Tennessee Governor Signs Bill On Religion In Schools

As reported by CBN, on April 10 Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslem signed HB 3266 into law. The bill makes two changes in Tennessee law regarding religion in schools. In reaction to Cheatham County's 2010 settlement of a lawsuit involving religious activities in schools (ACLU summary), the bill prohibits local education agencies and school administrators from taking any action that would infringe the rights or freedoms of students, teachers or staff without their written consent.An amendment to the bill that also passed provides that:

LEAs [Local Education Agencies] and school administrators may not prohibit personnel from participating in religious activities on school grounds that are initiated by students at reasonable times before or after the instructional day so long as such activities are voluntary for all parties and do not conflict with the responsibilities or assignments of such personnel.

SEC Files Suit In Affinity Fraud Aimed At Socially Conscious Church-Goers

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced Thursday that it had filed a federal lawsuit in Atlanta against Ephren W. Taylor, II, the operator of an $11 million Ponzi scheme that targeted socially conscious African-American church-goers.  The complaint (full text) in Securities and Exchange Commission v. City Capital Corp., (ND GA, filed 4/12/2012) alleged in part:

Taylor strenuously cultivated an image of a highly successful and socially conscious entrepreneur. Marketing himself as "The Social Capitalist," he touted equally his status as the youngest black CEO of a public company and the son of a Christian minister who understands the importance of "giving back.".... Taylor conducted a multi-city "Building Wealth Tour," on which he spoke to church congregations – including Atlanta’s New Birth Church – or at wealth management seminars featuring other speakers.

Christian Post reports on the case.

Student's Rights Not Infringed By Bus Driver's Lecture On Tolerance

In R.Z. v. Carmel Clay Schools, (SD IN, April 11, 2012), an Indiana federal district court granted summary judgment to defendants in a case in which parents challenged a lecture given by a public-school bus driver in 2008 to students on the bus. Her remarks were triggered by anti-gay and religious statements the parents' eighth-grade daughter had made. The bus driver (whose lengthy statements were recorded by school bus surveillance equipment) said in part:

This week we had a very historic election. Okay. It’s called diversity in this country. The diversity here – we’ve got kids on this bus who are Jewish, Catholic, I’ve had Muslims, I’ve had Buddhists, Sikhs, fine. That’s why we are what we are. I don’t care if you’re gay. I don’t care what you are. All those diverse things are what make this country what it is. I don’t care if you are evangelical. What I will not tolerate is your own personal views being espoused on this bus that you are going to go to hell if you don’t do it the way I do it. We’ve had this conversation before, we’ve had it for three years. We’re not going to have it again. If you can’t believe in tolerance towards one another, you don’t belong here. You belong in a parochial church school. I don’t want to hear one more word about anybody going to hell if they are gay or if they’re Buddhist or whatever, cause it is none of your damn business.

The court rejected claims that the student's free expression, free exercise and equal protection rights had been infringed.

American Nazi Party Deploys Registered Lobbyist For First Time

For the first time, the American Nazi Party has a registered lobbyist in Washington, D.C.  Michigan resident John Bowles has filed a Lobbying Registration form (full text) with Congress, listing his client as "ANP". Haaretz reported today that 55-year old Bowles, an American Nazi Party member told ABC that lobbying was  something that the Party wanted to "try out for the first time and see if it flies." The American Nazi Party's has created a new website devoted to its lobbying activities.

Catholic Bishops Issue New Statement On Challenges To Religious Liberty

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops on Thursday issued a new call to action to defend religious liberty.  In a document titled Our First Most Cherished Liberty: A Statement on Religious Liberty, the bishops said:

As Catholic bishops and American citizens, we address an urgent summons to our fellow Catholics and fellow Americans to be on guard, for religious liberty is under attack, both at home and abroad.

The statement cites 7 specific areas of concern to the bishops: the HHS mandate on contraceptive coverage in health insurance policies; state immigration laws that threaten pastoral outreach to illegal immigrants; a Connecticut bill that would have forced restructuring of parish governance; Hastings College of Law denial of recognition to the Christian Legal Society because of religious limits on who could be leaders; governmental refusals to fund Catholic foster care and adoption services that refuse to place children with same-sex couples; New York City's rule against churches renting out space in school buildings on weekends; and disqualifying USCCB from administering human trafficking grants because it will not provide or refer for contraceptive or abortion services. (See prior related posting.)  [Thanks to Marty Lederman via Religionlaw for the lead.]

Kentucky Governor Signs Into Law Bill Giving Amish Alternatives For Buggy Signage

AP reports that on Wednesday, Kentucky governor, Steve Beshear, signed SB 75 into law. The bill gives Amish horse-drawn buggies the alternative to use lanterns and white reflective tape instead of the orange triangle -- the standard slow-moving vehicle symbol-- to which Amish have religious objections. (See prior posting.)

Tennessee Governor Lets Bill On Science Teaching Become Law Without His Signature

The Tennessean reports that Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam on Tuesday returned HB 368 to the legislature without either vetoing or signing it. The bill on teaching of controversial scientific topics, including evolution, global warming, the origins of life and human cloning, will thus become law without his signature. The bill (which passed the legislature by large majorities) encourages schools to help students "respond appropriately and respectfully to differences of opinion about scientific subjects required to be taught under the curriculum framework developed by the state board of education." It goes on to provide that "teachers shall be permitted to help students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories covered in the course being taught within the curriculum framework developed by the state board of education." (See prior posting.) The governor said that the bill creates confusion, explaining:

I do not believe that this legislation changes the scientific standards that are taught in our schools or the curriculum that is used by our teachers. However, I also don’t believe that it accomplishes anything that isn’t already acceptable in our schools.

No Basis For Removing State Charges To Ecclesiastical Court

In Prather v. Governor of Washington, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49810 (WD WA, April 9, 2012), a Washington federal district court dismissed a civil rights lawsuit in which plaintiff claimed that state criminal proceedings against him alleging domestic violence and drug charges should have been removed to an ecclesiastical court.  Vincent Prather argued that "[t]he Bible forbids Christians from asserting or defending their rights in a secular court."  The court said that religious convictions do not exempt an individual from laws that are generally applied to all citizens.

