San Joaquin Episcopal Diocese Sues To Recover Property of Another Parish

The reorganized continuing Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin, California, continues to file lawsuits to reclaim property of break-away parishes. Episcopal Life reported on Friday that the diocese has filed suit in state court against St. Columba's Church in Fresno, one of the 40 congregations that broke away to affiliate with the more conservative Province of the Southern Cone. The diocese has previously sued two other break-away parishes as well as former bishop, John-David Schofield. (See prior posting.).

D.C. Catholic Charities Requires New Hires To Support Church Tenets

Yesterday's Washington Post reports that Washington, D.C.'s Catholic Charities has begun to require newly hired employees to sign a letter promising that they will not "violate the principles or tenets" of the Catholic Church. A spokesman says this is consistent with the organization's past policies. Catholic Charities receives millions of dollars of government funding for its social service activities. Bush administration policy allowed religious organizations receiving federal funds to engage in faith-based hiring. (See prior posting.) The Obama administration, which has been urged by many to reverse that policy for employees within federally funded programs, is apparently reviewing the question on a case-by-case basis. (See prior posting.)

Anti-Semitic Handbills Attack Jewish Legislators Who Support Gun Control

Today's Baltimore Sun reports on anti-Semitic handbills available on the website of the organization Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO). Three of the 39 handbills available from the website attack Jewish legislators-- state and federal-- for their support of firearms regulation. One attacks Maryland state Senator Brian Frosh and Marlyland state Assembly Delegate Samuel Rosenberg, proclaiming "Bagel Brain Jews Want Your Bullets and Your Guns." This flyer has been mailed by someone to homes in Frosh's district. A second flyer aimed at Maryland state Senator Michael Lenett is headlined "A Jew Should Not Support Racism!" and refers readers to a video titled "No Guns for Negroes." A third flyer portrays U.S. Senators Feinstein, Schumer, Boxer and Lautenberg in Nazi uniforms. The executive director of JPFO is Aaron Zelman of Hartford, Wisconsin, who says he is Jewish.

EEOC Sues Company On Behalf of Fired Mennonite Baptist Employee

The EEOC announced on Thursday that it has filed a religious discrimination lawsuit against the Pollard Agency, an Alabama-based security company. The company fired Marian Lawson who had been assigned to a client in Monticello, Ga. Pollard refused to accommodate her request that she be permitted to cover her hair with a scarf in accordance with her Mennonite Baptist beliefs.

Argentine Court Invalidates Marriage of Same-Sex Couple

According to a CNA report this week, a federal judge in Argentina has nullified the same-sex marriage of two men that was performed at Buenos Aires' Civil Registry earlier this month. The court ruled that the marriage was invalid "because of the absence of the institution's structural elements." The court ordered the men to return their marriage license and ruled that any legal effects derived from the marriage ceremony are suspended. The marriage was originally performed after a City Court judge ordered the Civil Registry to provide the couple with a date for their ceremony. (Buenos Aires Herald.)

Court Says Non-Custodial Parent May Share Religion With Child

In D.R.S. v. L.E.K., (LA App., March 10, 2010), a Louisiana state appellate court held that a parent holding court-awarded custody of a child generally may not shield the child from exposure to the non-custodial parent's religious beliefs. The court said:

Though the custodial or domiciliary parent may raise the child in a legitimate religion of his/her own choosing, that parent may not force that religion or religious affiliation upon the noncustodial parent or preclude the noncustodial parent from pursuing his/her own religious affiliation and sharing same with the child provided doing so does not negatively affect the best interests of the child. There is no statutory nor jurisprudential authority to support the trial court's ruling that the custodial or domiciliary parent has the sole authority to mandate "what belief system is presented to the child in . . . any home in which the child visits or resides."

Oklahoma Senate Passes Bill Rejecting Cooperation With Feds On Intimidation Investigations

The Oklahoma state Senate earlier this week passed by a vote of 39-6 Senate Bill 1965 [Word doc.] which is designed to prevent Oklahoma law enforcement officials from cooperating with federal agencies that attempt to prosecute individuals under 18 USC Sec. 245 when the state has investigated the crime but has not prosecuted, or has not obtained a conviction under state's intimidation and harassment law. Sec. 245 outlaws intimidation of a person engaged in federally protected activities because of race, religion or national origin. Both a press release from Oklahoma state Sen. Steve Russell and an article Friday in The Edge says that the bill is designed to prevent cooperation with federal prosecutions under the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009. However that law is codified as 18 USC 249. The provisions passed by the state Senate and sent on the the House on March 10 provide:

law enforcement agencies shall deny access to law enforcement records to any federal agency when such request is made relating to a case handled and completed by a law enforcement agency of this state and the purpose is to attempt to investigate or prosecute the individual or individuals pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 245, except for records of any individuals convicted pursuant to Section 850 of Title 21 of the Oklahoma Statutes and for those records listed in subsection A of this section....

[State law enforcement officials] shall keep their litigation files and investigatory reports confidential upon request of any federal agency when such request is made for the purpose of an attempt to investigate or prosecute an individual or individuals pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 245, except for those records of any individuals convicted pursuant to Section 850 of Title 21 of the Oklahoma Statutes.

EEOC Says New York City Discriminated Against Arabic Language School Principal

According to today's New York Times, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has concluded that New York City's Department of Education (DOE) discriminated against the founding principal of a controversial Arabic-language public school when it fired her. The EEOC concluded that DOE discriminated on the basis of race, religion and national origin when it forced Debbie Almontaser, a Muslim of Yemeni descent, to resign as principal of the Khalil Gibran International Academy in Brooklyn. According to the EEOC's letter urging DOE to reach a just resolution of Almontaser's claims, opponents of the dual-language school succeeded in falsely painting Almontaser as a jihadist, instead of as the moderate Muslim that she was. Misleading characterization of remarks by Almontaser in a New York Post article triggered anti-Muslim bias that led to the Department of Education's action. (See prior related posting.) DOE says it did not discriminate against Almontaser, will not reinstate her and will defend against any litigation she brings.

Faith-Based Restriction Prevents Volunteer From Being Hired In Federally Funded Program

A Seattle Times article earlier this week personalizes the controversy over whether faith-based social service agencies may use religious criteria in hiring employees in federally funded programs. World Relief's U.S. activities, under contract with the State Department, resettle refugees from all cultural and religious backgrounds. The organization receives up to 70% of its funding from government sources. Saad Mohammad Ali worked for six months as a volunteer with World Relief in Seattle, Washington, helping resettle Iraqi refugees. However, when Ali, a Muslim who came to the U.S. from Iraq two years ago, applied for a job with Wold Relief as a case worker, he was told that the organization only hires Christians. While the agency's agreements with the State Department prohibit it from proselytizing, it says its hiring policy allows it to preserve its core identity and values. Also, employees say they often pray during staff meetings, and non-Christians might feel uncomfortable with that practice. Ali says he finds the policy to be in conflict with everything he has learned about the U.S.

Texas State Board Rejects Teaching About Establishment Clause

The Texas State Board of Education is meeting this week to debate the social studies standards for Texas schools. (Dallas Morning News.) In a surprise decision yesterday, the Board defeated by a 10-5 party line vote a proposal by Democratic member Mavis Knight that government classes teach about the Establishment Clause. Her proposal called for students to examine the reasons the Founding Fathers "protected religious freedom in America by barring government from promoting or disfavoring any particular religion over all others." Republicans on the Board said that Knight's proposal was based on an inaccurate interpretation of the Founder's intent and was a half-truth that would play down the importance of religion to the Founders. (Dallas Morning News.) Fox News reports that the final vote on this proposal and others will come in May after they are all posted for public comment.

