Kristen Clark Sworn In To Head Justice Department Civil Rights Division

On Tuesday, the U.S. Senate, by a vote of 51-48, confirmed Kristen Clark as Assistant Attorney General to head the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. She was sworn in Tuesday evening, making her the first woman, and the first Black woman, to hold this position. According to NBC News:

Her nomination was met with opposition from Republicans, who accused Clarke of antisemitism. The accusation stemmed from an incident in 1994 in which the Harvard Black Students Association, a group Clarke led at age 19, invited a professor accused of promoting antisemitic conspiracy theories to speak. Clarke defended the decision at the time in the Harvard Crimson, the school's student newspaper.

She acknowledged this past January that giving the professor a platform was a mistake, and touted her record on antisemitism in her civil rights work.

Biden Issues Greeting To Buddhists Celebrating Vesak

Yesterday President Biden issued a Statement (full text) sending warm wishes to Buddhists celebrating the festival of Vesak, saying in part:

The ceremonial lighting of a lamp, the symbol of this holiday that has been celebrated for over 2,500 years, reminds us of Buddhism’s teachings of compassion, humility, and selflessness that endure today. On this day, we also commemorate the many contributions of Buddhists in America....

Florida State Settles With Catholic Student Who Was Removed As Student Senate Head

As previously reported, last October a student court at the University of Florida concluded that the University's Student Senate violated the 1st Amendment when it removed Jack Denton, a Catholic student, from the Senate presidency. Student Senate took the action because Denton criticized Black Lives Matter, the ACLU and Reclaim the Block, saying they take views opposed to Catholic teachings. Now, the University has entered a settlement agreement (full text) with Denton under which the University has agreed to pay Denton $10,000 in damages and $1050 in back pay that he would have earned if he had remained Senate president. It will also pay Denton's attorney fees of $83,950. ADF, which represented Denton, issued a press release announcing the settlement.

Kosher Restaurant Sues Certifying Agency For Defamation

New York Post reported this week on a lawsuit filed last month in a state trial court in Nassau County, New York by a kosher restaurant against the local kosher certifying agency that the restaurant used to hire. Last July, the restaurant, Chimichurri Charcoal Chicken, as well as two other establishments, switched from Vaad Hakashrus of the Five Towns and Far Rockaway to a rival, less expensive, certifying agency called Mehadrin of the Five Towns. This led the Vaad to issue a statement, alleged to be defamatory, criticizing Chimichurri's kosher food standards and urging residents not to eat there. The restaurant's lawsuit alleges:

The existing Vaad does not want competition, is afraid of the competition, and is trying to use its power to drive them — or attempt to drive them — out of business.

Chimichurri initially attempted to resolve the dispute in a rabbinical court, but the rabbis who head the Vaad did not show up for the hearing. This led the rabbinical court to grant unusual permission for Chimichurri to sue in secular court. The Vaad's lawyer told the New York Post:

Rabbis have an obligation and a right under the First Amendment to guide their communities with respect to religious issues and this does constitute a religious issue.

The Vaad has said that it has legitimate concerns about conflicts of interest.

Street Artist Sues Vatican For Using Her Image of Christ On Postage Stamp

 AP reports on a lawsuit filed in Italy last month by a Rome street artist.  Alessia Babrow has sued the Vatican for copyright infringement for using her street art image of Christ on the Vatican's 2020 Easter postage stamp.  The image was glued onto a bridge near the Vatican:

Olivieri, the Vatican’s numismatic chief, has told an Italian journalist that he took a photo of the Christ when he saw it while riding his moped one day and decided to use the image for the Easter stamp in an apparent attempt to appeal to a new generation of stamp enthusiasts.

