DC Circuit: Federal Employee Need Not Relitigate Religious Discrimination Victory To Appeal Retaliation Holding

In Payne v. Salazar, (DC Cir., Sept. 7, 2010), the D.C. Circuit gave a substantial victory to federal employees asserting Title VII employment discrimination claims.  In the case, Department of Interior employee Cassandra Payne won her religious discrimination clam at the administrative level.  An EEOC administrative judge found that the Interior Department had violated Title VII by refusing Payne's requests for weekends off so she could attend church and Bible study.  However the administrative judge rejected her claim that her supervisor had retaliated against her for filing the EEO claim.  Payne appealed the retaliation ruling by filing suit in federal district court. However the district court accepted the government's contention that in order to sue on the retaliation claim, Payne must also relitigate the religious discrimination claim on which she had been successful at the administrative level. The Court of Appeals reversed, rejecting the government's interpretation of the statutory language. It held that a federal employee does not have to re-prove in court a claim on which she has already been successful in order to sue on other Title VII claims which were rejected at the agency level. [Thanks to FedSmith for the lead.]

Algerian Court Dismisses Prosecution of Two Christians For Eating During Ramadan

In Algeria yesterday, a court in the town of Ain El-Hammam dismissed a prosecution that had been brought against two Christian construction workers charged with eating during daylight hours during Ramadan. Prosecutors demanded that the two be punished for insulting Islam.  The defendants argued that they were not eating in a "public place", and that their prosecution violated constitutional protections and provisions of international conventions protecting freedom of religion.  According to Times Live and the Christian Post, the court ruled that no law provided for bringing charges against the two non-Muslims.

Christian Wrestling Coach Settles Religious Discrimination Claim Against Dearborn, MI School

Dearborn, Michigan's Fordson High School has settled a religious discrimination lawsuit filed against it by its former wrestling coach who claimed he was fired because the school's principal, a Muslim, is weeding out Christian teachers, coaches and staff. (See prior posting.) AP reported yesterday that Dearborn Public Schools paid 65-year old wrestling coach Gerald Marszalek $24,500 to settle the religious discrimination claims. Earlier this year it paid him $500 to drop his age discrimination claims.

Court Refuses To Dismiss Justice Department's Title VII Case Against NYC Transit Authority

In United States v. New York City Transit Authority, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102704 (ED NY, Sept. 24, 2010), the Department of Justice sued the New York City Transit Authority claiming that it violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act through polices and practices that discriminate against employees whose religious beliefs require them to wear certain head coverings, such as turbans or khimars, without logos on them. The complaint alleged selective enforcement of the Transit Authority's uniform policies and failure to reasonably accommodate Sikh and Muslim employees. The court rejected three arguments for dismissal put forward by the Transit Authority. The court held that the suit can be maintained as a "pattern or practice" claim, that in such a claim the government does not have to show that each person for whom it will ultimately seek relief was a victim of the employer's discriminatory policy, and that such claims are not subject to the same rules regarding shifts of burden of proof as in individual Title VII actions. The court also held that whether the Transit Authority offered reasonable accommodation of employees' beliefs could not be determined as a matter of law at the summary judgment stage.

Prosecutor's Biblical References Not A Basis For Overturning Death Sentences

Jackson v. Epps, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102562 (ND MI, Sept. 28, 2010) is a habeas corpus action by a prisoner challenging his capital murder convictions and the resulting four death sentences imposed on him.  Among other claims, petitioner asserted that the prosecutor's Biblical references during closing arguments at the sentencing phase of his trial violated the Establishment Clause and urged jurors to rely on impermissible factors in reaching their decision. The court disagreed, pointing out that the prosecutor:

asked the jury to apply the secular law given to them, and she used a familiar reference to argue that point. The reign of King Herod and his death from a painful disease, are historical fact, and her comments concerning the slaughter of children referenced a story in a book. That the comments have a religious connotation does not render the argument inherently religious....

Moreover, [the prosecutor's] reference to "God's law" was responsive to Petitioner's own arguments..... [Her] statements were not an endorsement of extrajudicial authority for imposing a sentence of death. Her statements were more akin to familiar Proverbs and parables that are used to support arguments outside of a religious context.... [T]here was no prosecutorial suggestion that personal responsibility for the sentence did not ultimately rest with the jury, and the comments did not suggest that religious principles, rather than the law, applied.

Trial of Geert Wilders For Anti-Muslim Incitement Opens In Netherlands

In Amsterdam, Netherlands yesterday, the trial of Geert Wilders, an anti-Muslim right wing member of parliament, opened. Hurriyet Daily News reports that Wilders is charged with giving religious offense to Muslims and inciting hatred and discrimination against Muslims.  In his opening statement, Wilders defended freedom of speech, and then refused to answer any questions from judges. This led presiding judge Jan Moors to observe that Wilders appeared to be avoiding discussion. Wilders attorney said that this statement shows that Judge Moors is biased, and moved to have him disqualified. (See prior related posting.) Support by Wilders' Freedom Party is critical to the coalition government that will shortly take office in the Netherlands. (See prior related posting.)

Husband In Contempt For Teaching Child Christian Faith In Violation of Divorce Settlement

In Greene v. Greene, (GA Ct. App., Oct. 1, 2010), a Georgia appellate court upheld a trial court's finding that a divorced husband was in contempt for violating a Settlement Agreement that gave his former wife final decision-making authority over matters related to their daughter's religious upbringing.  The wife was Jewish and the husband was Christian. The husband had agreed that the child would be raised in the Jewish faith.  However, according to the court:

Husband admitted that he had taken the child to numerous Christian churches ...[;] that he told the child that she was Jewish on the outside and Christian on the inside; that he shared Christian prayers with the child; that he and his mother read the Bible to the child; that his mother taught the child the Christian faith from the Bible...; and that the child told him that she was conflicted about the two different faiths. Husband also admitted that he gave the child a children's Bible, as well as DVDs of Christian stories and movies; that he taught her Christian songs and played them while riding in the car with the child; and that he had referred to Wife's parents by numbers but denied that he was referencing the Holocaust.

The appeals court also concluded that the trial court's instructions to the Husband on how to purge himself of contempt were sufficiently clear.

