Vietnam Issues Religious Policy White Paper

Voice of America reported on Friday that Vietnam has released its first government white paper on religious policy. The report reflects the Hanoi government's new more friendly approach to religion. Nguyen The Doanh, the vice chairman of the Government Committee on Religious Affairs, says that the government is making it easier for new religions to be recognized. However, despite new national policies, some provincial authorities still ban certain religious practices and interfere with Protestant leaders.

Proposal To Reinforce French Secularism

In France, the High Council on Integration is recommending a new charter to further define separation of church and state in the activities of government employees and in the provision of government services. The National Secular Society reports today that the need for new charter was emphasized by recent incidents in which male doctors in hospital maternity wards are subject to insults and physical attacks by Muslim husbands who object to doctors’ touching their wives in the course of medical examination or treatment. The new charter on secularism would be distributed at public events, including ceremonies at which immigrants are granted French citizenship.

6th Circuit: First Amendment Protects Expletive Using "God"

In Leonard v. Robinson, (6th Cir., Feb. 2, 2007), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s grant of summary judgment to defendant and sent back for trial a civil rights claim growing out of an arrest of a local resident Thomas Leonard who got into a heated argument at a Montrose (MI) Township Board meeting. In a 2-1 decision, the majority held that “no reasonable officer would have found probable cause to arrest Leonard solely for uttering “God damn” while addressing the township board because the First Amendment protects this sort of uninhibited debate”. In the course of its opinion, the majority held unconstitutional Michigan Compiled Laws § 750.103 that makes it a misdemeanor for “Any person who has arrived at the age of discretion … [to] profanely curse or damn or swear by the name of God, Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost….” The majority said that the section “if not facially invalid, is radically limited by the First Amendment”. The majority also found constitutional problems with the potential application of three other Michigan statutes to Leonard’s speech.

Judge Sutton, dissenting in part, said: “While I am prepared to accept the majority’s judgment that the application of all four statutes to Leonard violated his First Amendment rights, I am not prepared to accept its judgment that the Supreme Court, our court or the Michigan courts had clearly established the unconstitutionality of all four of these duly enacted laws before this incident.” The Associated Press today reported on the decision. [Thanks to How Appealing for the lead.]

British Jewish Community Divided On Gay Adoption Rules

In Britain, organizations in the Jewish community differ somewhat in the extent of their support for the Catholic Church’s strong opposition to new Sexual Orientation Regulations that will require religiously sponsored social service agencies treat gay and lesbian couples equally with heterosexual couples in placing children for adoption. (See prior posting.) On Thursday, TotallyJewish.com reported that Britain’s Federation of Synagogues called for strong support of the positions of the Catholic Church and the Church of England in opposition to the new requirements. However the Jewish Community’s leading adoption agency says it does not discriminate against any group or part of the community. Meanwhile, Britain’s Chief Rabbi, Sir Jonathan Sacks, has issued an ambiguous press release, saying that Jewish law is committed to marriage and family, but at the same time the Jewish community is committed to compassion and sensitivity. The Board of Deputies of British Jews also issued an ambivalent statement.

Religious Discrimination Claim Filed Against California Athletic Club

In Hollister, California earlier this week, a family has filed a religious discrimination lawsuit seeking $4000 in damages against a local athletic club. The Hollister Free Lance reported on Thursday that Andrew and Christine Martinez have sued because Rovella’s Athletic Club refused to permit their son to participate in its competitive swim program after the Martinez’ crossed out several religious references in the club’s handbook before they signed an acceptance of it. The Martinez family is Catholic, but does not feel that a swim club is the proper place for their son to be exposed to religion.

Recent Prisoner Religious Freedom Cases

In Smithback v. Texas, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6033 (ND TX, Jan. 29, 2007), a Texas inmate brought a religious freedom challenge to a rule of the Texas Board of Criminal Justice that prohibited prisoners from placing extraneous drawings or illustrations on envelopes they mail out from prison. Plaintiff claims that prison authorities refused to let him send a letter to his family in an envelope containing a handwritten drawing of a large cross surrounded by the words "Jesus" and "LORD!" A federal Magistrate Judge held that this restriction did not substantially burden plaintiff’s free exercise of religion, and that prison authorities had a legitimate penological interest in imposing the restriction.