UPDATE: On Friday, the Texas State Board of Education voted 11-4 to approve a new social studies curriculum which, according to the New York Times, "will put a conservative stamp on history and economics textbooks, stressing the role of Christianity in American history and presenting Republican political philosophies in a more positive light." Among the numerous changes, Thomas Jefferson was dropped from the list of those who inspired revolutions in the late 18th and 19th centuries. Added to the list of those to be mentioned are St. Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin and William Blackstone. The curriculum standards will now be published in the state register for 30 days of public comment. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Indiana Valedictorian Sues To Stop Graduation Prayer

The valedictorian at Greenwood High School in suburban Indianapolis, Indiana has sued to enjoin a planned prayer at this year's graduation ceremonies. Because of his class rank, plaintiff Eric Workman will likely be speaking at commencement. The complaint (full text) in Workman v. Greenwood Community School Corporation, (SD IN, filed 3/11/2010), alleges that again this year the school followed its practice of scheduling graduation prayer after conducting a vote by students. A preprinted ballot handed out at a school assembly contained questions on this and other issues. Workman argues that the school has subjected religious practice to majority vote in violation of the First Amendment. Yesterday's Indianapolis Star reported on the lawsuit that was filed on the student's behalf by the ACLU of Indiana.

State Department's 2009 Country Reports on Human Rights Released

The U.S. State Department yesterday released its 2009 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, covering conditions in 194 countries around the world. Among the issues of religious freedom highlighted in the report's Introduction are China's tightening controls on independent Muslim religious leaders, sectarian attacks on Coptic Christians in Egypt, religious discrimination in Saudi Arabia, increasing anti-Semitism in Europe and South America, and discrimination against Muslims in some European countries. Jurist reports on the release.

Divided 9th Circuit Upholds Pledge Against Establishment Clause Challenge

In a 2-1 decision in Newdow v. Rio Linda Union School District, (9th Cir., March 11, 2010), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday upheld against an Establishment Clause challenge the Pledge of Allegiance, including its reference to God, and the statutorily authorized practice in the Rio Linda (CA) School District of teachers leading students in the pledge each day. Students are permitted to refrain from participating in the recitation. The majority, in a 60 -page opinion by Judge Bea (joined by Judge Nelson), said:

We hold that the Pledge of Allegiance does not violate the Establishment Clause because Congress' ostensible and predominant purpose was to inspire patriotism and that the context of the Pledge—its wording as a whole, the preamble to the statute, and this nation’s history—demonstrate that it is a predominantly patriotic exercise. For these reasons, the phrase "one Nation under God" does not turn this patriotic exercise into a religious activity

Accordingly, we hold that California’s statute requiring school districts to begin the school day with an "appropriate patriotic exercise" does not violate the Establishment Clause even though it permits teachers to lead students in recitation of the Pledge.

In 2002, the 9th Circuit in another case invalidated on Establishment Clause grounds a different school's pledge-recitation policy. Ultimately that holding was reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court on standing grounds. In reaction to the 9th Circuit's opinion, Congress reenacted the Pledge with findings detailing secular reasons for it. (P.L. 107-293). The majority pointed to this history to distinguish its earlier holding.

Judge Reinhardt filed a strongly-worded 133-page dissent. He said in part:

[N]o judge familiar with the history of the Pledge could in good conscience believe, as today’s majority purports to do, that the words "under God" were inserted into the Pledge for any purpose other than an explicitly and predominantly religious one.... Nor could any judge ... seriously deny that carrying out such an indoctrination in a public school classroom unconstitutionally forces many young children either to profess a religious belief antithetical to their personal views or to declare themselves through their silence or nonparticipation to be protesting nonbelievers, thereby subjecting themselves to hostility and ridicule.

It is equally clear that no judge ... could legitimately rely on a 2002 "reaffirmation" to justify the incorporation of the words "under God" into the Pledge ... as if the finite act in 1954 of transforming a purely secular patriotic pledge into a vehicle to promote religion, and to indoctrinate public schoolchildren with a belief in God, had never occurred.... In doing so [in 1954], we abandoned our historic principle that secular matters were for the state and matters of faith were for the church. The majority does so again today, sadly, by twisting, distorting, and misrepresenting the law, as well as the issues that are before us.

Today’s majority opinion will undoubtedly be celebrated, at least publicly, by almost all political figures, and by many citizens as well, without regard for the constitutional principles it violates and without regard for the judicial precedents it defies and distorts.... [T]o the joy or relief ... of the two members of the majority, this court’s willingness to abandon its constitutional responsibilities will be praised as patriotic and may even burnish the court's reputation among those who believe that it adheres too strictly to the dictates of the Constitution or that it values excessively the mandate of the Bill of Rights.

If a majority of the populace comes to believe in a patriotism that requires the abdication of judicial responsibility, if it comes to accept that we can only honor our nation by ignoring its basic values, if it comes to embrace a practice of bringing together the many by forfeiting the rights of the few, then we clearly will have imposed an untenable burden not only on our nation in general but on the judiciary in particular.... I do not doubt that many Americans feel bound together by their faith in God, but whatever beliefs may be shared by a majority of our citizens, it is respect for the rights of minorities and for the Constitution itself that must bind us all.

CNN reports on the decision. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

9th Circuit Rejects Challenge To "In God We Trust" On Coins and Currency

In Newdow v. Lefevre, (9th Cir., March 11, 2010), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday rejected an Establishment Clause challenge to the inscription of "In God We Trust" on U.S. coins and currency. It relied on a 1970 decision by the 9th Circuit that held the motto is patriotic or ceremonial, not theological or ritualistic. The court also rejected a challenge under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The court rejected on standing grounds plaintiff Michael Newdow's broader claim that the mere adoption of "In God We Trust" as the national motto was unconstitutional. Judge Reinhardt concurred only in the result.

Lawsuit Challenges Zoning Refusal For Bible Camp

Three brothers who have been refused zoning approval to build a year-round Bible camp and conference center that would serve youths with medical disabilities in the summers have filed a federal lawsuit challenging the refusal. The complaint (full text) in Eagle Cove Camp & Conference Center, Inc. v. Town of Woodboro, Wisconsin, (WD WI, filed 3/10/2010), alleges that the refusal to allow the camp on plaintiffs' Squash Lake property violates RLUIPA, the ADA, and constitutional equal protection and free exercise protections. Plaintiffs allege, among other things, that the town of Woodboro discriminates against missionary, outreach and evangelical religious exercise carried out by Bible camps. Yesterday's Rhinelander (WI) Daily News reported on the lawsuit. (See prior related posting.) [Thanks to Art Jaros for the lead.]

Cert. Filed In Dispute Over Display of Kindergartener's "Jesus" Poster

On Wednesday, a petition for certiorari (full text) in Peck v. Baldwinsville Central School District was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court. In the case, the 2nd Circuit dismissed a viewpoint discrimination lawsuit brought by parents who charged that a kindergarten teacher and a principal displayed their son's poster on environmental issues only after folding under a picture of Jesus on the poster so it was not visible. The court concluded that plaintiffs in their action for injunctive and declaratory relief had not shown a likelihood of future censorship or an official policy of regularly violating students' free speech rights. (See prior posting.) Liberty Counsel issued a press release announcing the filing of the petition for review.

Egypt's Sheik Tantawi, Head of Al Azhar, Dies

According to the New York Times, Egypt's chief religious official, Sheik Mohamed Sayed Tantawi, died yesterday during a visit to Saudi Arabia. He was 81. As head of Egypt's most prestigious center of Islamic learning, Al Azhar, Tantawi held sway over government policy on which books and films should be banned. He worked with President Hosni Mubarak's government to enforce moderate interpretations of Islam, and was sometimes criticized for giving religious legitimacy to the government. Last year he banned female students at Al Azhar from wearing full face veils. (See prior posting.) Tantawi strongly condemned the 9-11 attacks and the 2005 London subway attacks. (See prior posting.) Tantawi's willingness to interact with Israelis made him a controversial figure.

Virginia Governor Backs Equal Employment Opportunity for LGBT

Less than a week after Virgina's attorney general told public colleges in the state that they may not ban discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression (see prior posting), Virgina Governor Robert McDonnell has taken a somewhat different view. He issued Executive Directive 1 (2010) prohibiting employment discrimination by cabinet members or executive branch agencies. It reads in part:

The Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution prohibits discrimination without a rational basis against any class of persons. Discrimination based on factors such as one’s sexual orientation or parental status violates the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. Therefore, discrimination against enumerated classes of persons set forth in the Virginia Human Rights Act or discrimination against any class of persons without a rational basis is prohibited.