Muslims Get Mixed Messages On Their Integration In Germany

Deutsche Welle reported yesterday that Muslims in Germany are getting mixed messages from top government leaders.  On Sunday, Germany's President Christian Wulff, in a speech marking the 20th anniversary of German reunification, called for the integration of Muslims in Germany. In his speech, Wulff said: "Christianity doubtless belongs in Germany. Judaism belongs doubtless in Germany. That is our Judeo-Christian history. But now, Islam also belongs in Germany." A day later, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, endorsed Wulff's views but added that Muslims living in Germany must conform to "fundamental German values." She said there was no leeway on this demand. Meanwhile Norbert Geis, a member of parliament from a Bavarian party allied with Merkel's Christian Democrats said that Wulff's statement should not be interpreted to mean that Islam and Christianity have an equal footing in Germany.

Cert. Denied In Challenge To School Ban On Religious Music In Holiday Concerts

Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in Stratechuk v. Board of Education, (Docket No. 09-1184) (Order List.) In the case, the 3rd Circuit upheld a New Jersey school district's policy banning celebratory religious holiday music at school-sponsored holiday concerts. (See prior posting.) The policy was challenged on Establishment Clause grounds and on the ground that the school was unconstitutionally restricting students' access to ideas. Yesterday's Newark (NJ) Star Ledger reports on the Supreme Court's refusal to grant review.

England's Charity Commission Says Druids Are A Religion

The Charity Commission for England and Wales last Saturday, for the first time, recognized Druidry as a religion. The action gives the Druid Network charitable status for tax purposes in Britain.  CNN reports the Commission found that in Druidry: "There is a sufficient belief in a supreme being or entity to constitute a religion for the purposes of charity law." The Druids are generally seen as a neo-Pagan religion.

Recent Articles and Books of Interest

From SSRN:

• Susanna Mancini & Michel Rosenfeld, Unveiling the Limits of Tolerance: Comparing the Treatment of Majority and Minority Religious Symbols in the Public Sphere, (Cardozo Legal Studies Research Paper No. 309, Sept. 28, 2010).
• Paul Schiff Berman, Towards a Jurisprudence of Hybridity, (Utah Law Review, No. 1, 2010).

From SmartCILP:

• Scott W. Gaylord, Licensing Facially Religious Government Speech: Summum's Impact on the Free Speech and Establishment Clauses, 8 First Amendment Law Review 315-413 (2010).
• David L. Gregory & Stephen Martir, The Catholicity of the Middle Class: Reflections on Caritas in Veritate, 24 Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy 379-398 (2010).
• Guy Haarscher, Secularism, the Veil and "Reasonable Interlocutors": Why France Is Not All That Wrong, 28 Penn State International Law Review 367-382 (2010).
• Susan Pace Hamill, A Moral Perspective on the Role of Education in Sustaining the Middle Class, 24 Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy 309-325 (2010).
• R. Ashby Pate, Blood Libel: Radical Islam's Conscription of the Law of Defamation into a Legal Jihad Against the West--and How to Stop It, 8 First Amendment Law Review 414-451 (2010).
• Robert E. Rains, Marriage in the Time of Internet Ministers: I Now Pronounce You Married, but Who Am I To Do So?, 64 University of Miami Law Review 809-877 (2010).
• Mehmet Cengiz Uzun, The Protection of Laicism in Turkey and the Turkish Constitutional Court: the Example of Prohibition on the Use of the Islamic Veil in Higher Education, 28 Penn State International Law Review 383-426 (2010).

New Books:

• John Witte, Jr. & Joel Nichols, Religion and the American Constitutional Experiment, Third Edition, (Westview Press, July 2010).
• Jeff Sharlet, C Street: The Fundamentalist Threat to American Democracy, (Little Brown, Sept. 27, 2010), excerpted in The Takeaway.

Red Mass Marks Beginning of Supreme Court's October Term

The U.S. Supreme Court opens its new term today.  Yesterday, according to CNN, the traditional Red Mass was held at the Cathedral of St. Matthew the Apostle in Washington to mark the new term.  Among those in attendance was Vice President Joe Biden, Chief Justice John Roberts, and Associate Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Stephen Breyer.  Breyer was the only Justice attending who is not Catholic. He is Jewish.  The Court now is made up of six Catholics and three Jews. The homily at the Mass was given by Archbishop J. Augustine Di Noia.  During the current term, the Court will decide at least two cases involving the intersection of law and religion.  Arizona School Tuition Organization v. Winn involves a church-state challenge to Arizona's tuition tax credits (background), while Snyder v. Phelps involves a challenge by members of the anti-gay Westboro Baptist Church to a damage award against them for emotional distress caused by their picketing of a veteran's funeral (background).

Lawyer in Mosque Zoning Case Argues Islam Is A Political Movement, Not A Religion

Last week, court hearings began in the Rutherford County (TN) Chancery Court in a lawsuit seeking a temporary restraining order to halt construction of a controversial Islamic center being built in Murfreesboro, Tennessee. (See prior related posting.) Normally RLUIPA gives religious institutions special protections in zoning matters. The Tennessean reported yesterday, however, that challengers argued in court that Islam should be classified as a political movement, not a religion, and that the proposed mosque is not a house of worship.  In his opening statement, Smyrna (TN) attorney Joe Brandon, Jr. argued: "Shariah law is pure sedition." Local officials disagree and say the mosque should be treated like any other house of worship.

En Banc Rehearing Sought In Christian Student's Challenge To College's Policy

A petition for an en banc rehearing by the 9th Circuit in Lopez v. Candaele was filed last week. (Full text of petition.)  In the case, a panel of the 9th Circuit held that a Christian student at Los Angeles City College lacks standing to challenge the school's sexual harassment policy because there was never any credible threat that the policy would be used to discipline the student despite a speech professor's objections to the student's religious opposition to same-sex marriage. (See prior posting.) The rehearing request argues that the panel holding is at odds with decisions in the 3rd and 6th Circuits which permit a challenge to overbroad statutes that chill speech without a threat of enforcement. Alliance Defense Fund issued a press release announcing the filing of the rehearing request.

Appeals Court Upholds Release of Psychiatric Files of Clergy In Sex Abuse Settlement

In Doe 1 v. Franciscan Friars of California, Inc., (CA App., Sept. 30, 2010), a California appellate court held that pursuant to a settlement in a clergy sex abuse case, various confidential files of six alleged perpetrators could be released to the public. The court found that "compelling social interests in protecting children from molestation outweigh the Individual Friars' privacy rights, and the trial court correctly ordered the public release of psychiatric and other confidential records in the possession of the Franciscans." (See prior related posting.)