Tunisia's President Condemns Violence Against Jews At Ceremony Marking Synagogue Bombing

Moncef Marzouki, a human rights activist who was elected Tunisia's interim president last December following the country's "Arab Spring" demonstrations, yesterday reached out to Tunisia's 2600-year old Jewish community.  According to Tunisia Alive, Marzouki attended a ceremony at the El Ghriba Synagogue in Djerba to commemorate the 2002 Al-Qaeda truck bombing of the synagogue that killed 21 people.  In his remarks at the ceremony, Marzouki said that "any vandalism or violence against the Tunisian Jewish people, their property or their holy sites is totally unacceptable."  In three demonstrations by conservative Salafist Muslims in recent months, demonstrators have called for Muslims to kill or wage war against Jews.

Report Calls For More Diversity In Now-Denominational Irish Primary Schools

In Ireland yesterday, the government's Department of Education and Skills released a report of an advisory group calling for more diversity in primary schools in the country. According to the department's release:

The report notes that while 96% of education provision at primary level is denominational arising from the historical development of Irish primary education, there is clearly increased demand for new forms of multi-denominational and non-denominational schooling, as well as increased demand for Irish language schooling. 

Minister Quinn said "Parental choice should be our main concern. Over recent decades, Irish society has been undergoing major political, social, economic, cultural, demographic and educational change. Primary school provision needs to reflect this changed society and provide for increased diversity."

Links to the full report and other related primary source material are available from the Department's website. According to yesterday's Irish Times, a key recommendation in the report is the elimination of Rule 68 of the Rules for National Schools that calls religious instruction the most important part of the school's curriculum. [Thanks to Alliance Alert for the lead.]

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases-- Weekly Installment #2

In Smith v. Secretary of CDCR, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47183 (ED CA, April 3, 2012), a California federal magistrate judge rejected a claim for damages brought by an inmate who said he was a real Jew descended from Black Hebrew Israelites, and that he was refused kosher meals. The court ruled that money damages are not available for violations of RLUIPA.

In Neal v. Cross, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46878 (SD IL, April 3, 2012), an Illinois federal district court rejected an inmate's claim that his free exercise rights were infringed when his visit with his wife was cut short for unauthorized contact after a guard whispered to the officer in charge: "Muslims think they own the world."

In Heim v. Moore, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46786 (MD PA, April 3, 2012), a Pennsylvania federal district court allowed an inmate to proceed with is 1st Amendment free exercise and his equal protection claims (but not his RLUIPA claim) for damages after granting his request for a kosher diet was delayed without explanation for over 5 months.

In Azor v. City of New York, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47067 (ED NY, March 30, 2012), a New York federal district court rejected claims by a Rastafarian inmate that his free exercise rights were violated during his 12-hours of pre-trial detention when he was deprived of time to himself in a cell to pray, his pocket-size Bible was taken away, and he was denied prayer towels, a proper head covering and vegetarian or kosher food. He also claimed unsuccessfully that arresting officers made abusive comments about his religion.

In Bey v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation & Parole, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47459 (MD PA, April 4,2012), a Pennsylvania federal district court permitted an inmate to proceed with his free exercise claim that defendants are forcing him to attend a drug and alcohol treatment program that violates his religious beliefs in order to obtain parole or a favorable parole recommendation.

In Cobb v. Mendoza-Powers, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48572 (ED CA, April 5, 2012), a California federal magistrate judge allowed an inmate to proceed with his free exercise challenge to the continued enforcement of a prison grooming policy that had been found unconstitutional. Plaintiff, who had taken a vow not to comb or shave his hair as a symbol of his relationship with God, was disciplined violating the grooming rules.

In Robledo v. Leal, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48359 (ND TX, April 5, 2012), a Texas federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing an inmate's claims that his free exercise rights were violated by strip searches. He believes men should only be unclothed fully in front of their wives. The court also recommended dismissing complaints regarding removal of chairs from the chapel and limitations on the number of inmates who may participate in services at the chapel, as well as plaintiff's contention that searches of him were in retaliation for his attending Catholic services in the chapel.

In Rivers v. Mohr, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48191 (ND OH, April 5, 2012), an Ohio federal district court rejected claims by an inmate that the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections decision to eliminate pork from inmate meals violated the Establishment Clause, as well as his 8th and 14th Amendment rights. The court said: "The ODRC's decision merely makes accommodating a multitude of religious practices and beliefs easier and more economical for the prison. Nothing in the Complaint suggests that the ODRC endorsed the Muslim religion."

California County Wants Religious Roadside Signs Moved Back

The Butte County, California Public Works department finds itself in the midst of a religion-in-schools dispute.  KHSL-TV News reported Monday on two signs put up next to a county highway by Glenn Stankis who has unsuccessfully run for Paradise Unified School District school board 4 times on a platform of Christian beliefs.  One sign urges schools to teach the Ten Commandments in the 6th grade. The other calls for schools to reinstate the Pledge of Allegiance, including the words "one nation (and school district PUSD) under God."  After receiving complaints about the signs, the public works department decided that they violate county law that requires a 55-foot setback for roadside signs. It is asking Stankis to move the signs to meet the setback requirements. Commenting on the controversy, Stankis said: ""This is a Christian nation the courts have actually ruled that and the district wants to be secular in their outlook."