The Culpepper (VA) Star Exponent reports on developments. The Directive expands on an earlier equal opportunity memo signed by McDonnell that did not explicitly mention sexual orientation. (See prior posting.) [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Irish Pubs Want Good Friday Exemption For Rugby Viewers

Yesterday's London Mail reports that Ireland's ban on the sale of alcohol on Good Friday is creating significant problems for rugby fans. The much anticipated Munster v. Leinster match is scheduled for Good Friday, and while alcohol can be sold inside the stadium, that does not satisfy those who plan to watch the match in their local pubs. The Vintners Federation of Ireland is seeking a six-hour exemption for all licensed pubs in the Limerick city area. Pub owners believe that they may have to file a lawsuit to get the exemption.

Mandatory Premise Registration Violates Free Exercise Rights of Amish Farmer

In State of Wisconsin v. Miller, (WI Cir. Ct., March 10, 2010), a Wisconsin trial court held that the state's livestock premise registration requirements impose an impermissible burden on the religious beliefs of an Old Order Amish farmer who was cited for failure to comply with the registration provisions. Premise registration violated several Amish beliefs, including requirements they remain isolated from the modern world, that they rely on God not the government, and that they avoid the "Mark of the Beast." Relying on the free exercise protections of the Wisconsin Constitution, the court held that the state failed to establish that its interest in animal health cannot be met by alternative means that are less restrictive of farmer Emanuel Miller's free exercise of religion. The court concluded that alternative voluntary record keeping of the purchase, sale and transfer of animals is actually a more reliable alternative than mandatory premise registration. Tuesday's Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports on the decision, indicating that the state will probably file an appeal.

Canadian Advocate For Religious Use of Cannabis Profiled

Cannabis Culture yesterday carried a long article about Canadian Chris Bennett who has filed a lawsuit in Canadian federal courts seeking an order to compel the Minister of Justice to issue an exemption from Canada's Controlled Drugs and Substances Act for religious use of cannabis. Alternatively the suit seeks a declaration that the ban on possession and production of marijuana is unconstitutional under Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Sec. 2, religious freedoms; Sec. 7, liberty and security of the person; and Sec. 15, guaranteeing equality and prohibiting discrimination on the basis of religious belief).

Church's Misrepresentations Do Not Get Former Employee Unemployment Benefits

In Irvine v. St. John's Lutheran Church of Mound, (MN Ct. App., March 9, 2010), a Minnesota appellate court held that a former business administrator of a church was not entitled to unemployment compensation benefits even though the church's employment handbook indicated the church paid unemployment taxes and implied that employees would receive unemployment benefits if they lost their job through no fault of their own. Under Minnesota's statutes, church employees are eligible for unemployment benefits only if the church elects coverage. Here the church did not elect coverage. Incorrect representations to employees regarding coverage are not binding on the state. [Thanks to Chris Duckworth for the lead.]

Religious Land Use Disputes Continue To Arise: Michigan Church, Connecticut Chabad House

Zoning disputes involving religious institutions continue to arise around the country. Here are two recent ones. In Benton Township, Michigan, the Overflow Church wants to move its religious services and community outreach programs into a former Sears store that was donated to the church by the building's owner. Tuesday's Benton Harbor- St. Joseph Herald-Palladium reports on the Planning Commission hearing at which the church asked for a special use permit to allow it to operate in the commercial-zoned area. The owner of nearby Orchard Mall opposes the church's plans, saying the proposed use is not compatible with the mall and adjacent properties. Separately the mall owner is suing the church arguing that a 1978 operating agreement with Sears requires the property to be used for retail purposes.

Meanwhile, in Hartford, Connecticut, a Jewish group, Chabad Chevra, has filed a federal lawsuit claiming that its free exercise, speech, association, equal protection and due process rights and its rights under RLUIPA have been violated by the city's refusal to allow it to use a building it purchased as a Chabad House for religious worship, educational and university student activities and as a residence for its rabbi. The property had previously been used by a Baptist organization, and before that by a Catholic group, for religious purposes. The complaint (full text) in Chabad Chevra LLC v. City of Hartford, Connecticut, (D CT, filed 3/8/2010), charges that the city is burdening plaintiff's religious exercise, favoring nonreligious institutions over religious ones, and in particular is discriminating against proposed university student religious use of the premises. It claims that the city's action is based in large part on "anti-Hasidic animus." Courthouse News reported on the case yesterday. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Faith-Based Advisory Council Report Released

The White House today released the final version of the report of the President's Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. (See prior related posting.) The report is titled A New Era of Partnerships. It contains recommendations from each of the six task forces. (Note: The draft made available last month by the Washington Post was not the full report, but only the recommendations of the task force on reform of the faith-based office. See prior posting.)

Britain's Supreme Court Denies Christian Marriage Registrar Permission To Appeal

According to Pink News, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom on Monday refused permission to appeal the decision in Ladele v. London Borough of Islington. In the case the Court of Appeals of England and Wales agreed with Britain's Employment Appeals Tribunal that a Christian marriage registrar was not subjected to illegal discrimination when she was disciplined and threatened with dismissal for refusing on religious grounds to register same-sex civil partnerships. (See prior posting.) The Supreme Court said the case did not raise legal issues of "general public importance." Ladele is now considering whether to take her case to the European Court of Human Rights.

Court Rejects Religious Defense To Marijuana Use

In Georgetown, Colorado, a state court judge has rejected Trevor Douglas' free exercise claims and has found him guilty of possessing marijuana and drug paraphernalia, as well as driving an unregistered vehicle. He was assessed a $450 fine and ordered to perform 15 hours of community service. AP reported yesterday that the court found Douglas' beliefs do not rise to the level of a religion. Denver Channel 7 News says that Douglas is a member of the THC (The Hawaii Cannabis) Ministry and the Church of Universal Sacraments. Douglas says: "The religious use of cannabis is mandated by my god, just as wine and bread are used by Christians or peyote used by Indians." He plans to appeal his conviction.

Suit Argues Letter Cursing Police Officer Was Protected Religious Speech

A federal lawsuit filed on Monday claims that Pennsylvania state police and the police department of Media Borough (PA) have a practice of unlawfully prosecuting citizens for protected speech using Pennsylvania’s terroristic threats, harassment, and disorderly conduct statutes. The complaint (full text) in Damato v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, (ED PA, file 3/8/2010), contains these interesting allegations:

On October 11, 2008, the Plaintiff received a traffic citation issued by Officer Matthew Bellucci, of the Media Borough Police Department. Thereafter, on October 18, 2008, Officer Bellucci received a letter at his home stating the following: "You will get what's coming to you. God is just, and you will be punished. Fuck you! You are an asshole! A fucking asshole!"

... On or about October 24, 2008 Trooper Gerard B. McShea prepared a sworn Affidavit of Probable Cause causing a criminal summons to be issued against Plaintiff, charging Plaintiff of the crimes of Terroristic Threats, 18 Pa.C.S.A. §2706(a)(1) and Harassment, 18 Pa.C.S.A. §2709(a)(1) and 18 Pa.C.S.A. §2709(a)(6) as a result of mailing the aforementioned letter....

The communication directed to Officer Bellucci was expressing a religious opinion that "You will get what is coming to you. God is just and you will be punished." Such opinion is not a threat, but rather protected religious speech identifying God’s righteousness and willingness to punish.

Plaintiff asks for a declaratory judgment, damages and lawyer's fees. Yesterday's Delaware County (PA) Daily Times reports on the filing of the lawsuit.

6th Circuit: Parochial School Teacher of Secular Subjects Covered By ADA

In EEOC v. Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School, (6th Cir., March 9, 2010), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals held that parochial school teachers who teach primarily secular subjects are covered by the Americans With Disabilities Act. They are not "ministerial employees" who are excepted from coverage. Only teachers who teach primarily religious subjects or who have a central role in the spiritual or pastoral mission of the church are covered by the ministerial exception. The fact that plaintiff led some religious activities during the day, and that she had the title of commissioned minister do not make her primary duties religious in nature. [Thanks to both Steven H. Sholk and Derek Gaubatz for the lead.]

Final Faith-Based Advisory Council Report Submitted To White House

Yesterday, President Obama's Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships presented its final report to administration officials. According to IPA:

Over the course of the day, the Council presented its recommendations in key policy areas to senior officials who deal with each of those areas, including: Secretary of Health & Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, USAID Director Raj Shah, White House Domestics Policy Director Melody Barnes, National Security Council Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, and EPA Director Lisa Jackson.