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Patterson v. Schriro, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100187 (D AZ, Sept. 2), an Arizona federal district court refused to issue a preliminary injunction ordering plaintiff receive a kosher diet because plaintiff alleged no threat that his current kosher diet is likely to be discontinued or changed.


In Pugh v. Caruso, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100683 (WD MI, Sept. 22, 2010), a federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100713, Aug. 25, 2010) and dismissed plaintiff's RLUIPA challenge to various limits on his practice of Wicca.


In Ali v. Quarterman, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100621 (ED TX, Sept. 24, 2010), a Texas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100707, July 20, 2010) and dismissed a Muslim inmate's objections to the prison's grooming code that prevented him from wearing a beard and to its headgear policy that allowed him to wear a kufi only in his cell and at religious services.


In Ahmad v. Thomas, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100866 (SD  TX, Sept. 23, 2010), a Texas federal district court dismissed a Muslim inmate's attempt to obtain Friday Jum'ah services at the Harris County Jail as well as the right to use his prayer carpet and kufi cap in his cell.


In Braithwaite v. Hinkle, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100510 (ED VA, Sept. 20, 2010), a Virginia federal district court dismissed a Muslim inmate's free exercise challenge to prison grooming rules that prohibited him from wearing a beard. UPDATE: Affirmed, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 4115 (4th Cir., Feb. 24, 2011).


In Vinson v. Riley, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101666 (WD MI, Sept. 27, 2010), a Michigan federal district court permitted an inmate to move ahead with certain of his claims asserting that his free exercise and RLUIPA rights were violated when he was removed from the kosher meal program.  Officials said plaintiff had changed his religion by asserting that he was an active Moorish Science member. Plaintiff said that his nationality is Moorish American, but his religion is still African Hebrew Israelite.


In Jean-Pierre v. Bureau of Prisons, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101546 (WD PA, Sept. 27, 2010), a Pennsylvania federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101614, July 30, 2010) and permitted a Rastafarian inmate to move ahead on his free exercise and equal protection claims growing out of his removal from the Certified Religious Diet Program. However the court dismissed plaintiff's official capacity claims and claims for monetary damages under RFRA.


In Hall v. Skolnik, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102277 (D NV, Sept. 13, 2010), an inmate challenged authorities' denial of his request for kosher meals and charged that prison policies prevent black-Jewish inmates from practicing their religion to the same extent as other Jewish inmates. The court dismissed plaintiff's  official capacity claims for monetary damages and claims against the Nevada Department of Corrections, his 8th Amendment claims and his claims for emotional distress. However he was permitted to proceed on other claims.


In Avery v. Ferguson, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101947 (WD AK, Sept. 24, 2010), an Arkansas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101864, Sept. 3, 2010) and rejected a number of claims of constitutional violations growing out of conditions when plaintiff was held as a pre-trial detainee. However it permitted him to proceed with his claim that his free exercise rights were violated when he was denied a vegetarian diet.

USCIRF Puts Religious Freedom Spin on President's New Iran Sanctions

On Sept. 29, President Obama issued an Executive Order (full text) imposing financial sanctions on eight Iranian officials connected with the Revolutionary Guard, armed forces, Iranian intelligence service and national police.  Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the sanctions were imposed on "officials responsible for serious and sustained human rights abuses since the disputed election of June 2009." (Full text of statement.) As reported by the San Francisco Chronicle, the Order for the first time makes use of new authority given to the President in the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions Accountability and Divestment Act of 2010.  The Executive Order blocks funds of the 8 individuals in the U.S. or in overseas branches of U.S. banks and bars the contribution of funds, goods or services to the individuals. A Release issued last week by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom attempts to put a religious freedom spin on the new sanctions order. According to USCIRF: "During the past year, the Iranian government’s poor religious freedom record deteriorated, especially for religious minorities such as Baha’is, Christians, and Sufi Muslims, and physical attacks, harassment, detention, arrests, and imprisonment intensified. Even the recognized non-Muslim religious minorities–Jews, Armenian and Assyrian Christians, and Zoroastrians–protected under Iran’s constitution faced increasing discrimination and repression."

Court Issues Letters Rogatory Seeking Aid In Serving Process on Pope, Cardinals

In an unusual move, a Wisconsin federal district court in Doe 16 v. Holy See, (ED WI, Sept. 24, 2010), issued Letters Rogatory to "the appropriate judicial authority of the Holy See," requesting its assistance in serving process on Pope Benedict XVI and two cardinals named as defendants in a civil suit seeking damages and and other relief growing out of sexual abuse plaintiff suffered at the hands of Rev. Lawrence Murphy who taught at St. John's School for the Deaf. (See prior posting.) Here is the full text of the court order granting the motion for Letters Rogatory and the Letters relating to Pope Benedict, Cardinal Bertone (Vatican Secretary of State) and Cardinal Sodano (Bertone's predecessor). Raw Story carries its own and the AP report on the court orders. SNAP also issued a press release on the court's action.

California Governor Vetoes Civil Marriage Religious Freedom Act

Equality California reports that on Sept. 30 California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed SB 906, the Civil Marriage Religious Freedom Act. The bill was designed to protect clergy who refuse to solemnize a marriage that is contrary to their faith.  The Governor, however, objected to the portion of the bill that inserted the word "civil" before "marriage" in the California Family Code's definition of marriage. In response to the veto, Equality California said: "The governor’s mistaken belief that religious and civil marriages are identical and that religious marriages can be regulated by the state is exactly why this bill is needed.... We look forward to addressing the issues set forth in this bill with our next governor who hopefully will have a legal background and a clearer understanding of the fact that California law already defines marriage as a 'civil contract.'"  GLT News Now also reports on the veto. (See prior related posting.)

AU Asks IRS To Investigate Church Project Seeking To Unseat Iowa High Court Justices

Americans United announced on Thursday that it has written the Internal Revenue Service (full text of letter) complaining that Sioux City Iowa's Cornerstone World Outreach is violating the terms of its Section 501(c)(3) status by organizing Project Jeremiah 2010.  The Project is a campaign to urge parishioners to vote "no" on retention of three Iowa Supreme Court justices in November because the justices invalidated the state's ban on same-sex marriages. (See prior posting.) Cornerstone and other groups sponsoring the Project are asking pastors on the three Sunday's before election day to preach a message asking their followers to vote no in the retention vote. Yesterday's Sioux City Journal covers the reaction of a Cornerstone pastor and links to additional letters from Cornerstone on the matter.

