India's Supreme Court Orders Protection For Intermarrieds

The Supreme Court of India on Friday ordered police to provide new protections to young men and women who enter inter-caste or inter-religious marriages. Latta Singh v. State of U.P., (Sup. Ct. India, July 7, 2006), was a case involving violence and frivolous criminal charges brought by the unhappy family of a woman who married out of her caste. Not only did the court quash unjustified criminal charges, but it went out of its way to provide additional protections in the future.

It said: "If the parents ... do not approve of such inter-caste or inter-religious marriage the maximum they can do is ... cut off social relations with the son or the daughter, but they cannot give threats or commit or instigate acts of violence and cannot harass the person who undergoes such ... marriage. We, therefore, direct that the administration/police authorities throughout the country will see to it that if any boy or girl [who is not still a minor]... undergoes inter-caste or inter-religious marriage ..., the couple are not harassed by any one nor subjected to threats or acts of violence, and any one who gives such threats or harasses or commits acts of violence ... is taken to task by instituting criminal proceedings by the police against such persons...."

Friday's Times of India covers the decision.

Atheist Law Center Disbanded

Larry Darby, the Holocaust denier who lost his race for Alabama attorney general in the Democratic primary this year, announced yesterday that he has formally dissolved his organization, the Atheist Law Center. Darby said the Center was formed to advocate for separation between religion and government. His statement on the closing of the Center was riddled with anti-Semitic rhetoric. He concluded by stating: "I no longer categorically deny the existence of God. My views have changed based on experiences or understanding of the world around me. I appreciate the wisdom of Thomas Jefferson who, in the Declaration of Independence, spoke of the laws of nature and of nature's God. I agree with moral precepts put forth by Jesus of Nazareth and I am Christian in a sense that Jesus of Nazareth would approve."

German Ban On Muslim Teacher Wearing Headscarf Found Discriminatory

In the German state of Baden-Wuerttemberg, an administrative tribunal has found illegal discrimination in a Stuttgart school's enforcement of a law that prohibits "outward expressions that undermine the neutrality of the government or peace between political and religious creeds in school." The school refused to permit a Muslim teacher to wear a headscarf while she taught, but Catholic nuns are permitted to wear veils when they teach. Expatica as well as Jurist both covered the decision yesterday.

DC Circuit Says In Chaplain Case That Establishment Clause Violation Creates Per Se Irreparable Injury

Yesterday, in Chaplaincy of Full Gospel Churches v. England, (DC Cir., July 7, 2006), the District of Columbia Court of Appeals reversed the trial court and remanded for further findings a suit alleging that the Navy has unconstitutionally maintained a religious quota system for the promotion, assignment, and retention of Navy chaplains that disadvantages chaplains of non-liturgical Protestant faiths (i.e. Baptist, Evangelical, Pentecostal, and Charismatic chaplains.) Plaintiffs had moved for a preliminary injunction, arguing that their evidence demonstrated that Catholic Naval Reserve chaplains were favored and permitted to remain on active duty beyond mandatory separation age limits. This they argued violated the Establishment Clause.

The district court had denied the motion for an injunction, in part because plaintiffs had not demonstrated irreparable injury. The Court of Appeals, however, held that the Navy's violation of the Establishment Clause constituted per se irreparable injury. It remanded the case to the trial court for it to determine whether plaintiffs had also shown the other 3 elements necessary for a preliminary injunction: likelihood of success on the merits, the injunction will not substantially injure other parties and that it will further the public interest.

Justice Kennedy Stays Order To Remove Mt. Soledad Cross

The battle to preserve the Mt. Soledad Cross took on new life yesterday. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy issued an in-chambers opinion granting a stay of the federal district court's order to remove the cross pending final disposition of the appeal to the Ninth Circuit. (See prior posting.) The Ninth Circuit had denied a stay of the district court order to remove the cross, though it had ordered expedited briefing and scheduled argument for Oct. 16, 2006. Earlier this week Kennedy issued a temporary stay. Now in San Diegans for the Mt. Soledad National War Memorial v. Paulson, (Sup. Ct., July 7, 2006), Kennedy, sitting as Circuit Justice, wrote:

[T]he equities here support preserving the status quo while the city's appeal proceeds. Compared to the irreparable harm of altering the memorial and removing the cross, the harm in a brief delay ... seems slight. In addition, two further factors make this case "sufficiently unusual" ... to warrant granting a stay. First, a recent Act of Congress has deemed the monument a "national memorial honoring veterans of the United States Armed Forces" and has authorized the Secretary of the Interior to take title to the memorial on behalf of the United State if the city offers to donate it. Sec.116, 118 Stat. 3346.... Second, San Diego voters, seeking to carry out the transfer ... have approved a ballot proposition authorizing donation of the monument to the United States. While the Superior Court ... has invalidated the ballot proposition [on state constitutional grounds,] ... if the state appellate court reverses ... and allows the memorial to become federal property, its decision may moot the District Court's injunction, which addresses only the legality under state law of the cross' presence on city property....

Today's San Diego Union-Tribune has a story on Justice Kennedy's decision.
[Thanks to SCOTUS Blog for the link.]

Kerala Government Probe of Actress' Visit To Indian Temple May Be Started

In the state of Kerala, in India, the Sabarimala Temple has become the center of world-wide attention lately. India eNews.com today reports on recent developments at the shrine which traditionally excludes women between 10 and 50 years of age. Only girls who have not attained puberty and women who have entered menopause are allowed to enter the temple, dedicated to Lord Ayyappa. However recently the Indian actress, Jaimala claimed that she had entered the temple in violation of this tradition and had inadvertently touched the temple deity some 18 years ago. On Tuesday the Kerala High Court accepted a petition seeking to order a government probe of Jaimala's actions. (Press Trust of India.) Meanwhile, the Travancore Devaswom Board, the custodian of the temple, said that it will begin a series of corrective rituals that will cost around half a million rupees and take almost two years to complete.

Delaware School District Remains At Center Of Prayer Debate

The Indian River School District in Delaware continues to be at the center of controversy about school prayer. An article in today's Sussex County (Delaware) Post reports that the board of education last week made minor changes in its policy on prayer at graduation ceremonies and baccalaureate services in the district. After a controversy in 2004, the board adopted a policy that provides that student-initiated, student-delivered, voluntary messages are permitted during such ceremonies. The most recent revisions deal with who is responsible for selecting student speakers and reviewing their speeches.

Lawsuits against the school district are pending challenging the Board's continuing practice of opening school board meetings with a prayer, its extensive pattern of school-sponsored prayer at graduation, and its promotion of Christianity in other contexts. (See prior postings 1, 2.) Last week, Jews on First published a long account of the charges against the school district and reported that the Jewish family that filed the 2004 lawsuit against the district felt it necessary to move to Wilmington, two hours away, out of fear of retaliation.

Jews For Jesus New York Subway Ads Are Controversial

A massive ad campaign on the New York City subways by Jews for Jesus (JFJ) has offended many Jews who ride the City's transit system, according to an article from today's New York Post. However, the guidelines for ads on New York subways adopted by MTA New York City Transit in 1997 only prohibit messages that discriminate on the basis of race, gender or sexual orientation, or those that contain images or sell services inappropriate for minors. Subway officials say that the First Amendment prohibits them from otherwise discriminating on the basis of their disagreement with an ad's message. JFJ has purchased ads in subway cars and on 42 illuminated panels at the Times Square subway station, urging Jews to accept Jesus as their Messiah. The ads are part of a broader $1.4 million campaign by Jews for Jesus that has sent 200 missionaries to New York City for the month of July. Today's New York Times reports that the missionaries will operate in all five boroughs and suburban counties, and will have special programs aimed at Russian-speaking Jews, Israelis and Hasidic Jews.

Church Sues To Keep Offering Classes In Its Building

The American Center for Law and Justice announced yesterday that it had filed suit in a Virginia federal district court to defend the rights of the McLean Bible Church to offer Bible study and religious ministry classes in its church building under its current use permit. The Church is one of the largest in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area. The county claims classes were not included as part of the church’s permit and that if it wants to conduct them it must qualify as a college or university. The problem arose because of a 2001 agreement with Capitol Bible Seminary to administer some aspects of the Church's educational offerings. The suit claims that the actions of Fairfax County violate the Church's rights to religious free exercise under the Constitution and RLUIPA, as well as its freedom of speech and association, and its right to equal protection of the laws.