9th Circuit Rejects Qualified Immunity For Denying NOI Inmate Participation In Ramadan

In Obataiye-Allah v. Steward, (9th Cir., May 25, 2021), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals vacated an Oregon federal district court's holding that prison officials were shielded from damages by qualified immunity in a Nation of Islam inmate's suit complaining that he was denied participation in Ramadan in 2018. The court said in part:

Plaintiff’s declaration established that he has a sincerely held Nation of Islam religious belief and he informed defendants that weekly prayer meetings were not required for Nation of Islam Muslims. The right to free exercise was clearly established in 2018, such that a reasonable official would have known that requiring attendance at weekly prayer meetings as a condition to participate in Ramadan, without consideration of other alternatives to establish sincerity of belief, would violate the First Amendment.

The court also vacated the district court's rejection of plaintiff's equal protection "class of one" claim. 

Building Code Is Not Zoning Law Under RLUIPA

In St. Paul’s Foundation and Shrine of Saint Nicholas the Wonder Worker, Patron of Sailors, Brewers and Repentant Thieves v. Baldacci, (D MA, May 21, 2021), a Massachusetts federal district court held that revocation of a building permit to assure compliance with the state building code is not covered by RLUIPA.  Plaintiff, a monastery, sought to renovate a building to provide a space to brew beer, a chapel and and a fellowship hall.  The court concluded that a building code is not a land use regulation or zoning law. Moreover, there was no substantial burden on religious exercise.

Georgia Anti-BDS Law Held Unconstitutional

 In Martin v. Wrigley, (ND GA, May 21, 2021), a Georgia federal district court held that Georgia's anti-Israel boycott law violates contractors' free speech rights and is unconstitutionally vague. The law requires that all state contracts contain a certification that the contractor is not engaged engaged in a boycott of Israel. It was challenged by a pro-Palestinian journalist who had been invited to speak at a conference at a state university. The court said in part:

Because the burden on speech imposed by O.C.G.A. § 50-5-85 is content based, it is subject to strict scrutiny....  Even assuming that Georgia's interest in furthering foreign policy goals regarding relations with Israel is a substantial state interest, Defendants fail to explain how Martin's advocacy of a boycott of Israel as any bearing on Georgia's ability to advance foreign policy goals with Israel. The law also is not narrowly tailored to achieve the state's purported interest....

The requirement contained in O.C.G.A. § 50-5-85 that parties seeking to contract with the state of Georgia sign a certification that they are not engaged in a boycott of Israel also is unconstitutional compelled speech.

CAIR issued a press release announcing the decision.

Canadian Supreme Court Refuses To Invalidate Archbishop's Expulsion of Church Members

In Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church of Canada St. Mary Cathedral v. Aga, (Sup Ct Canada, May 21, 2021), the Supreme Court of Canada refused to invalidate an Archbishop's expulsion of five church members. The expelled members had been critical of the Archbishop's refusal to accept a recommendation of a committee investigating a movement which some saw as heretical. The members argued that their expulsions violated principles of natural justice because they had no opportunity to hear or contest the charges against them. The court held, however, that "there is no free‑standing right to procedural fairness with respect to decisions taken by voluntary associations." The court explained its decision:

Jurisdiction to intervene in the affairs of a voluntary association depends on the existence of a legal right which the court is asked to vindicate. Here, the only viable candidate for a legal right justifying judicial intervention is contract. The finding of a contract between members of a voluntary association does not automatically follow from the existence of a written constitution and bylaws. Voluntary associations with constitutions and bylaws may be constituted by contract, but this is a determination that must be made on the basis of general contract principles, and objective intention to enter into legal relations is required. In this case, evidence of an objective intention to enter into legal relations is missing. As such, there is no contract, there is no jurisdiction, and there is no genuine issue requiring a trial.

Canadian law however does permit courts to intervene in religious decisions more readily than America courts are willing to do, as illustrated by this summary by the Court:

[W]hile purely theological issues are not justiciable ..., where a legal right is at issue, courts may need to consider questions that have a religious aspect in vindicating the legal right.... For example, courts adjudicating disputes over church property may need to consider adherence to the church’s internal rules, even where those rules are meant to give effect to religious commitments.  

Law Times reports on the decision.