Egyptian Court Suspends Constitutional Assembly Over Legality of Appointments To It

In Egypt yesterday, Cairo's Administrative Court suspended the newly created 100-member constitutional assembly appointed to draft a new constitution for the country while a panel of judges investigates the legality of the way in which the members were appointed. BBC News and The National report that dissatisfaction with the make-up of the constitutional assembly was growing ever since the two Islamic parties in parliament gave 60 of the seats on the constitution drafting body to Islamists. (However the Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party says that only 48 of the assembly's members are Islamists.) Coptic Christians got very few seats. Over 20 members of the constitutional assembly have already withdrawn in protest, including representatives of the Coptic Church and of the prestigious Sunni institution, Al Azhar. Journalists, professors and liberal secular members of parliament are also  among those who have withdrawn. (See prior posting.) Al Azhar had called for a constitution that guarantees freedoms of worship, opinion, scientific research and art and creative expression, and many politicians have endorsed the proposal. (See prior posting.)

In India, 23 out Of 46 Convicted For Gujarat Riots

Gulf Times reports that a court in the Indian state of Gujarat yesterday convicted 23 people in connection with the Ode village massacre that took place in 2002 as part of broader Hindu-Muslim religious riots set off after a train carrying 60 Hindu pilgrims was set on fire by a mob. Another 23 defendants were acquitted for lack of evidence. As described by the Gulf Times, the massacre involved rioters in the small Gujarati village of Ode who bolted doors of a house where Muslim families had taken refuge and then set it on fire. Of the 23 who died, 18 were women. This is one of several cases that has been investigated by a special team appointed by the Supreme Court. (See prior related posting.)

UPDATE: AFP reported Thursday that 18 of the defendants (found guilty of murder and conspiracy) were given life sentences, while 5 others (convicted of attempted murder) were sentenced to 7 years in prison.

9th Circuit: Church Marijuana Use Suit Is Ripe; But No Monetary Damages Under RFRA

Oklevueha Native American Church of Hawaii, Inc. v. Holder, (9th Cir., April 9, 2012), is a suit under the 1st Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act by a church whose sacramental earth-based healing ceremonies involve the consumption of marijuana.  In 2009, law enforcement officers seized a pound of marijuana intended for Oklevueha use from FedEx. Plaintiffs claim that even though no criminal charges have been filed against them, they fear for their ability to continue to grow, use and distribute marijuana for religious purposes. Among other things, they sought injunctive and declaratory relief to prevent enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act against them. The district court dismissed the claim on ripeness grounds. The 9th Circuit, however, reversed, holding:

Plaintiffs need not allege a threat of future prosecution because the statute has already been enforced against them. When the Government seized Plaintiffs’ marijuana pursuant to the CSA, a definite and concrete dispute regarding the lawfulness of that seizure came into existence.

The 9th Circuit also rejected the government's argument that plaintiffs should have first applied to the Drug Enforcement Administration for an exception. It said that it would not read an exhaustion requirement into the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The court however rejected plaintiffs' claim for return or compensation for the marijuana that was seized in 2009.  It held that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act's "appropriate relief" provision does not authorize suits for money damages against the federal government, just as under the Supreme Court's Sossamon decision, similar language in the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act does not authorize damage suits against states. Yesterday's Honolulu Star-Advertiser reports on the decision.

Pennsylvania Asks Intrusive Questions for Non-Photo Voter ID

AP reported yesterday on the problems faced by Amish and certain Mennonite sects now that Pennsylvania's new voter identification law has come into effect. Those who object for religious reasons to being photographed have the alternative of obtaining a non-photo ID from the state Department of Transportation. However questions are being raised about the intrusiveness of the affidavit that must be completed in order to obtain a non-photo ID. Applicants must answer 18 questions, including "Describe your religion," "How many members are there of your religion?"; "What religious practices do you observe?", and "Do other family members hold the same religious beliefs." Amish merely seeking to renew an existing ID can merely follow the past practice of submitting a letter from their bishop.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Bader v. Wrenn, (1st Cir., March 29, 2012), the 1st Circuit rejected a RLUIPA claim by a Jewish inmate who was transferred from a prison which offered Jewish religious activities to one that did not because of a lack of outside clergy, volunteers and co-religionists. The court said that the proximate cause of the lack of religious services was not the government's transfer of plaintiff.

In Dalrymple v. Dooley, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42814 (D SD, March 28, 2012), a South Dakota federal district court dismissed, with leave to refile, a claim that prison officials refused to add him to the "2012 Passover meal list for the Jewish Holiday Meals."

In Cotton v. Cate, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43884 (ND CA, March 26, 2012), a California federal district court rejected claims of an inmate who was a follower of the Shetaut Neter religion that his free exercise, equal protection and RLUIPA rights were violated when he was refused a Kemetic (raw vegan-organic) religioius diet.

In Little v. Jones, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44420 (ED OK, March 29, 2012), a Seventh-day Adventist inmate sought a vegan religious diet. An Oklahoma federal district court in a case on remand from the 10th Circuit denied in part defendants' motion for summary judgment because there is a question of fact regarding the sincerity of plaintiff's religious beliefs. It also permitted plaintiff to proceed on his claim for compensatory damages, and to amend to add claims for nominal and punitive damages.

In Tafari v. Brown, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45055 (ND NY, March 30, 2012), a New York federal district court adopted in part a magistrate's recommendations (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45054, March 6, 2012) and dismissed an inmate's claims that his rights were infringed when he was denied kosher meals during specific time periods, when he was not provided holiday food or a vegetarian kosher diet, and when authorities sanctioned him for not cutting his dreadlocks.

In Hysell v. Schwarzenegger, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45452 (ED CA, March 39, 2012), a California federal magistrate judge has recommended dismissing a Wiccan inmate's claim that defendants used an underground regulation to confiscate his twenty-six Wicca religion books, oils, incense, and a multi-plug extension cord for candles.

In Harris v. Avant, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44458 (D CO, March 29, 2012), a Colorado federal district court dismissed a Jewish inmate's claims that her free exercise and RLUIPA rights were infringed when she was required to "move to another room" on a Saturday and sign a form in connection with the move. On a separate occasion she was told to throw away a kosher meal.  The magistrate's recommendations are at 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44465, Feb. 16, 2012.