HUD Charges Apartment With Religious Discrimination

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development brought an unusual housing discrimination case on Wednesday against Triple H. Realty, LLC of Lakewood, New Jersey. (HUD Press Release.) The complaint (full text) filed before an administrative law judge says that the owner, managing agent, and onsite superintendent of the Cottage Manor Apartments treated non-Jewish tenants less favorably than Jewish tenants in a number of ways, including imposing more restrictive rules and charging higher rents. The complaint alleged that respondents also attempted to set aside better-maintained buildings in the apartment complex for Jewish tenants. Non-Jewish Hispanic and African-American tenants were forced to transfer to buildings located in the rear of the apartment complex. The HUD complaint asks for a declaration that the respondents have violated the Fair Housing Act, an injunction against future violations, an award of damages and imposition of a civil penalty.

Fraud and Emotional Distress Claims Dismissed On First Amendment Grounds

In Peeler v. Way International, Inc., (Tenn. Ct. App., July 5, 2006), a Tennessee court of appeals upheld the dismissal of claims by a doctor and his wife against Way International, a worldwide religious organization. It found that many of the claims were barred by the statute of limitations and that the others would involve the court in determining the validity of The Way's religious doctrines and beliefs in a manner barred by the First Amendment's religion clauses. The suit alleged fraud and infliction of emotional distress resulting from The Way's teachings and mind control practices that required avoiding debt and "abundant sharing" of follower's assets. The plaintiffs feared being "marked and avoided" if they did not share their assets, which were allegedly not used for The Way's outreach purposes, but rather for the "prurient interests" its leadership.

Judge's Accommodation Of Religious Needs Of Defendant Upheld

In Trubin v. Mazzuca, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45321 (SDNY, July 6, 2006), a New York federal district court rejected a Muslim prisoner's claim that he was denied his free exercise rights at his burglary trial because the judge refused to completely adjourn jury deliberations on Friday. The court found that the judge had proposed a reasonable accommodation that would have adjourned the proceedings for two hours for the defendant to attend services and then return to the court room.

House Hearings On Religious Minorities In Middle East

Last week, the House Committee on International Relations, through its Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Operations, held hearings on The Plight of Religious Minorities: Can Religious Pluralism Survive? The subcommittee has posted the Hearing Notice, and the prepared statements of The Honorable Henry J. Hyde , The Honorable John V. Hanford III, Ms. Nina Shea, Father Firas Aridah, Ms. Rosie Malek-Yonan, and Ms. Kit Bigelow. It also posted the subcommittee Staff Report that was submitted for the record. The hearings focused on the plight of religious minorities in a number of countries in the Middle East. [Thanks to Blog from the Capital for the information.]

Parties Agree, But Judge Postpones Hearing On Chabad vs. Hollywood, Florida

The U.S. Department of Justice announced yesterday that a settlement has been reached in the lawsuit against the city of Hollywood, Florida that is charged with discriminating against a Orthodox Jewish Chabad congregation by removed a special zoning exception that had been granted to it for operating its synagogue. (See prior posting.) Under the settlement the city will allow the Hollywood Community Synagogue to operate permanently at its current location, and to expand within a block of that location. The city also agreed that its leaders and managers, and certain city employees, will attend training on the requirements of RLUIPA, and that it will adopt new complaint procedures and report periodically to the Justice Department. Finally, in a separate agreement, filed with the court at the same time, the city agreed to pay Chabad $2 million in damages, attorneys fees and costs.

The settlement still has to be approved by U.S. district Judge Joan Lenard, who could call a public hearing to allow neighborhood residents to voice their opinions on the settlement. (Miami Herald, July 6). This morning, Judge Lenard postponed the hearing that had been scheduled for today on the settlement. (Bradenton Herald).

UPDATE: Yesterday, four homeowners in the neighborhood filed a request asking Judge Joan Lenard to permit them to argue against the propposed settlement between Chabad and the city of Hollywood. (Miami Herald).

Australian Schools Object To Newly Mandated Salaries For Chaplains

In the Australian state of South Australia, 187 schools face the prospect of having to raise the pay of their school chaplains by 400%. ABC South East reports that a new state law requires school chaplains be paid by the hour, instead of being given a small honorarium as is done at present. Critics of the new law call it "atheism by stealth", since they say this could make chaplains unaffordable for many schools.