Opening Of Court Sessions With Prayer Violates Establishment Clause

In Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Mack, (SD TX, May 21, 2021), a Texas federal district court held that a program devised by a Justice of the Peace under which his court sessions are opened with a prayer from a volunteer chaplain violates the Establishment Clause. The court concluded that attendees are impermissibly coerced into participating in religious ritual. It said in part:

The structure of the ceremony, combined with the defendant’s attendant statements about the ceremony’s purpose, is designed to give attendees “a sense of being in the presence of something . . . holy and sacred[.]” ... The Court is of the view that the defendant violates the Establishment Clause when, before a captured audience of litigants and their counsel, he presents himself as theopneustically-inspired, enabling him to advance, through the Chaplaincy Program, God’s “larger purpose.” Such a magnanimous goal flies in the face of historical tradition, and makes a mockery of both, religion and law.

FFRF issued a press release announcing the decision. First Liberty Institute which represents defendant says that it will appeal the decision to the 5th Circuit.

Another Church Seeks Emergency Injunction Against COVID Limits From Supreme Court

Last Friday, a Maine church filed a motion with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking an injunction while its petition for certiorari is pending to prevent Maine from enforcing its COVID-19 capacity restrictions on worship services. The petition (full text) in Calvary Chapel of Bangor v. Mills, (Sup. Ct. filed 5/21/2021), says in part:

For 381 days, Respondent Governor Janet Mills ... has been imposing unconstitutional restrictions on Calvary Chapel’s religious worship services while exempting myriad other activities from similar restrictions. Every religious worship gathering of Calvary Chapel from March 2020, to the present has been and is “illegal” under the Governor’s Orders. Maine imposes the most severe restrictions in the country on churches and places of worship.

Liberty Counsel issued a press release announcing the filing of the motion. 

Iowa Supreme Court Dismisses Fiduciary and Defamation Claims Against Church and Pastors

In Koster v. Harvest Bible Chapel- Quad Cities,(IA Sup. Ct., May 21, 2021), the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of a suit against a church and three of its pastors by a congregant who alleged defamation and breach of fiduciary duty. The court summarized the facts:

Two members of a church went through a fractious divorce. One member alleged that the other member had abused their children, allegations that turned out to be groundless. Their pastor, however, believed the allegations and sent emails to fellow pastors, church staff, and a discipleship group. The emails repeated the allegations to some extent, while also expressing support for the member making the allegations. After the allegations were discredited, the member who had been victimized by the allegations sued the pastor and the church on several tort theories....

We find that the plaintiff’s breach of fiduciary duty claim cannot go forward because it would require consideration of the church’s doctrine and religious practices. We also find that the plaintiff’s defamation claim is subject to a qualified privilege and that plaintiff has not overcome that privilege with evidence of actual malice.

Recent Articles of Interest

 From SSRN:

• Devin Humphreys, Conspiracy, Contract, and Covenant: Redefining Conspiracy's Actus Reus Through an Analysis of Selected Biblical Agreements, (February 5, 2021).
• V. Venkatraman & Dr. Kalaivani Rajendran, Question of Women Rights: Stri Dharma on the Hindu Women’s Rights Violation in In Colonial Tamilnadu, 1926 – 1936 (May 15, 2021).
• Anujay Shrivastava & Yashowardhan Tiwari, Understanding The Misunderstood: Mapping The Scope Of A Deity’s Rights In India, (10(1) WBNUJS International Journal of Law and Policy Review 1-45 (2021)).
• Fahad Aldossary, Are the Limitations on Remedies Fair? A Comparative Study Between the US Law and Islamic Law, (May 18, 2021).
• Fatih Serkant Adiguzel & Timur Kuran, The Islamic Waqf: Instrument of Unequal Security, Worldly and Otherworldly,  Economic Research Initiatives at Duke (ERID) Working Paper No. 305 (2021).

From SmartCILP:

• Joyce A. Hughes, Muhammad Ali: The Passport Issue, (42 North Carolina Central Law Review) 167-191 (2020).