The group concluded the day in a meeting with President Obama who appreciated the Council members’ service and hard work in forging common ground across religious, political and philosophical lines.

The text of one task force report was released in advance last month,[corrected] (see prior posting), as was information on two issues on which the Advisory Council was divided-- whether religious symbols can be present in areas where government-funded programs are offered and whether churches need to form separate corporations to receive federal social service funds (see prior posting). Council Member Melissa Rogers writes at length on the report in yesterday's Washington Post. Meanwhile a coalition of 26 religious and civil rights groups-- the Coalition Against Religious Discrimination-- wrote the President recommending that he adopt the consensus recommendations on reform of the Faith-Based Office, that religious-based hiring in federally funded social service programs be prohibited, and that houses of worship be required to create separate corporations if they seek to provide secular government funded social services.

Pennsylvania Woman Indicted In Conspiracy To Kill Muhammad Cartoonist

According to the New York Times, yesterday federal prosecutors unsealed an indictment (full text) against a Pennsylvania woman who was charged with conspiracy in a plot to kill Swedish cartoonist Lars Vilks. An Al Qaeda linked group placed a $100,000 bounty on Vilks because of his cartoon of the prophet Muhammad atop the body of a dog. (See prior postings 1, 2 .) The woman who is charged is Colleen LaRose, an American from suburban Philadelphia who is also known as "Fatima LaRose" and as "Jihad Jane." According to a Department of Justice press release, LaRose used the Internet to recruit others to wage and support violent Jihad in South Asia and Europe. She apparently traveled to Europe after being ordered to kill cartoonist Vilks in a way that would frighten "the whole Kufar [non-believer] world." LaRose was arrested in October, but the indictment was kept under seal until yesterday when seven Muslims who are charged with being part of the same plot against Vilks were arrested in Ireland. (Pakistan Daily Times.)

UPDATE: AP reports that after the arrests in Ireland, three Swedish newspapers on Wednesday reprinted the Lars Vilks cartoon as part of their coverage of the story.

UPDATE2: The Wall Street Journal reported that on Saturday evening (3/13), Irish authorities released (without filing charges) 4 of the 7 (one man and three women) who they had arrested.

Catholic Church Targets Philippine Health Chief Over Condom Campaign

Yesterday's Washington Post reports that the Catholic Church in the Philippines is calling for the resignation of Health Secretary Esperanza Cabral. The Church, a powerful force in the country, is angry over the condom distribution campaign instituted by the Harvard-trained health chief. As part of the country's fight against AIDS, on Valentine's Day government health workers passed out roses and condoms on the streets of Manila. Bishop Nereo Odchimar, president of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines, calling for fidelity and premarital chastity, said: "The condom business is a multimillion dollar industry that heavily targets the adolescent market at the expense of morality and family life." The Health Department promotes a 3-part "ABC formula": abstinence, be faithful and use a condom.

Dispute Over Fire Department Chaplain's Web Page

In Spring Hill, Florida, resident Ken Fagan has filed a complaint with the Department of Community Affairs objecting to a link on the Spring Hill fire district's website. According to My Fox Tampa Bay yesterday, Fagan objects to a link to the Fire Rescue Chaplain's web page that contains scriptural quotes and in turn links to a site offering Bibles for sale. Fagan argues that a tax supported website should not have links to religious groups or support religion. In response, the chaplain, known as Pastor Jack, has added a statement on his web page that reads in part: "I have always intended this to honor all of our citizens, our firefighters, and the wonderful principles of our Constitution. All faiths have been blessed in America to the equal right of expression. Our founding fathers showed themselves wise beyond their years. Please know I respect all faiths, and all citizens and wish only to present a page that provides help and useful information to all who choose to look at it."

Christian Group Presses Pray for a Liberal Campaign

Beliefnet yesterday reported on last month's "Adopt a Liberal" Deck of Cards initiative begun by Liberty Counsel. The deck contains 51cards picturing "liberals" with one card carrying a question mark for the "unknown liberal." The program asks participants "to pray daily for the liberal(s) of your choice, so each can become a good influence on our Nation’s culture. Prayer is powerful! It allows God to change the minds of those for whom we are praying." The liberals pictured on the cards include not only politicians and public officials, but also movie and television stars and news commentators. Liberty Counsel also has produced a bumper sticker reading: "Have you prayed for a liberal today?"

Parents Who Relied on Prayer To Heal Son Sentenced to 16 Months For Negligent Homicide

The Oregonian reports that an Oregon state judge yesterday sentenced Jeffrey and Marci Beagley to 16 months in prison, followed by 3 years probation, after their conviction last month for the criminally negligent homicide of their 16 year old son. The Beagley's, members of the Followers of Christ Church that rejects medical care, prayed for their son rather than seeking medical attention for his urinary tract obstruction. (See prior posting.) Clackamas County Circuit Court Judge Steven Maurer gave a long explanation of his sentencing, saying that too many children had died because of the Followers of Christ Church's beliefs. He said, "It needs to stop." He said that even though the Beagleys "are good people," the magnitude of their crime calls for a prison sentence.

Muslim-Christian Ethnic Massacre In Nigeria Kills 378 Christians

In four Nigerian villages on Sunday, at least 378 members of the Christian Berom ethnic group were killed by members of the Muslim Fulanis. The massacres took place in Zot, Dogo Nahawa, Rastat and Shen. The Wall Street Journal, the London Times and BBC News all report on the massacres. The attackers came at night, fired shots to scare residents out of their homes, and then hacked them with machetes as they rushed out. Some residents were caught in animal traps and fishing nets as they tried to escape, and then hacked to death. Other houses were set on fire with residents in them. Apparently the killings, in villages near the city of Jos, were in revenge for killings in January. (See prior posting.) Survivors reported that Muslims in three of the villages had received phone calls two days before the massacres warning them to leave the area. A BBC analysts says: "These killings are often painted by local politicians as a religious or sectarian conflict. In fact it is a struggle between ethnic groups for fertile land and resources in the region known as Nigeria's Middle Belt."

Supreme Court Grants Cert. In Westboro Baptist Church Funeral Picketing Case

The U.S. Supreme Court this morning granted certiorari in Snyder v. Phelps, (Docket No. 09-751, March 8, 2010). (Order List.) In the case in which review has been granted, the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the Westboro Baptist Church and its leaders that a $5 million judgment against them growing out of their picketing of the funeral of Iraq veteran Matthew Snyder violated their free speech rights. Westboro members have gained notoriety for their picketing of veterans' funerals carrying signs attacking America's acceptance of gays. In the case, Snyder's father claimed that the picketing and a related Internet posting amounted to an invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The majority held that defendants' picket signs, while "utterly distasteful," nevertheless involve matters of public concern. The 4th Circuit also held that the signs and Internet postings were merely "imaginative and hyperbolic rhetoric intended to spark debate," and could not be interpreted as verifiable facts about Snyder or his son. (See prior posting.)

UPDATE: Here is the petition for certiorari and the brief in opposition (thanks to SCOTUS blog).

Speculation Surrounds Mixed-Faith Wedding Ceremony for Chelsea Clinton

AP last week reported on the questions surrounding arrangements for the upcoming wedding of Chelsea Clinton, daughter of the former President Bill Clinton and of the current Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. In particular, papers are speculating on whether her wedding will be performed by a rabbi since her fiance, Marc Mezvinsky, is Jewish. Chelsea grew up attending a Methodist church with her mother. Many rabbis will not officiate at a mixed-faith ceremony, but some will. The United Methodist Church leaves the question of mixed-faith ceremonies to local pastors and allows ministers to adapt the wedding ceremony to some extent in such cases.

School Guidance Director Sues, Claiming Animus From Orthodox Jewish Board Members

In Lawrence, New York, the school district's guidance director who was denied tenure filed a lawsuit charging that his dismissal stems from the ongoing tension between Orthodox Jews who took control of the Lawrence school board in 2006 and the community's non-Orthodox residents. (See prior posting.) According to Sunday's Newsday, Jay Silverstein (a Duke-educated psychologist) says he was advised by his superintendent that he would be more likely to get tenure if he became friendlier with board members and with a fellow administrator who was said to be Orthodox and influential. Silverstein, who plans to run for the school board in May, is Jewish, but non-practicing. Co-workers praise Silverstein's job performance, but school board president Murray Forman called Silverstein's action "another frivolous lawsuit." [Thanks to Joel Katz (Relig. & State In Israel) for the lead.]