In Scott v. Brown, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44653 (ND GA, March 29, 2012) a Georgia federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44669, Jan. 31, 2012) and, while dismissing a number of claims by a Muslim inmate, allowed him to proceed with 1st and 14th Amendment individual capacity damage claims alleging lack of a Muslim chaplain, not being allowed to wear a kufi, failure to provide secure places to pray, and not being allowed to celebrate an end-of-Ramadan meal.

In a lengthy opinion in Wood v. Yordy, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46610 (D ID, March 30, 2012), an Idaho federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that he was temporarily removed from his work assignments in the prison chapel and Life Transitions Program and that his worship times in the prison chapel were limited. The court commented: "This case undoubtedly shows how a strong-willed inmate can exploit the human weaknesses of prison staff...."

In Munson v. Gaetz, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46064 (SD IL, March 30, 2012), an Illinois federal district court permitted a Buddhist inmate who, for religious reasons, was on a lacto-ovo-vegetarian diet to move ahead with claims that his health is being injured by the high TVP/soy content in the diet. He is seeking a soy-free vegetarian diet.

Court Decides It Can Adjudicate Church's Factional Dispute

In Carter v. Lee (VT Super, April 3, 2012), a Vermont trial court held that it can adjudicate a dispute between factions of the First Congregational Church of Manchester.  Plaintiffs filed a derivative suit challenging a congregational vote to create a Board of Elders as the church's governing body.  Plaintiffs claim that they were denied access to the church membership list and records in violation of the non-profit corporation statute; that actions of the Board of Elders, including hiring of a new clergyman and certain expenditures are unauthorized; and that defendants failed to give proper notice of an amendment to the church bylaws and of a special meeting. The court concluded:

Although plaintiffs identify specific actions taken by the Board of Elders to which they object, there is no suggestion in the record that their objections are religious in nature. Plaintiffs do not argue that the Board of Elders has taken action that runs contrary to the tenets of the church, or that the creation of the board is inconsistent with church doctrine.... [A]ll of plaintiffs' claims involve a straightforward application of Vermont's non-profit corporations' law, and do not require an examination of religious doctrine. Because it appears that the court can adjudicate each count of the plaintiffs' complaint without considering ecclesiastical evidence, or resolving any religious disagreement, the court has jurisdiction to proceed.

California Environmental Rules Reduce Supply of Kosher For Passover Coke

The San Gabriel Valley Tribune reported last week that new California environmental regulations that went into effect this year have had the effect of cutting off much of the supply of Kosher for Passover Coca Cola in California. At issue is a chemical used in caramel coloring for beverages-- 4-Methylimidazole. The new California regulations require that warning labels be placed on food and beverages that contain more that a prescribed level of the chemical because, according to California, it has been known to cause cancer.  So Coke's supplier in California has a new alternative-process caramel with less of the chemical in it (background), but the formula used by manufacturer does not meet requirements for Passover food. Coke plans to have the problem solved by next year. Meanwhile some California stores have acquired Kosher for Passover Code from other states.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Robert Leckey, Face to Face, (April 6, 2012).
• Sahar F. Aziz, Symposium: Confronting Islam: Shari'ah, the Constitution, and American Muslims: The Face of Islam: The Perception of Muslims in America, (11 Maryland Journal of Race, Religion, Gender, and Class 89, 2011).
• Khaled Benjelayel, Market and Economic Regulation, Islamic Perspective, (January 25, 2012).
• Deedra J. Abboud, The Anti-Therapeutic Effects of the Anti-Shari’a Movement on American Society,(March 9, 2012)

From SmartCILP:

• William P. Marshall, Ballard and the Religious Inquiry Exception to the Criminal Law, [Abstract], 44 Texas Tech. Law Review 239-257 (2011).
• Frank S. Ravitch, The Unbearable Lightness of Free Exercise under Smith: Exemptions, Dasein, and the More Nuanced Approach of the Japanese Supreme Court, [Abstract], 44 Texas Tech. Law Review 259-279 (2011).

1st Circuit: Bible In Jury Room, But Unconsulted, Does Not Require New Trial

In United States v. Rodriguez, (1st Cir., March 28, 2012), the U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a convicted defendant's motion for a new trial based on discovery that a pocket-size New Testament Bible was found in the jury deliberation room. The district court had held a hearing on the matter, and the jury foreperson testified that the Bible was not discussed during jury deliberations, and she never even saw it open. The Court of Appeals held that this was a sufficient investigation to eliminate questions as to whether extrinsic information was used to improperly influence the jury. It was not an abuse of discretion for the trial judge, under the circumstances, to refuse to bring in every juror to question them on the matter. National Law Journal (3/30) reports on the decision.

Times Op Ed Questions Value of the Religious Diversity In the Presidential Race

Today's New York Times carries a lengthy op-ed by Ross Douthat titled Divided by God. He says in part:

In 2012, we finally have a presidential field whose diversity mirrors the diversity of American Christianity as a whole.....

This diversity is not necessarily a strength. The old Christian establishment — ... [the] Roman Catholic Church as well as the major Protestant denominations ... helped bind a vast and teeming nation together. It was the hierarchy, discipline and institutional continuity of mainline Protestantism and later Catholicism that built hospitals and schools, orphanages and universities, and assimilated generations of immigrants. At the same time, the kind of “mere Christianity” ... that the major denominations shared frequently provided a kind of invisible mortar for our culture and a framework for our great debates.

Today, that religious common ground has all but disappeared.

And the inescapability of religious polarization — whether it pits evangelicals against Mormons, the White House against the Catholic Church, or Rick Santorum against the secular press — during an election year that was expected to be all about the economy is a sign of what happens to a deeply religious country when its theological center cannot hold.

The full article is worth a read.

Obama's Weekly Address Focuses On Meaning of Easter

President Obama's weekly address yesterday (full text) extended Easter and Passover greetings to all those celebrating the holidays. His remarks focused primarily on the meaning of Easter. He said in part:

For me, and for countless other Christians, Easter weekend is a time to reflect and rejoice.  Yesterday, many of us took a few quiet moments to try and fathom the tremendous sacrifice Jesus made for all of us. Tomorrow, we will celebrate the resurrection of a savior who died so that we might live....