In 2 Suits, EEOC Charges Businesses With Refusing To Accommodate Sunday Sabbath Observance

In two lawsuits filed Friday, the EEOC sued two unrelated businesses for refusing to accommodate the religious observance of employees who refused to work on Sundays because it is their Sabbath.  In a suit filed in federal court in Washington state, the EEOC charged that Walmart ended the accommodation it had provided the manager of its Colville (WA) store for the last 14 years. (EEOC press release.)  Employee Richard Nichols is a devout Mormon and, according to the Bellingham (WA) Herald, is also the mayor of Colville.

Meanwhile, in a suit filed in a California federal district court, the EEOC charged that a new manager at a Supercuts store refused to continue the practice that for 9 years had accommodated hair stylist Carolyn Sedar's observance of Sunday as her sabbath. (EEOC press release.)

Reference To Defendant's Satanist Beliefs Is Not Basis For Reversal of Death Sentence

In Davis v. State of Texas, (TX Ct. Crim. App., Sept. 29, 2010), a Texas appellate court rejected a defendant', appeal of his death sentence, finding that defendant's various claims of prejudice because he was a Satanist did not call for reversal of the jury's decision in the punishment phase.  The issue arose on a retrial of the penalty phase of his case after his successful appeal.  Defendant had become a Satanist while in prison. the court rejected defendant's objection to the prosecutor's statement in closing argument that evidence of defendant's affiliation with Satanism is another piece of the puzzle for the jury to consider on the issue of whether defendant would likely pose a danger in the future. The appeals court also upheld the trial court's rejection of for cause challenges to two jurors who defendant claimed would be prejudiced against him because of his Satanist affiliation. [Thanks to Eugene Volokh via Religionlaw for the lead.]

Indian Court Issues Compromise Ruling In Long-Running Dispute Over Title To Sacred Land

In India on Thursday, the Allahabad High Court issued a compromise ruling in a 60-year long dispute over title to a sacred site claimed by both Hindus and Muslims.  NDTV and the Wall Street Journal report on the 2-1 decision that divided the site in the town of Ayodhya between the two religious groups. Hindus say the site was the birthplace of Lard Ram and was the location of an ancient temple. However the Babri Masjid mosque was constructed on the site sometime between the 16th and 18th century.  In 1992, a Hindu mob partially destroyed the mosque, and widespread violence followed.  In its decision (excerpts), all three judges agreed that the area below the central dome where idols of Lord Ram and other gods sit in a makeshift temple, should be warded to the Hindu Nirmohi Akhara. Under the majority judgment, one-third of the site also goes to the Hindu party for Ram Lalla, and one-third goes to the Muslim Sunni Waqf Board. The inner courtyard belongs to both Hindus and Muslims.The ruling however maintains the status quo for three months so the parties can appeal. Each of the three judges issued a separate opinion, which in total were reported to run 8000 pages.

CNN Fires Rick Sanchez For Anti-Semitic Comments On Radio Interview

Yesterday CNN fired news anchor Rick Sanchez after Sanchez's anti-Semitic remarks in an interview on SiriusXM radio.  In the interview with Pete Dominick on "Stand Up!", Sanchez called Comedy Central's John Stewart a bigot.  Sanchez was promoting his new book, "Conventional Idiocy." As reported by the Washington Post, Stewart has repeatedly criticized Sanchez on The Daily Show. Among Sanchez's comments in the long interview was the following : "I'm telling you that everybody who runs CNN is a lot like Stewart. And a lot of people who run all the other networks are a lot like Stewart. And to imply that somehow they, the people in this country who are Jewish are oppressed minorities? Yeah." The Washington Post has more excerpts and audio from the interview.

Challenge To Pledge and National Motto In Capitol Visitor Center Dismissed On Standing Grounds

In Freedom from Religion Foundation v. Ayers, (WD WI, Sept. 29, 2010), a Wisconsin federal district court held that neither the Freedom from Religion Foundation, nor any of its members, have standing to bring an Establishment Clause challenge to a Congressional joint resolution calling for the Architect of the Capital to engrave the Pledge of Allegiance and the National Motto, “In God We Trust”, in the Capitol Visitors Center.  The court held:

Plaintiffs fail to establish standing because they cannot point to any specific congressional appropriation for the allegedly unconstitutional concurrent resolution. Plaintiffs allege that performing the engraving as required by the concurrent resolution cost between $100,000 and $150,000 “funded from U.S. taxpayer appropriations made by Congress[.]” … This allegation … does not provide the necessary link between taxpayer status and the expenditure. “[U]se of funds for [an] allegedly unconstitutional program, without more, is not sufficient to meet the nexus required by Flast”; the appropriation of those funds for such a purpose is what provides the necessary link between taxpayer and expenditure to create standing.

The American Center for Law & Justice issued a press release calling the decision "an encouraging victory."  Huffington Post reported on the decision.   

European Human Rights Court Rules on Right of Churches To Dismiss Employees for Private Behavior

In a press release last week, the European Court of Human Rights announced two Chamber Judgments, ruling for the first time on the application of the European Convention on Human Rights application to the dismissal of church employees for conduct in the sphere of their private lives. Article 8 of the ECHR protects the right to respect for family and private life.

In Obst v. Germany, the court upheld action by the German courts in permitting the Mormon Church to dismiss Michael Obst, the Church's director of public relations for Europe, for having an affair with another woman while he was married. As described by the press release, the European Court held that:

the German labour courts had taken account of all the relevant factors and undertaken a careful and thorough balancing exercise regarding the interests involved. They had pointed out that the Mormon Church had only been able to base Mr Obst’s dismissal on his adultery because he had informed the Church of it by his own initiative. According to the German courts’ findings, his dismissal amounted to a necessary measure aimed at preserving the Church’s credibility, having regard in particular to the nature of his post.

However, in the second case, Schuth v. Germany, the European Court held that the German courts had violated Art. 8 of the ECHR in permitting a Catholic parish to dismiss Bernhard Schuth, its organist and choirmaster, for living with a new partner after he separated from his wife. The press release describes the views of the European Court:

the [German] labour court of appeal had confined itself to stating that ... [Schuth's] functions were ... so closely connected to the Catholic Church’s proclamatory mission that the parish could not continue employing him without losing all credibility. That court had not examined this argument any further but appeared to have simply reproduced the opinion of the Church employer on this point. 