Recent Articles and Book of Interest

From SSRN:

• Christian Behrendt, State Norms and Religious Norms: Summary Reflections on Some of their Characteristics (Règles Étatiques Et Règles Religieuses: Brèves Réflexions Sur Certaines De Leurs Caractéristiques), (Revue de la Faculté de droit de l'Université de Liège, pp. 287-294, 2009).
• Nathan B. Oman, Natural Law and the Rhetoric of Empire: Reynolds v. United States, Polygamy, and Imperialism, (William & Mary Law School Research Paper No. 09-43, Feb. 26, 2010).
• Jill I. Goldenziel, Sanctioning Faith: Religion, State, and U.S.-Cuban Relations, (Journal of Law and Politics, Vol. 25, p. 179, 2009).
• Peter J. Smith & Robert W. Tuttle, Biblical Literalism and Constitutional Originalism, (GWU Legal Studies Research Paper, March 1, 2010).
• Gregory K, Acquaviva & John D. Castiglione, Judicial Diversity on State Supreme Courts, (Seton Hall Law Review, Vol. 39, No. 4, pp. 1203-1261, 2009).
• Gabriel Hallevy, Culture Crimes Against Women, (February 15, 2010).
• Mark Kende, Free Exercise of Religion: A Pragmatic and Comparative Assessment, (University of South Dakota Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Howard M. Wasserman, Iqbal, Procedural Mismatches, and Civil Rights Litigation, (Lewis & Clark Law Review, Vol. 14, p. 157, 2010.
• Tom Tyler, Stephen J. Schulhofer & Azuz Z. Huq, Legitimacy and Deterrence Effects in Counter-Terrorism Policing: A Study of Muslim Americans, (Law and Society Review, Forthcoming).

New Book:

• Douglas Laycock, Religious Liberty, Volume 1: Overviews and History, (Eedrmans, 2010).

Report Says Scientology Staff Members Are Treated Abusively

This morning's New York Times carries a front-page article on allegations by two former staff members of the Church of Scientology regarding abuse of staff mebers. Reporting on charges by Chris and Christie Colbran, who were recruited as teenagers to work for the elite corps of staff members known as Sea Org, the Times says:

They signed a contract for a billion years — in keeping with the church's belief that Scientologists are immortal. They worked seven days a week, often on little sleep, for sporadic paychecks of $50 a week, at most.

But after 13 years and growing disillusionment, the Collbrans decided to leave the Sea Org, setting off on a Kafkaesque journey that they said required them to sign false confessions about their personal lives and their work, pay the church thousands of dollars it said they owed for courses and counseling, and accept the consequences as their parents, siblings and friends who are church members cut off all communication with them.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Camacho v. Shields, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 4489 (9th Cir., March 3, 2010), the 9th Circuit upheld a lower court's finding that a prisoner's religious exercise was not substantially burdened by the interruption of his prayers on one occasion.

In Witcher v. Maclunny, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17382 (MD PA, Feb. 26, 2010), a Pennsylvania federal district court dismissed a prisoner's complaint regarding the removal of 25 religious books, finding that plaintiff failed to allege how this substantially burdened his ability to observe a central religious belief or practice.

In Brown v. Ray, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17363 (WD VA, Feb. 26, 2010), a Virginia federal magistrate judge dismissed on qualified immunity grounds the damage claim, but not the claim for injunctive relief, brought by a Nation of Islam inmate who alleged that he is being denied his weekly NOI newspaper, The Final Call. It also dismissed certain other related claims for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, but permitted others to proceed.

In Banks v. Dougherty, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17443 (ND IL, Feb. 26, 2010), an Illinois federal district court dismissed on mootness and sovereign immunity grounds claims by Muslims confined in a state mental health facility that the facility did not offer Friday Jumu'ah services.

In Butts v. Riley, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17517 (WD MI, Feb. 26, 2010), a Michigan federal district court upheld a prison's refusal, for lack of sincere religious belief, to furnish plaintiff a kosher diet.

In Chappell v. Helder, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18056 (WD AK, March 1, 2010), an Arkansas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125391, Dec. 14, 2009), and ordered the Washington County Detention Center to revise its policies on religious presentations and use of reading materials during lockout periods. It also awarded nominal damages. Plaintiff complained that he was forced to overhear religious presentations being given in the day room during lockout periods and that the only religious reading material inmates were allowed to have during lockout was the Bible.

In Hundal v. Salazar, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18837 (CD CA, March 3, 2010), a California federal district court adopted a federal magistrate's recommendations (2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125479, Dec. 16, 2009) and held that a Sikh prisoner can file an amended complaint against certain defendants alleging RLUIPA violations in refusing to permit him to wear a beard. However it dismissed his Free Exercise and Equal Protection claims and his RLUIPA claim against one defendant.

In LaRue v. Matheney , (SD WV, March 4, 2010), a West Virginia federal district court rejected a free exercise claim by a prisoner who had agreed to participate in the institution's treatment program. Plaintiff signed an Individual Therapy Contract obligating him to participate in treatment sessions and to refrain from certain conduct relating to children and to sexual matters. He now claims that his inability to keep pornography in his cell violates his beliefs as a member of the Christian Prurient Faith, a ministry which he founded. The court held that the burden with which he challenges was imposed on him because of a valid contract which he voluntarily entered.

In Peterman v. Berry, (ED WI, Feb. 26, 2010), a Wisconsin federal district court rejected complaints from a Muslim inmate that he was not provided a Halal diet, he was not allowed to order various religious items, there was no Muslim group worship, and he was required to purchase a Q'uran while Bibles were given out for free. The court found that the jail attempted to accommodate plaintiff's requests and that any failure to do so was not the result of any official policy or custom of the jail.

Hasidic Charity Can Claim Return of Seized Funds Only In Criminal Case

Friday's New Jersey Law Journal reports that a federal magistrate judge has ruled that a Hasidic Jewish charity cannot rely on 18 USC Sec. 983 to obtain a return of funds seized as part of a high profile public corruption and money laundering case. (See prior posting.) The court held that Gmach Shefa Chaim has an adequate remedy in a criminal case in which the government is suing for forfeiture of the $508,925 in the account. The court ruled that Sec. 983 only applies only to nonjudicial civil forfeitures of $500,000 or less and not to funds seized under a search warrant. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Virginia's AG Says State Colleges Cannot Ban LGBT Discrimination

According to the Washington Post, Virginia's Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II on Thursday sent a letter (full text) to the state's public colleges and universities advising them that:

the law and public policy of the Commonwealth of Virginia prohibit a college or university from including "sexual orientation," "gender identity," "gender expression," or like classification, as a protected class within its non-discrimination policy, absent specific authorization from the General Assembly.

Taxpayer Lacks Standing To Challenge Church's Use of School; Parent May Have Standing

In Henley v. Cleveland Board of Education, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18892 (ND OH, March 3, 2010), an Ohio federal district court held that a local taxpayer lacks standing to bring an Establishment Clause challenge to the practice of a local high school in permitting a church to use the school building for its weekly religious services. The court held that it was unable at this stage of the litigation to determine whether or not a second plaintiff, the mother of a school child, had alleged sufficient injury to her child under the Establishment Clause to have standing.

UPDATE: In Henley v. Cleveland Board of Education, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21876 (March 10, 2010), the court denied a motion for reconsideration.

9th Circuit Says Christians In Indonesia Face Likely Persecution, Torture

In Pelle v. Holder, (9th Cir., March 4, 2010), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Board of Immigration Appeals should have applied disfavored group analysis in deciding whether appellant faced a clear probability of future persecution. Christians who are not ethnic Chinese are a disfavored group in Indonesia. Further, in the court's view, there was ample evidence that the Indonesian government is aware, and possibly complicit, in torture inflicted on Christians by Muslim extremists.