European Court Says That Bulgaria Should Have Recognized Break-Away Orthodox Churches

In a case decided last month, Bulgarian Orthodox Old Calendar Church v. Bulgaria, (ECHR, April 21, 2021), the European Court of Human Rights, in a Chamber Judgment, held that Bulgaria had violated Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights when it refused to register a church adhering to the Old Calendarist variant of Eastern Orthodoxy.  Bulgarian courts relied on a provision in the Religious Denominations Act of 2002 providing that persons who had seceded from a registered religious institution before the Act’s entry into force in breach of that institution’s internal rules could not use the name of that institution. The European Court said in part:

62. Requiring a religious organisation seeking registration to take on a name which is not liable to mislead believers and the general public ... can in principle be seen as a justified limitation on its right freely to choose its name.... But the names of the applicant church and of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church were not identical, the applicant church’s name being sufficiently distinguished by the words “Old Calendar”. It is well known that Old Calendarist churches, which first appeared in the 1920s, when some Eastern Orthodox churches switched from the Julian Calendar to the Revised Julian Calendar, are distinct from those Eastern Orthodox churches.... Moreover, nothing suggests that the applicant church wished to identify itself with the Bulgarian Orthodox Church....

63.  In so far as the Government argued that the overlap between the beliefs and practices of the applicant church and of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church was also a bar to the applicant church’s registration...- it should be noted that the assessment of whether or not religious beliefs are identical is not a matter for the State authorities, but for the religious communities themselves....  Pluralism, which is the basic fabric of democracy, is incompatible with State action compelling a religious community to unite under a single leadership.... 

64.  The refusal to register the applicant church was therefore not “necessary in a democratic society”. It follows that there has been a breach of Article 9 of the Convention read in the light of Article 11.

Law & Religion UK has more on the decision.

In a second case decided the same day, Independent Orthodox Church v. Bulgaria, (ECHR April 21, 2021), the same section of the European Court held that Bulgaria violated Article 9 of the Convention when it refused to recognize a new church because its name and beliefs were the same as those of the existing Bulgarian Orthodox Church. The Court commented:

[T]he State does not need to ensure that religious communities remain under a unified leadership.... Even if the creation of the applicant church was ... prompted by a division within the Bulgarian Orthodox Church, this fact does not alter that.... Nor does the fact that the Bulgarian Orthodox Church’s unity is considered of the utmost importance for its adherents and for Bulgarian society in general.

Suit Against Chicago Schools Over Transcendental Meditation Program Can Move Ahead In Part

In Separation of Hinduism from Our Schools v. Chicago Public Schools, (ND IL, May 21, 2021), plaintiffs challenged Chicago Public Schools' "Quiet Time" program which was led by a Transcendental Meditation instructor. They claim that the sessions contained elements of Hinduism in them. The court dismissed claims of some of the plaintiffs for lack of standing, and dismissed claims against the private foundation and the University of Chicago which helped implement the program. One of the plaintiffs, a former student who was required to participate in the program, was found to have standing to bring Establishment and Free Exercise clause claims as well as a claim under the Illinois Religious Freedom Restoration Act against the Chicago public schools. His father also had standing on 1st Amendment claims arising before his son's 18th birthday. The court said in part:

[E]ven if the Williamses were seeking only nominal damages, they would have standing to sue. In a case decided after the parties' briefs were submitted, the Supreme Court held that "a request for nominal damages satisfies the redressability element of standing where a plaintiff's claim is based on a completed violation of a legal right." Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski, 141 S. Ct. 792, 802 (2021).

Court Denies Injunction Against HUD's Fair Housing Act Interpretation Of Sex Discrimination

According to the Springfield News-Leader, after a 2½-hour hearing on Wednesday, a Missouri federal district court judge refused to issue a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction against enforcement of a Department of Housing and Urban Development Directive interpreting the Fair Housing Act as barring discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The challenge was brought by College of the Ozarks, a Christian college that objects to housing transgender females in women's dormitories. (See prior posting.) The judge said that enjoining HUD would not protect the school from liability in a suit by a student who alleges  discrimination.