The labour courts had moreover made no mention of Mr Schüth’s de facto family life or of the legal protection afforded to it. The interests of the Church employer had thus not been balanced against Mr Schüth’s right to respect for his private and family life, but only against his interest in keeping his post. A more detailed examination would have been required when weighing the competing rights and interests at stake.

The full text of each of the decisions are available in French: Affaire Obst c. Allemagne, (ECHR, Sept. 23, 2010) and Affaire Schuth c. Allemange, (ECHR, Sept. 23, 2010). These Chamber Judgments can still be appealed to the Grand Chamber. [Thanks to Pew Sitter for the lead.]

Judge Refuses To Recuse Himself Over Charge of Religious Bias

Palmer v. City of Prescott, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101136 (D AZ, Sept. 7, 2010), is a suit against the city of Prescott, Arizona and various of its officials alleging violations of plaintiff's 4th and 5th Amendment rights. Plaintiff moved to disqualify federal district court Judge David Campbell from hearing the case because Campbell is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.  Plaintiff, Peter Palmer, is an evangelical Christian who proselytizes Mormons. He alleges that Judge Campbell's religious beliefs will bias him against plaintiff. The judge refused to disqualify himself, saying that plaintiff's proselytizing activities have nothing to do with the claims in this case, and citing federal precedent holding that church membership does not create a sufficient appearance of bias to require disqualification.

EEOC Sues AutoZone On Behalf of Sikh Employee

The EEOC announced yesterday that it has filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Massachusetts against AutoZone, Inc. on behalf of a Sikh employee.  The suit alleges that AutoZone refused to allow employee Frank Mahoney-Burroughs wear a turban and kara (religious bracelet). The suit also alleges a hostile work environment in which Mahoney-Burroughs' manager asked him if he was a terrorist and had joined al-Qaeda, and in which Auto Zone failed to intervene when customers made terrorist jokes and referred to Mahoney-Burroughs as Bin-Laden. The suit alleges that Mahoney-Burroughs was fired because of his religion and in retaliation for complaining about discrimination.

DC Circuit Stays Preliminary Injunction Against Stem Cell Guidelines

Yesterday the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Sherley v. Sebelius granted a stay of a preliminary injunction during the appeal of a federal district court's order enjoining application of the Obama Administration's guidelines expanding grants for stem cell research. (Full text of order.) The court also ordered that argument of the appeal be expedited.  According to a Reuters report, government lawyers argued to the D.C. Circuit that dozens of research projects would be ruined if their grant funding was cut off, wasting millions of taxpayer dollars.

AU Asks IRS To Investigate Church's Political Endorsement On Pulpit Sunday

Reaction is now beginning to activities of churches which last Sunday participated in Alliance Defense Fund's Pulpit Sunday challenging tax code restrictions on non-profits, including churches. (See prior posting.)  Americans United announced yesterday that it has sent a letter (full text) to the Internal Revenue Service asking it to investigate Fairview Baptist Church in Edmond, Oklahoma.  The church's pastor, Paul Blair, endorsed Rep. Mary Fallin for Oklahoma governor from the pulpit during Sunday services.

Lehi, Utah Police Investigate TV Reality Show Polygamous Family

The TLC Channel on Sunday premiered a new reality TV show titled "Sister Wives." The network describes the program as" "Meet husband Kody-- along with his three wives: Meri, Janelle and Christine and their combined 13 children-- and see how they attempt to navigate life as a 'normal' family in a society that shuns their lifestyle."  Yesterday's Rexburg, Idaho Standard Journal reports that Lehi, Utah police have launched an investigation of the Kody Brown family which is featured on the program. (It says Brown has four wives, 13 children and 3 stepchildren.) Evidence gathered in the investigation will be turned over to the Utah County attorney's office for possible prosecution.  The policy of the Utah attorney general's office has been not to pursue cases of bigamy involving consenting adults.Utah's polygamist community has been working over the last ten years to educate law enforcement agencies about its culture, and the Browns had hoped that this show would broaden public understanding of plural families.

New York Town Wants Sufi Cemetery Shut Down

AP reported  yesterday that in the rural upstate New York town of Sidney Center, the town board voted in August to pursue legal action to shut down the town's small Sufi cemetery. Town Supervisor Bob McCarthy says the cemetery is illegal and that the two bodies already buried should be removed. He fears that the town may be saddled with the cost of the cemetery some day if it is abandoned. A Sufi spokesman says that the town zoning board approved the cemetery in 2005 and that burial permits were filed with the town for the burials that took place. Hans Hass of the 30-member Osmanli Naksibendi Hakkani community charges that the town board's action was motivated by the controversy over the proposed Islamic center at Ground Zero in New York City. The leader of the group proposing that mosque is a Sufi, but is not affiliated with the Sufi group in Sidney Center.

MRFF Charges New Religious Freedom Problems At Air Force Academy

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation announced yesterday that it has sent a letter (full text), co-signed by the heads of nine other groups, to the Secretary of Defense making three demands for changes to deal with the allegedly worsening situation involving Christian proselytizing at the Air Force Academy.  The letter asks that the Air Force release its most recent Climate Survey of cadets and staff at the Air Force academy. The voluntary survey asks about the religious environment at the Academy. Second, the letter asks that the Defense Department begin an investigation of "Cadets for Christ" and other proselytizing organizations. Third, the letter demands that the Defense Department investigate the Air Force Academy's "incontrovertible and unconstitutional establishment of a fundamentalist Christian culture/ meme amongst its cadet and staff populations." The letter claims that there is an "underground" group of over 100 cadets at the Academy who are pretending to be fundamentalist Christians merely in order to remain in good standing with their peers and superiors. (See prior related posting.)

Obama Tells Audience Why He Is A Christian

As reported by the New York Times, President Obama continues his series of stops in back yards in various parts of the country in the run up to the mid-term elections. Today, in New Mexico, he was asked by one questioner : "Why are you a Christian?" Here is the CBN News transcript of his answer (the article also includes a video of the Q&A and a transcript of his response in the Q&A to a question about abortion rights):

I’m a Christian by choice. My family didn’t ... frankly, they weren’t folks who went to church every week. My mother was one of the most spiritual people I knew, but she didn’t raise me into church. I came to my Christian faith later in life. ... It was because the precepts of Jesus Christ spoke to me in terms of the kind of life I would want to lead. Being by brother’s keepers ... treating others as they would treat me ... also understanding that Jesus Christ dying for my sins spoke to the humility we all have to have as human beings. ... We’re sinful, and we’re flawed, and we make mistakes, and we achieve salvation through the grace of God. ... We can still see God in other people and do our best to help them find their own grace. So that’s what I strive to do and pray to do every day. ... I think my public service is a part of that effort to express my Christian faith.