Qualified Immunity Applies To RFRA Claim Growing Out of Drug Search

In Jama v. United States, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18554 (WD WA, March 2, 2010), a Washington federal district court held that the concept of qualified immunity applies in suits under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, just as it applies in suits charging constitutional violations. It concluded that a police officer and a federal DEA agent had qualified immunity in a Muslim woman's lawsuit against them charging they had violated RFRA in forcing her to remain outside her apartment in a nightgown without her head covered while her apartment was being searched for evidence of khat distribution. No evidence was found. Two others detained in the same raid were unrelated males. Plaintiff's Muslim faith prohibits her from appearing in a state of undress or from appearing without a head scarf before unrelated males. In granting qualified immunity, the court held that it could not conclude that the right of a person to wear religious covering during a search of a her home was "clearly established" at the time of the search.

Court Issues Preliminary Injunction Barring Noise Prosecutions Against Church Bells

In St. Mark Roman Catholic Parish Phoenix v. City of Phoenix, (D AZ, March 3, 2010), an Arizona federal district court issued a preliminary injunction barring the City of Phoenix from enforcing its Noise Ordinance against sound generated in the course of religious expression. The lawsuit was brought by churches which had been prosecuted or feared prosecution under the ordinance because of the level of sound from their carillon bells. (See prior posting 1, 2). The challenged law prohibits "unreasonably loud, disturbing and unnecessary noise." Plaintiffs alleged that the law's restrictions are unconstitutionally vague and violate their free expression and free exercise rights, as well as their rights under Arizona's Free Exercise of Religion Act. In granting the preliminary injunction, the court, focusing on plaintiffs' free expression challenge, said:

The Court finds, for the purposes of preliminary injunction analysis, that the Noise
Ordinance is neither precise enough nor clear enough to be considered narrowly tailored. The Noise Ordinance does not contain an objective standard, such as a decibel level, under which loud, disturbing, and unnecessary sounds are targeted to the exclusion of sounds that are not loud, disturbing, and unnecessary. Also, the exemptions from the Noise Ordinance are a scattershot list, providing an exception for government vehicles, noncommercial public addresses, ice cream trucks (or other uses of hand-held devices playing "pleasing melodies"),and nighttime street work, but not considering any other types of sound to be exempt from coverage. The government's interest in preventing the disturbance of its citizens by noise could be achieved by other, less restrictive means.

Alliance Defense Fund issued a release announcing the decision.

Religious Questionnaire To City Candidates Draws Criticism

In Farmington, New Mexico's recent municipal elections, the campaign manager for one of the losing City Council candidates secretly designed a scorecard to rank local candidates on their religious and social values. Yesterday's Farmington Daily Times says that candidate Bob Moon did not know that his campaign manager, Drew Degner, had designed the questionnaire that asked closed-end questions about issues such as church attendance, abortion rights and gay marriage. Some candidates refused to answer the questions and are critical of it. Degner said he designed the survey in order to help fellow Emmanuel Baptist Church members determine candidates' values. He did not distribute the scorecard beyond his church. Moon, a pastor, only posted a copy on the bulletin board at his church, My Father's House.

4th Circuit Upholds Church's Discrimination and RLUIPA Claims

In Reaching Hearts International, Inc. v. Prince George's County, (4th Cir., March 3, 2010), the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with a Maryland federal district court that a Seventh Day Adventist Congregation's rights under the Equal Protection Clause and RLUIPA were infringed when the county refused to grant a change in sewer and water classifications for a portion of property on which it planned to build a church. The court concluded:

the evidence presented at trial of the County's anti-church animus was very strong. The evidence thus supports the jury’s conclusion that (1) the County intentionally discriminated against Reaching Hearts on a prohibited ground, and (2) the County imposed or implemented a land use regulation in a manner that imposed a substantial burden on Reaching Heart’s religious exercise, without satisfying the standard of strict scrutiny.

Yesterday's Washington Post reports on the decision.

State Employees Say Boss Judged Them On the Quality of Their Religious Faith

The director of the Ohio Workers' Compensation Council is being accused of religious discrimination by her three-member staff-- two attorneys and an executive assistant. According to yesterday's Columbus Dispatch, Virginia McInerney, director of the Council that oversees the operations of Ohio's Bureau of Workers' Compensation, fired the staffers after they asked for separation agreements because of insurmountable inter-office tensions. The staffers say that McInerney, who often asked them to pray, was judging them "not on professional performance but on the quality of their faith, according to her beliefs." In letters to the state senator who chairs the Council, the three said McInerney told them she believed God placed her in her job and that the source of office conflict was an "inability to recognize her 'divine gift for editing.'"

Anti-Evolutionists Tying Curriculum Efforts To Global Warming Skepticism

Today's New York Times reports that critics of evolution who want alternative theories taught in public schools are beginning to tie that effort together with a similar push to encourage teaching of alternative theories about global warming. The strategy, being pursued in various states, builds on growing numbers of conservatives who have doubts about the science of climate change. Rev. Jim Ball of the Evangelical Environmental Network, a group that agrees with the science of global warming, says that many religious opponents believe "it is hubris to think that human beings could disrupt something that God created." As a legal matter, those tying the two issues together are reacting in part to a statement in a 2005 federal district court opinion finding that Cobb County, Georgia's singling out of evolution as a questionable theory in textbook stickers had the effect of advancing religion.

Church Lacks Standing To Sue Over Investigation of Its Loud Music

In Faith Baptist Church v. Waterford Township, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18226 (ED MI, March 2, 2010), a Michigan federal district court held that a church lacks standing to complain about police investigations of complaints about the volume of music coming from the church during rehearsals, services and concerts. (See prior posting). The court said:

Plaintiffs have not articulated any concrete or particularized injury. FBC continues to hold services with the music of its choosing. There is no allegation that the nature of FBC's religious services changed in any way in response to the investigation of the noise complaints. There is no specific allegation that any right to free association has been impinged or that any church members were deterred from worshiping.... There is no allegation that FBC was ordered to stop their music or that anyone was ticketed, charged, or fined. In fact, Waterford's disturbing the peace ordinance, which they challenge as vague and overbroad, was not enforced against them. Further, the evidence suggests that Waterford does not have a present intention to enforce the ordinance against them....

Although the complaint alleges that the actions of the prosecutor and police have caused a "chilling effect" -- such bare allegations are insufficient to confer standing.

Texas Republicans Support Religious Reference At Public Gatherings and On Government Buildings

Tuesday's Texas Republican primary ballot included five "non-binding resolutions that are the party's way of gauging support for issues, and for informing voters and elected officials where the party's grassroots stand on the issues." One of those, Ballot Prop. #4 read:

The use of the word "God", prayers, and the Ten Commandments should be allowed at public gatherings and public educational institutions, as well as be permitted on government buildings and property.

The advisory measure passed by an overwhelming 95.14% majority, with 11.1% of the state's registered voters participating. (Official results.) Apparently this same measure will appear on the November general election ballot. (San Marcos Daily Record). Yesterday American Atheists issued a press release warning that if this proposal is formally adopted in the state, "it will prove to be unconstitutional and expensive for state taxpayers."

Key Christian Conservative Defeated In Texas Board of Education Primary

The Christian Post and the Baptist Standard report that in Tuesday's Texas Republican Party primary, State Board of Education member Don McLeroy lost to challenger Thomas Ratliff by fewer than 900 votes. The ousted McLeroy was an outspoken Christian conservative who has doubts about the theory of evolution. He has supported added emphasis in social studies courses on the role of Christianity in the founding of the United States. In a debate about evolution, he supported a proposal that science teachers encourage students to address the "strengths and weaknesses" of scientific theories. Different language was ultimately adopted. (See prior related posting.) According to the AP, winner Ratliff is considered a moderate. The 15-member board currently has 7 social conservatives who sometimes win on issues by picking up one or two other swing votes. Meanwhile conservative member Ken Mercer won his primary race. In the race for the seat of retiring conservative Cynthia Dunbar, conservative candidate Brian Russell will be in an April runoff with educator Marsha Farney. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Public Housing Authority Says No More On-Site Church Services

According to yesterday's Dallas News, the Dallas (TX) Housing Authority has ordered a halt to Sunday morning worship services in one of the public housing complexes it administers. For the past 14 years, Lake Highlands United Methodist Church has brought Sunday services to elderly residents of Audelia Manor. Now, however, MaryAnn Russ, Dallas Housing Authority CEO, says the worship services violate the DHA's contract with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development as well as church-state separation principles. She says that worship services amount to agency endorsement of religion. New Housing Authority agreements with religious social service groups prohibit them from holding worship services in public housing units. However a HUD spokesman in Washington says that the Fair Housing Act does not prohibit religious activity in common areas of public housing as long the activity does not result in unequal treatment of residents.