In Heleva v. Kramer, (3d Cir., Jan. 27, 2007), the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a Pennsylvania district court’s dismissal of a prisoner’s free exercise of religion claim. The Court of Appeals held that the lower court erred in finding that books sent to him by his sister were not "religious". The lower court’s distinction between religious books and spiritual, self-help books was found to be untenable. Also the court held that the fact the prisoner’s claim is based on the deprivation of personal property—refusal to give him the books sent to him—does not prevent him from asserting a free exercise claim.

In Kay v. Friel, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6391 (D UT, Jan. 26, 2007), and in the related case of Kay v. Bemis, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6392 (D UT, Jan 25, 2007), a Utah federal district court rejected a Wiccan prisoner’ free exercise, establishment clause and RLUIPA claims growing out of allegations that officials at two different prisons variously prevented him from possessing items needed for religious practices, including tarot cards, a Dungeons and Dragons game, and a metal religious symbol, and prevented him from purchasing incense and certain books. The court held that plaintiff’s complaint contains no allegations of facts showing that the items he desires are necessary to the practice of the Wicca religion, nor does it describe the nature of the religious ritual he was prevented from conducting, nor—in the Bemis case-- does he make clear his religious affiliation. The state had a reasonable explanation for the lack of Wiccan religious services. Finally, the relief he sought under RLUIPA is unavailable to him.

In Young v. Beard, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6950 (ED PA, Jan. 31, 2007), a Pennsylvania federal district judge, after a non-jury trial, rejected a prisoner’s claim that prison policy permitting religious musical bands—and permitting them to rehearse more frequently than secular bands—violates the establishment clause and equal protection clause.

In Nelson v. Miller, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6580 (SD IL, Jan. 30, 2007), an Illinois federal Magistrate Judge dismissed various claims by a Catholic prisoner that prison authorities failed to furnish him a diet that complies with his religious beliefs. The court found that plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies as to one free exercise claim. His claim relating to denial of a vegan diet are moot because he is now receiving such a diet, and there is no reasonable expectation that it will be withdrawn. The court found that the 11th Amendment barred plaintiff’s damage claim under RLUIPA against defendant in his official capacity.

In Thompson v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95008 (MD PA, filed Feb. 1, 2007), a Pennsylvania federal district court adopted recommendations of a federal magistrate judge rejecting claims of a Rastafarian prisoner who had been refused an exemption from a prison’s hair-length requirements. Officials found that his religious beliefs were not sincere. The court found that two of the defendants had in fact supported plaintiff’s claim for an exemption, so no cause of action lies against them.

NFL Says Church Super Bowl Parties Violate Copyright Laws

Yesterday's Indianapolis Star reports that the NFL is telling churches-- even through demand letters sent by overnight express-- that they will be violating the copyright laws if they host Super Bowl parties on large-screen TV's. NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said: "We have contracts with our (TV) networks to provide free over-the-air television for people at home. The network economics are based on television ratings and at-home viewing. Out-of-home viewing is not measured by Nielsen." The only exception is for sports bars and other businesses that show televised sports as a part of their everyday operations. The NFL also objected to plans by Fall Creek Baptist Church in Indianapolis to show a video at their Super Bowl party of the Christian testimonies of Colts coach Tony Dungy and Chicago Bears coach Lovie Smith. The NFL says that for groups other than businesses that regularly show televised sports events, gatherings are limited to use of one TV set no larger than 55 inches, no admission fees may be charged (even to pay for refreshments), no "message" may be promoted in connection with the game, and "Super Bowl" may not be used in the publicity. Christianity Today's Weblog has more on this story.

UPDATE: Compliments of a posting on Religionlaw by Marty Lederman, here are the copyright law sections involved. 17 USC 106(5) gives the copyright owner the "exclusive right" to "publicly display" an audiovisual work. However there is an exemption in 17 USC 110(5)(B) for displays that comply with certain limitations.