Christ’s triumph over death holds special meaning for Christians.  But all of us, no matter how or whether we believe, can identify with elements of His story.  The triumph of hope over despair.  Of faith over doubt. The notion that there is something out there that is bigger than ourselves.

These beliefs help unite Americans of all faiths and backgrounds.  They shape our values and guide our work.  They put our lives in perspective.

A video of the address is also available.

Appeals Court Dismisses Negligence Claim Against LDS Church and Volunteer Officials In Sex Abuse Case

In John Doe v. Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, 2012 Mass. App. Unpub. LEXIS 413 (MA App., April 3, 2012), a Massachusetts appeals court dismissed a suit alleging negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress brought against the Mormon Church and certain volunteer clergy and mission presidents by a victim of childhood sexual abuse.  The abuse was committed by Kevin Curlew, a church member and volunteer babysitter at an informal church function. Miklos Jako, a non-member of the church, had warned two former missionaries of Curlew's past criminal convictions for sex abuse of children. The court said:

plaintiff's argument is that the church officials in Methuen "should have known" more, either because the internal communication of Jako's allegations should have been better relayed, or because the local ward or the stake should have done more to find out about Curlew, based on his status as a probationer ten years earlier. This duty can not arise as a matter of church membership.....

[T]he sole ground for the claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress ... is the fact that Doe saw Curlew at church on one occasion after he reported the abuse.... The decision to allow Curlew access to the church grounds and the reasons therefore inherently involves an assessment of Curlew's relationship with the church, and involve the secular review of ecclesiastical discipline and church doctrine. As such, we are prohibited from assigning liability to such actions.

Church's Cultural Center May Move Ahead With RLUIPA Equal Terms Claim

Victory Center v. City of Kelso, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47890 (WD WA, April 4, 2012), is a challenge under RLUIPA, as well as the state and federal constitution, to Kelso, Washington's zoning regulations which kept an educational and cultural center affiliated with the Kelso Church of Truth from locating in an area zoned as pedestrian retail. The court held that the zoning regulations did not impose a substantial burden under RLUIPA on Victory Center's religious exercise, but that a factual question remains as to whether the city violated the equal terms provisions of RLUIPA in treating Victory Center differently than secular educational and cultural institutions. The court rejected Victory Center's 1st and 14th Amendment claims as well as its state constitutional claims. It also found that the city's community development director had qualified immunity.

California Federal Judge Says Same-Sex Spouse of Court Employee Entitled To Health Insurance Coverage

On Tuesday in San Francisco (CA), federal district judge James Ware, acting as administrator of the federal district court's employee dispute resolution program, ruled that denying law clerk Christopher Nathan the right to enroll his same-sex spouse in the government's health insurance program violates the court's guarantee of a discrimination-free workplace. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Ware ordered reimbursement of Nathan for the cost of past and future private insurance for his spouse. The court's clerk, Richard Wieking, says that Ware's order is in conflict with a directive of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts requiring compliance with the Defense of Marriage Act.

Court Issues TRO To Permit Pre-Easter Christian Preaching to Muslims In Dearborn

Stand Up America Now is an organization created by Florida pastors Terry Jones and Wayne Sapp to "help in  proclaiming the Holy Bible of Jesus Christ to Muslims and to educate people about the threat of Shariah law to the fundamental freedoms of our nation."  They plan to speak and hand out fliers on Saturday, just before Easter, on a grassy area in Dearborn, Michigan that is open to the public and is across from the Dearborn Islamic Center. They applied for a permit, saying they expected 20 to 25 people to attend. However, before granting the permit, the city insisted that they sign an indemnification agreement as required by city ordinance. The agreement included a waiver of claims against the city even for violation of constitutional rights.  The pastors refused, and instead filed a motion (full text) for a temporary restraining order. In Stand Up America Now v. City of Dearborn, (ED MI, April 5, 2012), a Michigan federal district court granted the TRO, finding that plaintiffs:

are likely to succeed on their claim that the City of Dearborn’s ordinance requiring a “Hold and Harmless” agreement prior to holding an event, is unconstitutional and violates Plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights....

The City of Dearborn’s Ordinance No. 17-33 requires the sponsor of an event to sign an indemnification agreement with terms established by the legal department.... [A]n ordinance which grants an administrative body or government official unfettered discretion to regulate the licensing of activities protected by the First Amendment is unconstitutional....

Thomas More Law Center says that minutes before the order was issued, the city agreed to grant a permit without a Hold Harmless agreement, but plaintiffs still wanted the court to pass on the constitutionality of the requirement since it might be invoked in the future. (See prior related posting.) [Thanks to Alliance Alert for the lead.]

NY Assistant Principal May Proceed With Charges of Anti-Semitism

In Weiss v. Department of Education of the City of New York, (SD NY, March 29, 2012), a New York federal district court permitted a former assistant principal to proceed with his hostile work environment and religious discrimination claims growing out of anti-Semitic comments by the school's principal. Among other things, plaintiff alleged that the principal referred to him several times as a "pork-eating Jew", and alleged that the principal threatened to fire him when he no longer wanted to work on Saturdays to observe the Sabbath. His 5-year probationary appointment at the School for Community Research and Learning was terminated after four years. Courthouse News Service reports on the decision.

Egyptian Court Sentences 17-Year Old For Insults To Islam On Facebook

Reuters reports that an Egyptian court on Wednesday sentenced 17-year old Gamal Abdou Massoud, a Coptic Christian, to the maximum 3-year penalty for publishing cartoons on Facebook that insulted Islam and the Prophet Muhammad. Massoud also distributed some of the cartoons to friends in the city of Assiut. The cartoons, posted in December, led to Muslim attacks on Christian homes.

