton was a well-known drummer in a French rock band who later became religiously observant. More recently, Bitton and one of his sons was attacked in the 1991 Crown Height riots. After Bitton quit his job last month, he posted entires on his blog accusing the restaurant of permitting non-kosher food in its kitchen and accused its chef of being a "Jew hater". The restaurant says Bitton was too strict in applying rules of kashrut. Bitton is under a gag order from the Brooklyn trial court where a hearing is scheduled next week. Here is a copy of the court's order, courtesy of The Canonist blog.

Firing Over Threatening Letters Is Not Relgious Discrimination

In Carmack v. National Railroad Passenger Corp., (D Mass, March 22, 2007) a Massachusetts federal judge, adopting a Magistrate's recommendation, dismissed an unusual religious discrimination claim filed by a former Amtrak employee. In a conflict with his union representative, Joseph Carmack had written a series of documents described as "Letters from Hell". The rambling letters, referring to "Lucifer", included a paraphrase of parts of Shakespeare's Hamlet. The letters were viewed as a threat under Amtrak's violence policy. Carmack was dismissed after he refused to submit to psychiatric examination.

Among Carmack's many claims challenging his firing were claims alleging religious discrimination under Title VII and violations of his First Amendment rights. He claimed that his letters, which were the underlying basis for his dismissal, expressed his belief in spiritual forces and used "standard cultural and religious expressions of God and ... Satan or Lucifer ... to refer to ... spiritual forces in which Plaintiff believes."

The court dismissed Carmack's Title VII and state employment discrimination claims for failing to exhaust his administrative remedies. It went on to hold that on the merits of both his statutory and First Amendment claims, Carmack had not shown that his letters involved any religious practice or that he was dismissed because of his religion.

Canadian Street Preacher Ignoring Ban On Loudspeakers

In Calgary, Alberta, street preacher Art Pawlowski is battling city officials who have issued him a permit to preach in a city park only if he does not use loud speakers. CBC News yesterday reported that the Court of Queens Bench earlier this month ruled the permit restrictions valid. Pawlowski, however, is ignoring them, using amplification equipment when he preaches three times a week at a small green space across from a homeless shelter. Police have given Pawlowski more than $400 in tickets so far for various violations.

Hindu Nationalists Protest New Indian Coin Design

Asia News reported earlier this week that Hindu nationalists are demanding that the Reserve Bank of India withdraw a new 2 rupee coin that pictures men from four different religions coming together and raising their hands in unity. Fundamentalists in the state of Uttar Pradesh say that authorities replaced the map of India that was previously on the coin with the new design that looks like a Christian cross. [Thanks to International Christian Concern for the lead.]