Senate Chaplain Cancels Out After Finding Conference's Political Slant

The Associated Press reports today that U.S. Senate Chaplain Barry Black has cancelled a speech he was scheduled to give at next month's Reclaiming America for Christ Conference after conference promoters put his photo-- along with those of prominent conservatives-- on a brochure promoting the event. Black told Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid that he was concerned that his appearance would violate the Senate chaplain's "historic tradition of being nonpolitical, nonpartisan, nonsectarian". Black is the first military chaplain, the first African-American and the first Seventh-day Adventist to hold the post of Senate Chaplain. When Black agreed to appear at the Reclaiming America for Christ Conference, he was not aware of the conservative slant of the event or who the other speakers would be. [Thanks to Blog from the Capital for the link, and to Steven Sholk for a heads up on the story.]

President Speaks At National Prayer Breakfast

Yesterday President Bush spoke at the 55th National Prayer Breakfast held at the Hilton Washington Hotel. In his remarks (full text) he said: "Prayer changes hearts. Prayer changes lives. And prayer makes us a more compassionate and giving people. When we pray we surrender our will to the Almighty, and open ourselves up to His priorities and His touch. His call to love our neighbors as we would like to be loved ourselves is something that we hear when we pray. And we answer that call by reaching out to feed the hungry and clothe the poor and aid the widow and the orphan."

This year's breakfast attracted 3600 guests from 170 nations and all 50 states and U.S. territories. The keynote speaker was Dr. Frances Collins, Director of the Human Genome Project. Among the other speakers was U.S. Congressman Mike McIntyre (D-NC) who hosted a spiritual heritage tour of the U.S. Capitol the night before the breakfast. (Topsail-Island.info).

Preliminary Injunction Granted To Student Anti-Abortion Protester

In M.A.L. v. Kinsland, (ED MI, Jan. 31, 2007), a Michigan federal district court granted a preliminary injunction against school officials to an 8th-grade student who was prevented from expressing his anti-abortion views at school last October to mark "Pro-Life Day of Silent Solidarity"-- an event sponsored by a Christian youth organization. (See prior posting.) The parties subsequently agreed that the student could wear red tape on his wrists and a sweat shirt containing a protest slogan. However they remained at odds on the school's literature distribution policy. The court found it likely that the plaintiff would succeed on the merits of his claim that the school's literature distribution policy is an unconstitutional violation of his First Amendment rights. A release by Alliance Defense Fund discusses the case as does an article in the Monroe (MI) News.

British Humanist Offical Urges End To Bishops' Seats In House of Lords

Ekklesia yesterday reported that in connection with discussions by the British government about House of Lords reform, Hanne Stinson, chief executive of the British Humanist Association, has urged that the practice of automatically setting aside 26 seats for bishops of the Church of England be ended. The House of Lords has a total of 746 members. In the past there have been suggestions about expanding representation to other religious groups, but Congregationalists, Quakers and others have objected to "religious representation" on principle. Stinson has urged that all appointment of Lords be solely on merit.

Federal Employee Has Partial Win On Discriminatory E-Mail Policy Challenge

In Gee v. Kempthorne, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6695 (D ID, Jan. 30, 2007), an Idaho federal district court has dismissed as moot a First Amendment and RFRA claim by a Mormon employee of the Department of Interior Bureau of Reclamation, but has permitted the employee to move ahead with an equal protection claim for a declaratory judgment that in the future, regardless of the Department's computer use policy, Plaintiff may not be treated differently in the enforcement of those policies because of his religious beliefs. The case grew out of limitations placed on plaintiff's use of his office computer for non-government business after he sent out e-mails objecting to other e-mails he had received from Department employees about recognition of June as Gay and Lesbian Pride Month.

Court Rejects Delay Motion In Wiccan Grave Marker Suit

A federal district court judge in Wisconsin has denied a motion by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to delay the start of a trial in a lawsuit seeking a decision on adding the Wiccan pentacle to the list of permissible symbols on veterans' memorial markers in national cemeteries. The Associated Press reported yesterday that in a one-line order, the court rejected a motion by the VA in Circle Sanctuary v. Nicholson to delay the trial while it finalizes a new rule on gravestone markers. The suit alleges that the VA has already delayed ruling on the matter for over nine years. (See prior posting.) Trial is now set to begin on the matter on June 29.