Obama Sends Passover Greetings

Tonight begins the Jewish festival of Passover. Yesterday, the White House posted a video message from the President extending Passover wishes to all those celebrating the holiday. He also announced that he will again host a Seder at the White House, led by Jewish members of his staff.  Obama's Seder has become a tradition ever since an impromptu one was held in 2008 during his campaign in Pennsylvania.

Air Force Drops Course Reading That Encouraged Chapel Attendance

Military.com reports that last week, after receiving a letter from the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, the Air Force dropped a required reading from its online Squadron Officer School's course. At issue was a section of the reading titled “Spiritual and Ethical Responsibilities of the Leader." It said that officership carries with it moral responsibility and that the government expects officers’ conduct to reflect the ideals and values that our nation cherishes. It continued: "If you attend chapel regularly, both officers and airmen are likely to follow this example."

1st Circuit Hears Oral Arguments In Challenge To DOMA

The U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday heard oral arguments in three cases challenging the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act. The consolidated cases are Gill v. Office of Personnel Management, Hara v. Office of Personnel Management, and Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  In the cases, the district court held that DOMA was unconstitutional. (See prior posting.) Keen News Service, reporting on the arguments, points out that initially the Department of Justice filed an appeal of the district court decisions. However, one month later the Obama administration announced that it considers DOMA unconstitutional and would no longer defend it in court. The Republican leadership in the House of Representatives is defending the district court opinions in the 1st Circuit.  However, a Justice Department lawyer also argued, asking to court to apply strict scrutiny to DOMA, thereby making it likely to be struck down. The Justice Department, however, did defend DOMA against the state of Massachusetts' argument that it infringes the 10th Amendment. A recording of the oral arguments (except for a portion at th beginning not captured because of equipment problems, is available on the Court of Appeals' website.

Settlement Reached In Suit Over Distribution of Religious Fliers In Schools

Fox 23 News reports that a settlement has been reached in Owasso Kids for Christ v. Owasso Public Schools. In the suit, a Christian group that wants to share its religious message with students and parents sued in federal court complaining that they were not given the same access as other community organizations for distributing flyers and posting information in the Owasso, Oklahoma public schools. (See prior posting.)  During the litigation, the school had already changed its policy so that it no outside organization can send out fliers to parents, but all groups can post fliers on bulletin boards on place them on literature tables in the schools. Under the settlement the school's insurer will also pay $20,000 in plaintiff's legal fees. Last Friday the settlement was filed and the lawsuit was dropped.

Court Dismisses Faculty Suit Involving Baptist Theological Dispute

Alexandria (LA) Town Talk and a press release from Louisiana College report on a decision handed down last week by a Louisiana trial court in a suit by four former faculty members against Louisiana College. The school is a Biblically-based Baptist college located in Pineville, Louisiana. The faculty members sued claiming loss of academic freedom, among other things. Apparently they objected to the administration's interference with their courses in Religion and Values, and in particular the administration's objections to their using as a text Scott Peck, The Road Less Traveled. The suit was originally filed in 1995, but settled in 1997.  However it was refiled in 2005 after, according to plaintiffs, the defendants started spreading rumors about them in churches around the state.  Apparently at the core of the dispute is a theological disagreement over whether the Bible is the inerrant word of God. The court dismissed the case on Establishment Clause grounds, holding that deciding it would require the court to choose sides in a dispute over Baptist theology.

UPDATE: A copy of the full decision in Winbery v. Louisiana College, (LA Dist. Ct., March 28,2012) is now available. In the case, plaintiffs alleged both defamation and breach of agreement in violation of the College's by-laws and faculty handbook.  While finding that the ministerial exception does not apply to prevent the court's exercising jurisdiction, the court held that both of the claims would require it to delve into disputes over Baptist theology in violation of the Establishment Clause. [Thanks to Rob Luther for the copy of the decision.]

Court Narrows Claims Even More In Plano School "Candy Cane" Case

Earlier this year, in the long-running litigation over Plano, Texas Independent School District rules that, among other things, prevented a student from handing out candy canes with attached religious messages, a federal magistrate judge recommended that three plaintiffs be permitted to go forward, but only with their "as applied" challenge under the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act to the school's 2004 (as opposed to its 2005) policy. (See prior posting.) Now in Morgan v. Plano Independent School District, (ED TX, March 30, 2012), a Texas federal district court, reviewing the magistrate's recommendations, accepted them only in part. Instead of allowing three plaintiffs to move ahead with the "as applied" challenge to the 2004 policy, the court permitted only one of the plaintiffs (Jonathan Morgan) to do so. The court held that the other two plaintiffs had failed to give the 60-day advance notice required by TRFRA before filing suit. Courthouse News this week reported on the decision

Obama Addresses White House Easter Prayer Breakfast

Yesterday, President Obama hosted the White House's 3rd annual Easter Prayer Breakfast. (White House blog.) The President's remarks (full text) were focused on the religious message of the holiday.  He said in part:

Now, I have to be careful, I am not going to stand up here and give a sermon.  It’s always a bad idea to give a sermon in front of professionals.... But in a few short days, all of us will experience the wonder of Easter morning.   And we will know, in the words of the Apostle Paul, “Christ Jesus...and Him crucified.”

It’s an opportunity for us to reflect on the triumph of the resurrection, and to give thanks for the all-important gift of grace.  And for me, and I’m sure for some of you, it’s also a chance to remember the tremendous sacrifice that led up to that day, and all that Christ endured -- not just as a Son of God, but as a human being.

For like us, Jesus knew doubt.  Like us, Jesus knew fear.  In the garden of Gethsemane, with attackers closing in around him, Jesus told His disciples, “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death.”...  So it is only because Jesus conquered His own anguish, conquered His fear, that we’re able to celebrate the resurrection.  It’s only because He endured unimaginable pain that wracked His body and bore the sins of the world that He burdened -- that burdened His soul that we are able to proclaim, “He is Risen!” 