Priest Sues Community College For Religious Discrimination

The Associated Press yesterday reported on a federal lawsuit that was filed in Connecticut last January by Rev. James A. Crowley, who is a Catholic priest and a business professor at Naugatuck Valley Community College. Crowley claims that his promotion was delayed after one of his supervisors objected to his clerical clothing and his use of "Catholic examples" in business ethics classes. Crowley claims that his class was placed under surveillance by campus police for over two years. After Crowley complained about the delay in his promotion, he was moved to an undesirable office and given a harsh class schedule. The lawsuit also claims that Dennis E. Spector, a supervisor who supported Crowley, was wrongfully accused of workplace violence and moved to the same windowless office as Crowley.

Recent Prisoner Cases

In Eley v. Herman, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44963 (ND Ind., June 21, 2006), an Indiana federal district court dismissed a prisoner's free exercise and RLUIPA claim that his rights were violated when he was not permitted to observe the Friday Jumu'ah prayer service during lunch times. The court permitted the plaintiff prisoner, Gregory Eley, to introduce more evidence on his complaint that the county jail refused to provide him a Koran. The court held that while the jail had no obligation to furnish religious materials to Eley, if he could show that the jail's Christian chaplain was acting under color of law in furnishing Christian material to inmates, Eley might have an equal protection claim.

In Gray v. Johnson, (WD Va., June 30, 2006), a Virginia federal district court rejected an inmate's Establishment Clause challenge to the Therapeutic Community Program (a 12-step program for those with a history of substance abuse) in which the inmate was required to participate in order to accrue good conduct time. Plaintiff John Martin claimed that fellow participants pressured him to adopt religious beliefs during mandatory group meetings. However the court found that TCP serves the important, secular purpose of rehabilitation, and that there is no indication that the program failed to strike the necessary constitutional balance between the inmates' right to speak and their right to be free from state-sponsored religious indoctrination. (See prior posting on Magistrate Judge's recommendations.)

Prague Cathedral Belongs To Church, Not State

In the Czech Republic, according to Catholic News Service yesterday, a court has held that St. Vitus Cathedral and surrounding properties in Prague belong to the Catholic Church. This holding reversed an earlier decision that the 660 year old cathedral containing tombs of kings and queens was "built from the dues of people regardless of their religion" and should be regarded as a symbol of the entire nation. On June 16, a Prague Municipal Court judge vindicated the claim of the Church to the cathedral that was nationalized under a 1954 Communist decree, and restored to the Church in a 1994 court ruling which a year later was overturned. In his decision last month, Judge Vladimir Fucik said the church's ownership of the cathedral had never been legally terminated.

County Fire Ban Impacts Native American Religious Ceremonies

In Gilpin County, Colorado, this summer's drought has created problems for Native Americans who wish to practice their traditional sweat lodge ceremony. Today's Rocky Mountain News says that officials have refused to exempt the ceremony-- which involves heating rocks with fire-- from the county's ban on open burning imposed to prevent wildfires. County Commissioner Al Price said that allowing ceremonial fires would open the floodgates for other people seeking a way around the ban. However Ray Rubio, a Southern Paiute, complains that the county did nothing to stop a Fourth of July fireworks show which he says was equally a fire danger. The county said it had no jurisdiction over the show in Black Hawk. Not all counties are as unyielding. Boulder County Sheriff Joe Pelle said the county tries to accommodate those who want to use fire for religious ceremonies during the county-wide fire ban. "We don't have problems with sweat lodge fires starting fires, we have problems with knuckleheads drinking in the woods and having campfires," he said.

Contempt Hearing Scheduled In Prisoner Autopsy Ban Case

Civil and criminal contempt hearings are scheduled in federal court in Nashville, Tennessee for July 28 as the daughter of executed murderer Sedley Alley claims the state medical examiner and a prison warden ignored an order issued by the court. The court, heeding Alley's religious objections, prohibited the state from performing an autopsy on Alley's body. (See prior posting.) Yesterday, the Knoxville News Sentinel reported that Glenn Funk, attorney for state medical examiner Dr. Bruce Levy, said that an autopsy was not performed, but that fluids were routinely removed from the body. Funk also said that the medical examiner's office did not know of the preliminary injunction that was issued only three hours before Alley's late-night execution, and was not served on authorities until the next morning.