UPDATE: The Dallas News reports that on Thursday, the Dallas Housing Authority reversed its decision. Religious services at Audelia Manor will resume on Sunday.

Bristish Airport Refuses Boarding To Muslim Women Who Rejected Body Scan

At Britain's Manchester Airport, two Muslim women have become the first passengers to be banned from boarding their flight because they refused to undergo a full body scan using an expensive new X-ray system. According to yesterday's London Express, one of the women objected on religious grounds and the other on medical grounds. The women, who had been randomly selected for scanning, had tickets to fly to Islamabad, Pakistan. An airport spokesman said: "These ladies were not in traditional Muslim dress and while they were not happy about being refused permission to fly there was no anger. They accepted the decision and did not complain." The privacy group Big Brother Watch offered to represent the women if they want to challenge the airport's actions in court.

Suit Challenges State Civil Rights Agency Jurisdiction Over Small Religiously-Motivated Group

A press release yesterday from the Thomas More Society announced that it has filed a lawsuit in Indiana state court challenging the authority of the Indiana Civil Rights Commission (ICRC) over the Fishers Adolescent Catholic Enrichment Society (FACES), a group of nine families who home-school their children. FACES was created to provide social occasions at which home-schooled children can interact in a religious context with one another. Problems arose when one mother whose daughter suffered from a serious food allergy insisted that her child have a special diet at a FACES banquet. FACES leaders believed that a home-prepared meal would be better, and refused the mother's request. The mother then filed a civil rights charge claiming that the refusal to accommodate her daughter amounted to discrimination on the basis of disability. The new lawsuit charges that the ICRC's assertion of jurisdiction over this kind of small voluntary association formed for religious purposes violates members' rights to freely associate in exercising and expressing their religious beliefs, protected by the Indiana and U.S. constitutions.

Cert. Denied In Establishment Challenge To Religious Displays In Postal Unit

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in Sincerely Yours, Inc. v. Cooper, (Docket No. 09-608, 3/1/2010). (Order List). In the case, the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals held that religious displays by the Full Gospel Interdenominational Church in the Contract Postal Unit it operates along side its ministry and outreach efforts in a store front facility in Manchester, Connecticut violate the Establishment Clause. (See prior posting.) AP yesterday reported on the Supreme Court's refusal to review the case.

Evangelical Group Wins Compromise In Settlement of Suit Over Tax Exemption

Kenneth Copeland Ministries on Monday announced the settlement of a lawsuit it had filed against Tarrant County (TX) Appraisal District challenging the denial of a tax exemption (see prior posting) for a $3.6 million jet owned by the evangelical religious group. BNA Daily Report for Executives (3/3/2010) [subscription required] gives further details. At issue was the county's requirement that the application for an exemption include the names, positions and salaries of all the organization's employees-- some 600 in total. KCM, which separately had been resisting Congressional demands for more financial information, refused to furnish the data arguing that it was protecting the privacy rights of its employees and the more general privacy rights of churches. In its view, only the Internal Revenue Service has authority to obtain this type of information from non-profits.

In the settlement in Eagle Mountain International Church Inc. v. Tarrant Appraisal District, Tex. Dist. Ct., No. 342-235701-09, agreed judgment entered 2/16/10, the county agreed to have KCM's employment records reviewed by a CPA who specializes in religious organizations. The county accepted as sufficient a report from the CPA that KCM's employee compesation was reasonable, without the underlying data going to the government.

European Court Grand Chamber Will Review Its Decision Banning Crucifixes In Italian Classrooms

The European Court of Human Rights announced yesterday that its 17-judge Grand Chamber will review a controversial decision handed down in November by a 7-judge panel in Lautsi v. Italy. The panel decision held that crucifixes in public school classrooms in Italy violate the European Convention on Human Rights' protections of thought, conscience and religion and the right of parents to educate their children according to their convictions. (See prior posting.) Business Week reported on the Court's decision to review the case.

High School Teacher Suspended Over Banning Wiccan Altar In Shop Class

A high school industrial arts teacher in Guthrie Center, Iowa has ben placed on paid leave pending the school's consultation with its attorney in an unusual dispute regarding student religious expression in class assignments. Yesterday's Des Moines Register reports that teacher Dale Halferty told a student that he could not build a Wiccan altar in shop class. While he could build a table that he could later use as part of an altar, Halferty told the student that he needed to keep all religious materials at home. However the student kept returning with a book on witchcraft. Halferty says he does not want any religious symbols in the shop, and previously told another student he could not build a cross in class. Almost 70 students have signed a petition saying they do not want witchcraft practiced in school. Halferty agreed, saying: "It scares me. I'm a Christian. This witchcraft stuff - it's terrible for our kids. It takes kids away from what they know, and leads them to a dark and violent life. We spend millions of tax dollars trying to save kids from that." Ben Stone, executive director of the Iowa Civil Liberties Union, says that students have the right to express their religious viewpoints within the context of a class assignment.

D.C. Catholic Charities Ends New Spousal Benefits To Avoid Recognizing Same-Sex Partners

Following up on their pledge to be in compliance with D.C. same-sex marriage law that takes effect today, Catholic Charities of Washington has stopped offering benefits to spouses of new employees. This avoids charges that the organization is illegally discriminating on the basis of marital status were it to refuse to recognize same-sex partners. CNS and Beliefnet report that the change will not affect employees whose spouses are currently covered. A letter to Catholic Charities employees from its CEO said: "We sincerely regret that we have to make this change, but it is necessary to allow Catholic Charities to continue to provide essential services to the clients we serve in partnership with the District of Columbia while remaining consistent with the tenets of our religious faith." While Catholic Charities CEO Edward J. Orzechowski says that the new D.C. statute requires that same-sex couples receive the same spousal benefits as heterosexual couples, in fact that requirement seems to stem from the anti-discrimination provisions of the D.C. Human Rights Law that prohibits employment discrimination based on sexual orientation or marital status.

Chief Justice Refuses To Stay Effectiveness of D.C. Same-Sex Marriage Law

U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has refused to grant a stay to prevent the District of Columbia’s Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Equality Amendment Act from taking effect today. In an in chambers opinion in Jackson v. District of Columbia Board of Elections and Ethics, (Sup. Ct., March 2, 2010), the Chief Justice said that it has been the practice of the Court to defer to defer to the decisions of the courts of the District of Columbia on matters of exclusively local concern. Congress has chosen not to override the D.C. statute, and petitioners can raise many of the same arguments in their pending litigation attempting to get an initiative on the ballot to repeal the law that permits same-sex marriage. AP reports on the decision, saying that while couples may apply for licenses beginning today, there is a 3-day waiting period before they get the licenses and can actually be married. (See prior related posting.) [Thanks to Alliance Alert for the lead.]

Plaintiffs Have Standing To Challenge Day of Prayer, But Not Prayer Proclamations

In Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Obama, (WD WI, March 2, 2010), a Wisconsin federal district court ruled on the standing of Freedom from Religion Foundation and some of its members in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the National Day of Prayer statute (36 USC 119) and the issuance of prayer proclamations by the President. (See prior posting.) In addition to the President, Shirley Dobson, chairperson of the National Day of Prayer Task Force was also named as a defendant. The court held:

Although the answer is not free from doubt, I conclude that, under the unique circumstances of this case, plaintiffs have standing to challenge the constitutionality of the National Day of Prayer statute. The primary injury plaintiffs allege is the feeling of unwelcomeness and exclusion they experience as nonreligious persons because of what they view as a message from the government that it favors Americans who pray. That injury is intangible, but it is no less concrete than the injuries in the many cases in which courts have recognized the standing of persons subjected to unwelcome religious speech. The only difference between those cases and this one is that plaintiffs have not come into physical or visual contact with a religious display. However, that difference has little significance in a case like this one involving a national message intended to reach all Americans.

... With respect to plaintiffs' challenge to "prayer proclamations" issued by the President (other than one required by § 119), none of the plaintiffs has read or heard such a proclamation except when they expressly sought one out. Such a self-inflicted "injury" cannot establish standing. With respect to defendant Dobson, plaintiffs have failed completely to show that any of her actions has injured them.