Obama Proclamation On Education and Sharing Day Honors Chabad Rebbe

In a Presidential Proclamation issued yesterday, President Obama declared April 3 as "Education and Sharing Day U.S.A., 2012." According to an article from Chabad.org:

Presidents, in conjunction with the Washington, D.C. based American Friends of Lubavitch, designate annually Education and Sharing Day U.S.A. on the anniversary of the birth of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, of righteous memory, who dedicated his life to the cause of education.

President Obama's Proclamation reads in part:

For centuries, the pursuit of knowledge and the cultivation of character have driven American progress and enriched our national life.  On Education and Sharing Day, U.S.A., we renew our commitment to these timeless aspirations, and we rededicate ourselves to fostering in our sons and daughters inquiring minds and compassionate hearts....

On Education and Sharing Day, U.S.A., we reflect on the teachings of Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, who embodied that humanitarian spirit.  As a tireless advocate for youth around the world, he inspired millions to lift the cause of education, to practice kindness and generosity, and to aspire toward their highest ideals....

Public Accommodations Complaint Filed Against T-Shirt Company That Rejected Gay Pride Order

Southsider Magazine yesterday reported on a complaint filed with the Human Rights Commission of the Lexington-Fayette (Kentucky) Urban County Government.  The Gay and Lesbian Services Organization ordered T-shirts for its Pride festival in June from Hands On Originals.  However when it found out the nature of the order, Hands On Originals refused to honor the order, even though it had bid on it. Instead it provided an alternative supplier who would provide the T-shirts at the same price. Hands On Originals says it is a Christian organization and "it is the prerogative of the company to refuse any order that would endorse positions that conflict with the convictions of the ownership." GLSO has filed its complaint under the Lexington Fairness Ordinance which, among other things, gives the Commission jurisdiction over complaints about discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in public accommodations.

Suit Challenges Ban On T-Shirt Supporting Day of Silence

The Cincinnati Enquirer reported yesterday on a lawsuit filed in federal court by a gay Waynesville (OH) high school student who was told by school officials that he could not wear a T-shirt carrying the slogan: "Jesus is not a homophobe." The slogan appears under a rainbow colored Christian Ichthys (fish) symbol. Student Maverick Couch wants to wear the shirt on April 20 to support the Day of Silence, a national event aimed at countering bullying of gay and lesbian students. School principal Randy Gebhardt says that the shirt is not permitted because it is "indecent and sexual in nature." Earlier, administrators had said the shirt was disruptive or that it was too religious.

Slaughterhouse Catering To Buddhists Sues To Stay In Business

In Rosemead, California, a poultry slaughter house whose customers are primarily Buddhist is suing the city over an ordinance (Rosemead Code of Ordinances, Sec. 17.12.105) that is forcing them to close down.  According to the San Gabriel Valley Tribune, Chinese American Live (Cal) Poultry Vikon, Inc. and its owners, along with one of its customers, filed suit on March 21 claiming that they are being targeted because of their ethnicity, culture and religion. The complaint alleges that to Buddhists, the fresh whole chickens available at Cal Poultry signify rebirth, togetherness and prosperity and are used in Buddhism to worship ancestors. Neighbors of Cal Poultry however complain about odors and escaped chickens.

Suit Challenging Harm From Imprecatory Prayers Dismissed

In 2009, Mikey Weinstein, founder of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, filed suit in state court against former Navy chaplain Gordon Klingenschmitt, Jim Ammerman (now deceased) and Ammerman's Chaplaincy of Full Gospel Churches contending that they were conspiring to encourage violence against him through use of "imprecatory prayers." (See prior posting.) Now, according to the Dallas Morning News, on Monday the court issued an oral ruling granting summary judgment to the defendants in the case-- Weinstein v. Ammerman, (Dallas Co. TX Dist. Ct., April 2, 2012). Judge Martin Hoffman did not reach the constitutional question of whether prayers that incite others to violence can be outlawed. Instead he ruled that plaintiffs had shown no connection between the prayers and the threats and vandalism suffered by Weinstein's family. Chaplain Gordon Klingenschmitt's reaction to the ruling was: "I praise God for religious freedom because the judge declared it’s OK to pray imprecatory prayers and quote Psalm 109."

Kiryas Joel's RLUIPA Case Goes Back To State Court

In November 2011, the town of Kiryas Joel, New York, (a Orthodox Jewish Hasidic enclave) and various other plaintiffs sued the nearby village of Woodbury, New York, challenging Woodbury's zoning laws under the state and federal constitutions and RLUIPA.  The Hudson Valley Times Herald-Record reported on the suit at the time it was filed. The population of Kiryas Joel is increasing, and residents are looking to surrounding areas for expansion.  They claim that two zoning laws adopted in 2011 by Woodbury discriminate against Hasidic Jews by limiting housing density in areas into which the Hasidic community wishes to expand. Shortly after Kiryas Joel filed its lawsuit in state court, the Village of Woodbury filed a motion to remove the case to federal court. Now, in Village of Kiryas Joel, New York v. Village of Woodbury, New York, (SDNY, March 29, 2012), the federal district court has sent the case back to state court on a technicality.  For a case to be removed, all defendants must consent to removal within 30 days after the defendants receive copies of the pleadings. (28 USC Sec. 1446). Here only two of the five defendants joined in the Notice of Removal. Mid-Hudson News Network reports on the decision.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases-- Installment #2 For the Week

In Blount v. Tate, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41350 (WD VA, March 26, 2012), a Virginia federal district court  rejected a Muslim inmate's complaint that officers tore his Qur'an and destroyed his prayer necklace in searching his cell while he was out; his special Eid meal was not served on a Common Fare tray; and he was not allowed to order a Pocket Salat.

In Walker v. Fischer, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40842 (ND NY, March 26, 2012), a New York federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40846, Feb. 27, 2012) and rejected a Muslim inmates complaint that authorities refused to provide him with a Kosher Diet in lieu of the prescribed Controlled "A" High Fiber Diet he was receiving. It also rejected his complaint about the Ramadan feast menu he received in the Special Housing Unit. However the court permitted him to proceed with a claim that prison officials refused to broadcast Jumuah sermons to his SHU cell.