But the one thing I want to emphasize ... as President of the United States, I’m also someone who deeply believes part of the bedrock strength of this country is that it embraces people of many faiths and of no faiths. This is a country that is still predominantly Christian, but we have Jews, Muslims, Hindus, atheists, agnostics, Buddhists, and their own path to grace is one that we have to revere and respect as much as our own, and that’s part of what makes our country what it is.

Egypt's Coptic Leader Apologizes For Bishop's Questioning of Qur'anic Verses

The leader of Egypt's Coptic Christian Church, Pope Shenouda III, in an interview aired on Egypt's state-run television Sunday apologized to Muslims for remarks made recently by the church's top bishop. Al-Azhar criticized Bishop Bishoy for provoking sectarian tension after Egyptian media quoted him as suggesting that verses in the Qur'an disputing the divine nature of Jesus were inserted after the death of the Prophet Muhammad. Daily News Egypt reports that Egypt's ambassador in Cyprus also raised the issue directly with Bishoy. The bishop has also contributed to rising tensions between Muslims and Copts by telling a newspaper last week that Muslims are only guests in Egypt. Egypt was majority Christian before the 7th century. Pope Shenouda said in his interview that it is now Christians who are guests since Muslims are the majority. Thousands of Muslims demonstrated Friday against Bishoy's statements and Al-Ahzar's Islamic Research Center held an emergency meeting to condemn the statements.

Pew Survey On Religious Knowledge Shows Confusion Over Religion In Schools

The Pew Forum yesterday released the results of a survey on U.S. Religious Knowledge (Executive Summary, Full Report). The survey of 3,412 Americans asked questions about the Bible, Christianity, Judaism, Mormonism, world religions, religion in public life and atheism. The groups scoring highest on the survey were atheists and agnostics, Jews and Mormons.  Here is the Report's summary of knowledge on church-state issues:

The survey also finds widespread confusion over the line between teaching and preaching in public schools.... [T]he single question that respondents most frequently get right is whether U.S. Supreme Court rulings allow teachers to lead public school classes in prayer. Nine-in-ten (89%) correctly say this is not allowed. But among the questions most often answered incorrectly is whether public school teachers are permitted to read from the Bible as an example of literature. Fully two-thirds of people surveyed (67%) also say "no" to this question, even though the Supreme Court has clearly stated that the Bible may be taught for its "literary and historic" qualities, as long as it is part of a secular curriculum. On a third question along these lines, just 36% of the public knows that comparative religion classes may be taught in public schools. Together, this block of questions suggests that many Americans think the constitutional restrictions on religion in public schools are tighter than they really are.

The question on which respondents scored worst was identifying the religion of Maimonides. Only 8% knew he was Jewish.  Today's New York Times reports on the survey.

Property Tax Exempt As Parsonage, But Not As Property Use Exclusively For Religious Purposes

In Rockland Hebrew Educational Center, Inc. v. The Village of Spring Valley, (NY Sup Ct, Sept. 8, 2010),  a Jewish religious educational organization challenged a village's refusal to renew the tax exemption for its property. A New York trial court held that the village carried its burden of showing that the property was not entitled to a tax exemption as real property owned by a religious or educational institution and used exclusively for those purposes. The exemption was unavailable because the organization was also using the property in violation of the zoning code by conducting religious services there. However the property is entitled to an exemption for property owned by a religious organization and used as a parsonage by its clergy.

Cert Filed In Challenge To Inauguration Oath and Prayers

Yesterday a Petition for Certiorari (full text) was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court asking it to review the D.C. Circuit's decision in Newdow v. Roberts. In the case, the majority of a 3-judge appeals court panel held that plaintiffs lacked standing to bring an Establishment Clause challenge to prayer and use of "so help me God" in the oath at Presidential inauguration ceremonies. The panel also held that the challenge was now moot. (See prior posting.) [Thanks to Bob Ritter for the lead.]

More Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In James v. Hayden, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99205 (SD NY, Sept. 21, 2010), a New York federal district court dismissed an inmate's claim that a group strip search violated his free exercise rights and his rights under RLUIPA, finding insufficient evidence of a substantial burden on plaintiff's religious beliefs.


In Garcia v. Clark, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98973 (ED CA, Sept. 20, 2010), a California federal magistrate judge permitted a Jewish inmate to move ahead with his claim against most of the defendants alleging that his free exercise rights and his rights under RLUIPA were violated when authorities took away accommodations that permitted him to take his kosher meal back to his cell to eat to avoid harassment.


In Leonard v. Louisiana, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99182 (WD LA, Sept. 20, 2010), a Louisiana federal district court followed up on its earlier determination that denying plaintiff access to Nation of Islam's newspaper "The Final Call" violated the 1st Amendment and RLUIPA. In this decision, the court awarded nominal damages, denied punitive damages and awarded attorneys fees of over $100,000.


In Roberts v. Cox, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98780 (D NV, Aug. 31, 2010), a Nevada federal magistrate judge permitted plaintiff to proceed with most of his free exercise and RLUIPA claims alleging that prison policies made it more difficult for blacks who purported to follow the Jewish faith to practice their religion than it did for white Jews. Among the policies were a requirement that a person be recognized a Jewish by an outside Jewish organization before the individual can receive kosher meals. Plaintiff also claimed that authorities cancelled Jewish services during Ramadan to accommodate Muslim prisoners.


In Mack v. Danforth, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99094 (MD GA, Sept. 21, 2010), a Georgia federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99095, July 13, 2010) and permitted plaintiff to proceed against against two of the named defendants on his claim that he was denied a religiously mandated vegan diet.


In Burkes v. Hamilton County, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99830 (SD IL, Sept. 23, 2010), an Illinois federal district court dismissed a claim by an inmate who objected to being required to remain in his 8-person jail cell during Christian religious services that are held in the cell as requested by one or more other prisoners in his cell.