Alliance Defense Fund issued a release on the decision.

Tennessee School District Settles Suit Challenging Religious Practices In Schools

The Cheatham County (TN) Board of Education voted Monday night to approve a settlement in a lawsuit alleging a pattern of religious activities in the county schools. (See prior posting.) The settlement order (full text) in Doe v. Cheatham County Board of Education, (MD TN, filed 11/16/2009), was announced in a press release by the ACLU of Tennessee that filed the lawsuit. Under the agreement, among other things school officials will not participate in or permit non-student third parties to offer prayers in conjunction with school events; will prevent non-student third parties (including the Gideons) from distributing Bibles during instructional time or at school events; will make a good faith effort not to hold school events at religious venues; will not knowingly let teachers promote personal religious beliefs to students during class or at school events; teachers will not cite sacred text as authority for historical or scientific fact to students in classes, or display religious symbols in class unless there is a pedagogical reason for doing so; and school teachers will not put religious beliefs or references to a deity on their school web pages.

British Sikhs Challenge 2011 Census Form

Britain's Sikh Federation is considering filing a lawsuit against the UK government's Office of National Statistics over the form it plans to use for the 2011 census. According to yesterday's Sikh Times, the government intends to list Sikhs as a choice in the voluntary portion of the form that asks about religious affiliation. The Sikh group insists that Sikh should also be a choice in the compulsory portion of the form that asks about ethnicity. They say that otherwise this will continue the under count of Sikhs that occurred ten years ago, reducing the amount of government services to which they are entitled.

Church Zoning Decision Remanded for Further Findings

In Arnold v. Versailles-Midway-Woodford County Board of Adjustment, (KY Ct. App., Feb. 26, 2010), a Kentucky appellate court in a second appeal in a church zoning case sent back for additional proceedings a county zoning authority's decision to grant Versailles United Methodist Church a conditional use permit for construction of a church building, school building, gymnasium and parking lot. The court held that again the County Board of Adjustment had not made adequate findings to justify its conclusions. It also directed the Board to make appropriate findings under RLUIPA instead of the conclusory statements that appeared in its original decision.

Ohio Supreme Court Will Decide If Church Can Sponsor Charter School

The Ohio Supreme Court has agreed to review a case in which a church claims that a decision of the Ohio Department of Education denying its application to sponsor a charter school ("community school") violates the equal protection clauses of the U.S. and Ohio (Art. 1, Sec. 2) constitutions and as well as the free exercise clause of the Ohio Constitution (Art. 1, Sc. 7). The denial was based on Ohio Rev. Code 3314.015(B)(3) that requires a sponsor to be an "education-oriented institution." According to yesterday's Columbus Dispatch, Brookwood Presbyterian Church in Columbus runs an educational program for 64 children with autism. It currently operates under the umbrella of another approved charter school, but that school is now threatened with closure. An Ohio Court of Appeals dismissed the church's challenge on the ground that the Department of Education's decision to deny a community school application is unappealable. Brookwood Presbyterian Church v. Ohio Department of Education, (OH Ct. App., Sept. 8, 2009). The full text of all the pleadings, briefs and court orders filed in the case in the Ohio Supreme Court are available online. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Teacher Wins Right To Display Classroom Banners With Religious References

In Johnson v. Poway Unified School District, (SD CA, Feb. 25, 2010), a California federal district court held that high school teacher Bradley Johnson's rights were violated when school officials told him to take down two 7-foot wide banners he had placed on his classroom wall. One displayed quotes such as "God Bless America" and "In God We Trust." The other quoted from the Declaration of Independence, with the term "Creator" in the quote in all capital letters. The school permits teachers to create their own displays in their classrooms, so long as the displays are not disruptive. Other teachers had posted items such as a Tibetan prayer flag, posters of Mahatma Gandhi, the Dali Lama and Malcolm X, as well as posters with views on a wide variety of other issues. Johnson's posters had hung in his classroom without objection for 20 years.

The court concluded that the school had created a limited public forum for teachers to express their views on their classroom walls, and that officials had engaged in unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination in squelching Johnson's speech. Establishment Clause concerns were unjustified since, according to the court, there is no realistic danger that an observer would think the school district was endorsing a particular religion. Moreover, the court concluded that by permitting Buddhist, Hindu, and anti-religious speech by some teachers while silencing the Judeo-Christian speech of Johnson, the school violates the Establishment Clause, the Equal Protection Clause and the "no preference" clause of the California Constitution. The court ordered school officials to immediately permit Johnson to redisplay the two banners at issue, and also awarded Johnson nominal damages. AP yesterday reported on the decision, and the Thomas More Law Center that represented Johnson issued a release on the decision, including photos of the disputed banners. (See prior related posting.)

Settlement Reached In Texas Prayer Garden Challenge

The San Antonio (TX) Express News reported yesterday that a settlement has been reached in a lawsuit attempting to prevent The Coming King Foundation from placing a 77-foot tall cross in their Kerrville, Texas subdivision. The cross is part of a 23-acre prayer garden., and will overlook Interstate 10. Neighbors say that subdivision deeds limit lots to residential use, but the Foundation argued that the deed restrictions are invalid because the 12-lot subdivision plot was not approved by county commissioners. (See prior posting.) Under the settlement, the garden will be constructed, but a privacy wall will be put up. Also access and parking from a subdivision street will be limited, and defendants will pay $25,000 toward plaintiff's legal fees.

Cert. Denied In Property Dispute Involving Break Away Episcopal Parish

Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in St. Luke's of the Mountains v. Episcopal Church, (Docket No. 09-708, March 1, 2010). (Order List.) In the case below, decided by a California appellate court under the name Huber v. Jackson, the court applied the "neutral principles" of law doctrine, concluding that the Episcopal Church and its Diocese of Los Angeles are the owners of the property of St. Luke's parish in La Crescenta, California. The congregants of St. Luke's voted in 2006 to break away from the Episcopal Church and affiliate with the more conservative Anglican Church of Uganda. (See prior posting.) The California Supreme Court refused review in the case (2009 Cal. LEXIS 9850, Sept. 17, 2009). The Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles issued a statement yesterday thanking the Supreme Court for its clarity in refusing review. Episcopal News Service reports on the Supreme Court's refusal to review the state appellate court's ruling. [Thanks to John W. Chilton for the lead.]

Private Rabbinic Court In Israel Is At Center of a Controversy

Last week Haaretz carried a long article about the little known group of private rabbinic courts in Israel known as Badatz, an acronym for Court of Justice or Righteous Court. The article focuses on the court branch located in Bnei Brak, a city east of Tel Aviv in which strictly observant Orthodox Jews (Haredi) and important Haredi rabbis live. Unlike the government-run rabbinical courts that deal only with family and personal status matters, Badatz deals with a wide variety of civil disputes. The parties must agree to submit their disputes to Badatz, but the rabbinic court can place pressure on members of the Haredi community who do not do so by issuing a "writ of refusal" which essentially calls for others to ostracise the individual who will not submit to the court's jurisdiction. Badatz has come into the news because of a lawsuit filed in the civil court system against several of the rabbinic judges (dayanim) on Badatz. [This paragraph has been corrected thans to an e-mail from Jack Levey.] As reported by Haaretz:

Rabbi Zvi Bialostosky, a building contractor, his son Chaim and the son's partner, Eliezer Friedman, were involved in a lengthy dispute with people who bought an apartment from them in Bnei Brak. The case was heard by Badatz Bnei Brak, until at a certain point Bialostosky and the other plaintiffs sued the dayanim in Tel Aviv Magistrate's Court.... Late last year, the contractors filed no fewer than 11 requests for various legal proceedings against the religious judges, in the process crossing a Haredi red line by taking their case to the state secular court system and, worse, suing dayanim. The result was an offensive of unprecedented ferocity by the Haredi leadership against two private individuals.

A letter signed by ... spiritual leaders of the Haredi world asserts that Bialostosky and Friedman "lifted a hand against God and His Torah" and are liable to cause "the destruction of the religion."

The contractors requested and were granted a restraining order against threats and harassment, after complaining to the civil court that the Badatz rulings constituted "harassment" and "libel." The dayanim retorted that such allegations were groundless and added that Bialostosky is "a quarrelsome individual who is involved in numberless disputes and litigations."