Suit On Misrepresentations In Settling Clergy Sex Abuse Claims Is Dismissed

 In Caldwell v. Archdiocese of New York, (SD NY, May 19, 2021), individuals who released their childhood sexual abuse claims as part of the Archdiocese's ’ Independent Reconciliation and Compensation Programs brought a class action claiming misrepresentations in procuring the releases. They claimed misrepresentations regarding the fairness of the settlements, the independence of the plan administrators, as well as failure to advise claimants of the prospects for enactment of the New York Child Victims Act.  The court dismissed the claims because plaintiffs failed to plead them with particularity as required by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 9(b).  They also failed to show a special relationship that would give rise to a duty to disclose information about the Child Victims Act and failed to show that they were induced to refrain from carrying out their own investigation.

Defamation Action By Bishop In Russian Orthodox Church Survives Motion To Dismiss

In Belya v. Metropolitan Hilarion, (SD NY, May 19, 2021), a New York federal district court refused to dismiss a defamation complaint by a leader of the Russian Orthodox Christian Church in the United States against various other Church leaders who oppose plaintiff's election as Bishop of Miami. According to the court, defendants, in a letter to the church's Synod, made various allegations:

Principally, the letter alleges that the election of Belya never actually occurred; that the results of Belya’s election were fabricated; that the communications from Hilarion to Russia were falsified, either with Hilarion’s knowledge or without; and that the letter from Archbishop Gavriil confirming that Belya had instituted the required changes of practice was likewise falsified. The Olkhovskiy Group requested, in light these allegations and additional unspecified complaints from persons in Florida, that Belya be suspended from clerical functions until the completion of a full investigation. This letter was disseminated among the members of the New York Synod, to parishes, churches, monasteries, and other institutions within ROCOR, as well as more broadly to online media outlets. 

According to Belya, after the September 3 Letter was sent, he was denied all access to Hilarion and was suspended from performing his duties as spiritual leader of his parish....

Rejecting an ecclesiastical abstention argument, the court concluded that the lawsuit "may be resolved by appealing to neutral principles of law. Plaintiff’s claim centers on Defendants’ allegations that he forged the various letters at issue that led to the confirmation of his election as Bishop of Miami."  The court went on:

Belya does not ask this Court to determine whether his election was proper or whether he should be reinstated to his role as Bishop of Miami, and the Court would not consider such a request under the doctrine of ecclesiastical abstention....

Defendants argued that the statements at issue could not be defamatory because they were merely allegations or opinions.  The court concluded, however, that at least one of the challenged statements were assertions of fact, not just allegations.

President Signs COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act

Yesterday, President Biden signed into law S.937, COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act. (full text). While the impetus for the bill was the increase in hate crimes against Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders, the Act's provisions ramp up enforcement efforts relating to a broader group of hate crimes, including crimes committed because of the victim's religion. Among the Act's provisions are the following:

(1) Expedited review of hate crimes by the Justice Department during the next year.

(2) Justice Department must issue new guidance to states and localities on how to create online reporting of hate crimes and expand public education campaigns.

(3) Grants to states and local governments to assist in reporting of hate crimes to the National Incident-Based Reporting System.

(4) Grants for state-run Hate-Crime Hot Lines.

(5) Grants for law enforcement activities or crime reduction programs to respond to hate crimes.

(6) Justice Department must provide an annual report to Congress on the incidence of hate crimes.

(7) New provision on sentencing for hate crimes. If court imposes a term of supervised release after imprisonment, the court may order defendant to take classes or provide community service directly related to the community harmed by the defendant's offense.

NOTE TO READERS USING FEEDBURNER E-MAIL SERVICE

Google, the sponsor of Feedburner, has announced that the Feedburner e-mail service will no longer be available after July 2021. If you are currently following Religion Clause through a daily e-mail from feedproxy@google.com, you may wish to select an alternative platform for following this blog. You can find alternatives near the bottom of the Sidebar of the blog. This does not affect those who access Religion Clause in other ways (including FeedBlitz).