In Collins v. Bruno, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99337 (D CT, Sept. 15, 2010), a Connecticut federal district court rejected an inmate's claim that his free exercise rights and rights under RLUIPA were violated when authorities rejected his request for halal meat for meals on two Muslim holidays.


In Muhammad v. Sisto, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99842 (ED CA, Sept. 10, 2010), a California federal magistrate judge rejected a Muslim inmate's motion for a temporary injunction to transfer him from state to federal custody because state officials allegedly interfered with his ability to fast for Ramadan in 2008.


In Serna v. Wells, 2010 U.S. Dist LEXIS 99433 (SD GA, Sept. 21, 2010), a Georgia federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99375, Aug. 31, 2010), and dismissed plaintiff's claims seeking to have the Bureau of Prisons make kosher meals available, holding that a habeas corpus proceeding is not the correct form of action to use to challenge conditions of confinement.

Church Loses RLUIPA Claim On Special Use Permit

In Grace Church of Roaring Fork Valley v. Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99950 (D CO, Sept. 20, 2010), a Colorado federal district court rejected RLUIPA and 1st Amendment challenges to the denial of an application for special review use of a church's property. Several years after the denial and on the eve of trial, the county reversed its decision and permitted construction of the church facilities. The church claimed it was still entitled to damages. The court concluded that no reasonable juror could find that the Commissioners' statements and questions at the hearings on the permit demonstrated a hostility toward religious use. Also, the permit denial imposed only an incidental burden on religion.

Court Dismisses 1st Amendment, But Not Statutory, Challenge To Vaccination Requirement

In Caviezel v. Great Neck Public Schools, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100451 (ED NY, Sept. 24, 2010), a New York federal district court held that the First Amendment does not give religious objectors the right to an exemption from New York's mandatory vaccination law for school children. The court however refused defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiffs' claim that New York's Public Health Law entitles parents with a sincere religious objection to have their children exempted from vaccination requirements. (See prior related posting.)

Bill Would Amend Title VI To Include Ban On Religious Discrimination In Schools Receiving Federal Funds

Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act currently prohibits denying participation in any program receiving federal financial assistance  based on "race, color or national origin." Senator Arlen Specter and Rep. Brad Sherman announced on Friday that they were introducing bills to amend Title VI to also ban discrimination on the basis of religion in order to protect Jewish, Muslim and Sikh students from harassment at schools and colleges receiving federal funds. The House version is HR 6216. The bill is a reaction to the position taken by the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights that Title VI does not apply to anti-Semitic harassment of Jewish students, and by implication members of other groups that have both religious and ethnic characteristics. (See prior related posting.) [Thanks to Joel Katz (Relig. & State in Israel) for the lead.]

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Barbara P. Billauer, Human Reproductive Cloning: The Intersection of Kaballa, the Bible and Biology - Parable, Exegesis and Modern Science, (September 22, 2010).
• Barbara P. Billauer, Human Reproductive Cloning: Science, Jewish Law and Metaphyics, (September 20, 2010).
• Sean Rehaag, Bordering on Legality: Canadian Church Sanctuary and the Rule of Law, (Refuge, Vol. 26, No. 1, p. 43, 2009).
• Geoffrey P. Miller, The Book of Judges: The Hebrew Bible’s Federalist Papers, (NYU School of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 10-66, Sept. 23, 2010).
• Nomi Maya Stolzenberg, Taking Blessings Seriously: A Comment on Ronald R. Garet's 'to Secure the Blessings', (USC Law Legal Studies Paper No. 10-1 (Sept. 23, 2010).
• Andrew F. March, Anwar Al-'Awlaqi Against the Islamic Legal Tradition, (Yale Law School, Public Law Working Paper; Islamic Law and Law of the Muslim World Paper. Sept. 23, 2010).

From SmartCILP:

• Shelly Kreiczer-Levy, Religiously Inspired Gender-Bias Disinheritance--What's Law Got to Do With It?, 43 Creighton Law Review 669-692 (2010).
• Jesse Merriam, Establishment Clause-Trophobia: Building a Framework for Escaping the Confines of Domestic Church-State Jurisprudence, 41 Columbia Human Rights Law Review 699-764 (2010).
• Symposium. [Intelligent Design .] Foreword by Hosea M. Horneman; articles by John H. Calvert, Johnny Rex Buckles, Casey Luskin, Edward Hawkins Sisson and Barbara Ruth Mouly. 3 Liberty University Law Review 203-574 (2009).

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Lee v. Johnson, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97703 (WD VA, Sept. 17, 2010), a Virginia federal district court permitted an inmate to move ahead with several claims alleging that House of Yahweh inmates were not given the opportunity to meet together for religious services and practice their religion in other ways. However claims against the prison chaplain were dismissed because it was not shown that he was a state employee.


In Watson-El v. Wilson, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97481 (ND IL, Sept. 15, 2010), an Illinois federal district court rejected an inmate's claim that prison rules that prevented transfer of funds between inmates violated his free exercise rights by preventing him from purchasing certain religious items.


In Rider v. Yates, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97528 (ED CA, Sept. 3, 2010), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed, with leave to amend, an inmate's complaint that prison authorities had wrongfully seized religious artifacts sent as a donation to the prison's Left-Hand Path Pagan Group.


In East v. California Department of Corrections, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97616 (ED CA, Sept. 1, 2010), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed, with leave to amend, an inmate's claim that his free exercise rights were infringed when a correctional officer failed to deliver him his personal property, which included a Bible.


In  Blanco v. Bralower, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97436 (D NV, Aug. 24, 2010), a Nevada federal magistrate judge concluded that an inmate failed to state a free exercise claim when he complained that correctional officers interrupted his prayers by making noise when they passed his cell.


In Countryman v. Nevada, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98033 (D NV, Aug. 26, 2010), a Nevada federal magistrate judge permitted an inmate to proceed with a claim that his rights under the 1st Amendment and RLUIPA were infringed when he was prevented from attending church services while in protective segregation.


In Pilgrim v. Artus, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97971 (ND NY, Sept. 17, 2010), a New York federal district court adopted the recommendations of a magistrate judge (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97978, March 17, 2010) and allowed an inmate who was a member of Nation of Islam to proceed with his challenge to prison grooming rules that did not permit him to wear his hair in dreadlocks.  Plaintiff's desire to wear his hair in dreadlocks flowed from his personal religious faith and not from tenets of Nation of Islam. The court limited plaintiff to non-monetary remedies.