California Church Moves Ahead With RLUIPA Damage Claim

Yesterday's North County (CA) Times reports that Elsinore Christian Center will move ahead with a $1.9 million damage claim against the City of Lake Elsinore, CA for losses the church suffered when it was prevented from relocating to a downtown building. This follows the church's win last August in the 9th Circuit which upheld the constitutionality of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. (See prior posting.) A Los Angeles federal district court judge set January 31 as the trial date for this next phase of the case.

Former House Speaker Criticizes Wm. & Mary President

Former U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Newt Gingrich has published an article in National Review Online severely critical of Gene R. Nichol, the president of the College of William and Mary who decided that the state school's chapel would only display a cross on Sundays and during Christian services. (See prior posting.) Gingrich said that the President's "reasoning bears the unmistakable influence of former Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O’Connor, whose major contribution to church-state thinking centers on her concept of endorsement.... Unfortunately, the "endorsement test”"has proven itself a decidedly unhelpful legal criterion. It is indeterminate, bordering on arbitrary, because it focuses primarily on subjective perceptions; its first consideration is not how the law actually treats people, but rather how people feel they are treated by the law. Taken to its logical conclusion, the endorsement test leads to the rule of the perpetually aggrieved, a tyranny of the easily offended."

Arizona Bills Would Aid Women Who Flee FLDS Polygamous Community

Yesterday's Arizona Republic reported that two bills have been introduced into the Arizona legislature to assist women who have fled Colorado City's FLDS Church. Rep. David Lujan, an attorney with the non-profit Justice for Children, introduced HB 2325 that would severely limit courts in granting custody or unsupervised visitation rights to a parent who is practicing polygamy or child bigamy. This is designed to prevent having wives who have fled from being forced to send their children back to a father and his other wives. The second bill, HB 2647, would provide funding for transitional housing to women who have fled a polygamous relationship or have been victimized by child bigamy.

Canadian Marriage Commissioner Charged For Refusing To Perform Gay Marriage

In Regina, Saskatchewan yesterday the Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal held a hearing on a discrimination complaint against one of the Canadian province's marriage commissioners who refused to perform a same-sex wedding ceremony on religious grounds. Canadian Press yesterday reported on the hearing. A lawyer for the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission said that marriage commissioners are required by law to provide civil wedding services for gay couples since same-sex marriage has been legalized in the province. However Orville Nichols, a devout Baptist, said he would have never taken the position as a marriage commissioner if at the time he was appointed there had been a requirement that he perform same-sex marriages.

Dallas Restrictions On Feeding Homeless Challenged

Today's Dallas (TX) Morning News reports that Rip Parker Memorial Homeless Ministry and Big Heart Ministries have filed a federal lawsuit to have Dallas' food distribution ordinance declared unconstitutional. The ordinance, which the city has enforced since February 2006, limits the places where groups can distribute food to the hungry. The primary permissible location is the city's downtown Day Resource Center. The ordinance stopped stopped charitable groups from serving food in vacant lots and cardboard box encampments under bridges. The suit claims that the ordinance violates the plaintiffs' free exercise of religion.

6th Circuit En Banc Rehearing Sought In "Teen Ranch" Case

On Tuesday, a petition for en banc review by the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals was filed in Teen Ranch v. Udow (see prior posting). The panel's decision upheld Michigan's decision to cut off placement of abused, neglected and delinquent children with Teen Ranch, finding its program coerces religious participation by the youths. Representing Teen Ranch, the Alliance Defense Fund announced the appeal which argues that teenagers initially placed with Teen Ranch can opt out and be transferred to a different rehabilitation program. The Petition For Rehearing argues that these "'opt-out' procedures result in 'private choice' controlling the flow of state funds to religious groups, thus insulating the state from an Establishment Clause violation."

Canadian Argues For Limiting Tax Exemptions For Some Religions

Canadian Catholic News yesterday called attention to an essay by Janice Gross Stein published last Fall in Literary Review of Canada. The University of Toronto political scientist argued that Canada should not make tax exemptions available to religious groups that fail to comply with "Canadian values". This would include the Catholic Church because of its refusal to ordain women. Constitutional lawyer Peter Lauwers said Stein is attempting to force change on religious groups and this, he said, would meant that "the state is no longer being neutral".