Texas State Board of Education Condemns Supposed Pro-Islamic Distortions In Textbooks

At its Sept. 24 meeting, the Texas State Board of Education approved, by a vote of 7-6, a resolution (full text) condemning supposed "pro-Islamic/ anti-Christian distortions in Social Studies texts." The resolution cites textbooks that devote more lines to Muslim than Christian beliefs and practices and claims "patterns of perjoratives toward Christians and superlatives toward Muslims", "politically correct whitewashes", and "sanitized definitions of 'jihad'". A release from the Texas Freedom Network says that 3 Democrats and 3 Republicans voted against the resolution, but the "board's far right members ... voted as a bloc to pass it." (See prior related posting.) Friday's Houston Chronicle reported on the Board's action.

Christian Missionaries Acquitted of Most Charges Growing Out of Dearborn Arab Festival

According to the Detroit Free Press, a jury in Dearborn, Michigan on Friday acquitted four Christian missionaries, members of a group called Acts 17 Apologetics, of breach of the peace charges growing out of their activities at this year's Dearborn Arab International Festival. One of the defendants, however, was convicted of failure to obey a police officer's order.  The four were videotaping themselves proselytizing Muslims at the festival. Dearborn mayor Jack O'Reilly Jr. says the four were attempting to raise money through publicity on YouTube. O'Reilly added: "It's really about a hatred of Muslims. That is what the whole heart of this is. ... Their idea is that there is no place for Muslims in America. They fail to understand the Constitution." (See prior related posting.)

Ft. Bragg Christian Concert Draws Church-State Objections

"Rock the Fort", a festival of Christian music and other activities, apparently went on as scheduled yesterday at Ft. Bragg, North Carolina despite a call by Americans United for the Army to cancel the event.  In a letter to the Secretary of the Army (full text), AU argued: " 'Rock the Fort' is not an event designed to minister to the needs of soldiers unable to otherwise access religious services; rather, it is an event designed to proselytize soldiers and community members into the worship of Jesus Christ. The Army has, thus, overstepped the constitutional line by sponsoring the event." According to yesterday's Fayetteville (NC) Observer, the event, sponsored by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, is for the first time open to the public who live off the Army base. (BGEA press release). Area Christian churches are helping with the event.  While Rock the Fort concerts have been held at other military bases, this one garnered particular attention as CNN covered the plans. Responding to objections also raised by the Freedom from Religion Foundation (press release and letter to Commander), Ft. Bragg's commander says he has taken steps to assure that no soldier is pressured to attend the event.

TSA OKs Carrying Lulav and Etrog On Planes

We are currently in the midst of the week-long Jewish festival of Sukkot.  The federal Transportation Security Administration has issued a press release assuring Jewish travelers that they will be able to bring the traditional lulav and etrog on airplanes.  TSA said:

Observant Jewish travelers may carry four plants – a palm branch, myrtle twigs, willow twigs, and a citron – in airports and through security checkpoints. These plants are religious articles and may be carried either separately or as a bundle. Jewish travelers may be observed in prayer, shaking the bundle of plants in six directions.

TSA’s screening procedures do not prohibit the carrying of such agricultural items through the airport or security checkpoints, or on airplanes.

[Thanks to Michael Lieberman for the lead.] 

Today Is 3rd Annual Pulpit Sunday Challenging IRS Restrictions On Church Political Activity

Today is Alliance Defense Fund's 3rd annual Pulpit Sunday in which pastors around the country will defy IRS limitations on partisan political activity by non-profit groups, including churches.  An ADF news release issued Thursday says the group expects 100 pastors to participate by preaching sermons today setting out Biblical perspectives on the positions of electoral candidates or current government officials. ADF attorney Erik Stanley said: "The IRS should not be used as a political tool to advance the agenda of radical groups bent on silencing the voice of the Church and inhibiting religious freedom." Americans United for Separation of Church and State argues, however, that: "Federal tax law doesn’t hinder anyone’s 'free speech.' It merely requires that all organizations that receive a 501(c)(3) tax exemption operate as religious, educational or charitable entities, not political action committees." AU plans to report to the IRS any violations it learns of.

Ministerial Exception Precludes ADA Claim

In McNeil v. Missouri Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church, (WD MO, Sept. 20, 2010), a Missouri federal district court held that under the "ministerial exception" doctrine it will not second guess hiring decisions made by religious institutions. The court rejected plaintiff's claim of disability discrimination under the Americans With Disabilities Act.  She alleged that the United Methodist Church refused to appoint her as an ordained minister because of her physical health.

Requiring Christian School To Obtain Use Permit Did Not Violate RLUIPA

In County of Los Angeles v. Sahag-Mesrob Armenian Christian School, (CA App., Sept. 22, 2010), a California state appellate court held that RLUIPA was not violated by the county's insistence that a Christian High School obtain a conditional use permit and comply with environmental laws in order to operate.  The denial of a waiver to permit the school to continue to operate while the permit application was pending neither imposed a substantial burden on the school's exercise of religion, nor did it violate the "equal terms" provisions of RLUIPA.

Faith-Based Head In Bush White House Says Obama Is Politicizing The Office

Jim Towey, director of faith-based initiatives in the George W. Bush White House, writes an op-ed column in today's Wall Street Journal criticizing what he sees as the politicization of the office in the Obama White House.  He focuses on a conference call to leaders of faith based and community groups last Tuesday by the President and his director of faith-based initiatives urging them to help explain the advantages of the Obama health care plan to their constituencies. Towey says:

Mr. Obama is within his legal rights to engage our country's spiritual leaders in his effort to sell health-care reform. But he should not use the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships to do If he cannot restore its focus to promoting successful programs that serve our country's poor, then he should do the decent thing and close the faith-based initiatives office.

GOP Pledge To America Includes Some Promises On Issues of Religious Concern

On Thursday, House Republicans released their agenda as the November elections approach.  Titled A Pledge to America (full text), the document deals primarily with economic issues, health care, defense and restoring trust in government. The Pledge does however contain this mention of religious issues:

We pledge to honor families, traditional marriage, life, and the private and faith-based organizations that form the core of our American values.

In the section detailing plans to "repeal and replace" President Obama's health care plan, the document complains that the current law is inadequate to assure that taxpayer funds are not used to pay for abortions.  It promises to create a government-wide prohibition on use taxpayer funding of abortion and of subsidies for abortion services. It also pledges to enact conscience protections for health care providers.