In Crump v. Michigan Department of Corrections, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40542 (ED MI, March 26, 2012), a Michigan federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154344, Nov. 14, 2011) and dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies a Muslim inmate's complaint that prison authorities have endorsed an anti-Shi'a, Wahhabi Islamic sect in the prison and thereby have created an environment in which it is impossible for him to safely practice his Shi'a faith.

In Epps v. Grannis, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41889 (SD CA, March 26, 2012), a California federal district court adopted in part and rejected in part a magistrate's report (2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154398, Dec. 1, 2011) and permitted a Muslim inmate to proceed with several claims under RLUIPA relating to Ramadan observance, religious diet and confiscation of photocopies of a book. The court dismissed most of the 1st Amendment challenges to the same practices.

In Earls v. Michigan Department of Corrections, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41806 (WD MI, March 27, 2012), a Michigan federal district court adopted in part a magistrate's recommendation (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41805, Feb. 17, 2012) and dismissed claims by a former inmate now on parole that prison officials "refuse to acknowledge the Methodist religion as a sect of Protestant Christianity."

In Crump v. Winn, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41535 (ED MI, March 27, 2012), a Michigan federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41539, March 5, 2012) and dismissed a Muslim inmate's claim that the deputy warden changed the Muslim prayer time in a way that placed a substantial burden on his free exercise of religion.

In Christen v. Washington Department of Corrections, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42201 (WD WA, March 27, 2012), a Washington federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42202, Feb. 16, 2012) and dismissed the complaint of an inmate regarding the signature he used on grievances. He claims he is a Restoration Druid and when "forced to interact with foreign jurisdictions" he must use a "signature-in-dishonor" demonstrating his mark accompanied by "UCC 1-207 and "all rights reserved/without prejudiced, abbreviated as ARR/WOP."

In Holt v. Hobbs, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39752 (ED AR, March 23, 2012), an Arkansas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40942, Jan. 27, 2012) and dismissed a preliminary injunction request, upholding the requirement that a Muslim inmate shave his beard in compliance with the prison's grooming policy.

In Ruley v. Stovall, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41948 (ED KY, March 27, 2012), a Kentucky federal district court dismissed an inmate's 1st Amendment and RLUIPA challenges to the confiscation of his Satanic Bible.

In Robinson v. Jimenez, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43095 (ED NY, March 26, 2012), a New York federal district court adopted a portion of a magistrate's recommendations (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43097, March 6, 2012), and dismissed a 1st Amendment challenge to an incident in which Jewish prisoners' use of the religious purpose room for Rosh Hashanah services was interrupted and they were required to leave because of an erroneous scheduling conflict by which Muslim inmates had reserved the room for Ramadan services at the same time.

In Dobson v. Vail, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42939 (WD WA, March 28, 2012), a Washington federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42937, Feb. 16, 2012), and dismissed an Asatru inmate's free exercise, RLUIPA and establishment clause challenges, as well as 8th and 14th Amendment challenges, to a requirement that he participate in a program known as the Right Living Model. Plaintiff claimed that the program "favors secular humanistic doctrines," clearly endorses The Four Agreements, a "Toltec Wisdom book", and that his involuntary participation was in conflict with his religious values.

Appeals Court Agrees: 1st Amendment Precludes Suit For Injuries During Healing Service

In Kubala v. Hartford Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp., (CT App., March 27, 2012), a Connecticut appeals court adopted the trial court's opinion (see prior posting) and dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction a suit brought against a Catholic priest, his church and the Hartford Diocese seeking damages for injuries plaintiff received when, during a Catholic Charismatic Renewal healing service, she was physically injured. The appeals court held that deciding the case would involve an impermissible interference with the defendants' free exercise of religion. The trial court had held: "[S]ince the plaintiff's claims are inextricably intertwined with the religious context in which the incident occurred, the court cannot apply neutral principles of secular law to this case."

Firefighter's Religious Objections To Foul Language Dismissed

In Trussell v. City of Decherd, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40086  (ED TN, March 23, 2012), a Tennessee federal district court dismissed free exercise claims brought by a former member of the Decherd, Tennessee fire department. Plaintiff complained that other firefighters engaged in cursing and foul language, and that as "a devout Christian" his religious beliefs "included a prohibition on the use of foul language." The court said that his free exercise allegations were unclear and he had not alleged a connection between his religion and any employment action against him.

Challenge To North Carolina Marriage Laws Dismissed

According to the Greensboro (NC) News & Record, a North Carolina state trial court judge on Friday dismissed a lawsuit filed last year by 11 clergy challenging the state's requirement that marriages be solemnized by clergy or a magistrate.  The complaint claimed that (1) it violates the Establishment Clause for the state to make a member of the clergy an agent of the state to perform a marriage ceremony and submit a state granted license; (2) it violates state and federal free exercise protections for the state to require individuals entering into marriage to participate in a state-prescribed ceremony and licensing of the marriage; and (3) it is unconstitutional for the state to prohibit members of the clergy from solemnizing the marriage of same-sex couples. (See prior posting.) Plaintiffs say they will appeal the decision.

Copts Withdraw From Egypt's Constitution Drafting Panel

The Financial Times reported yesterday that in Egypt, the Coptic Orthodox Church has decided to withdraw its representatives from the constitutional assembly that was appointed to draft a new constitution for the country. The Church General Council said that it had become pointless for the church to be represented. The decision by the Copts follows a similar withdrawal a few days earlier by al-Azhar, the highest Sunni religious authority, which also claimed it was being sidelined. The Copts are concerned that Islamists will dominate the constitution-drafting process and give religion a more central role in public life.  The fears of Islamist control were exacerbated last week end when the Muslim Brotherhood went back on its pledge not to run a candidate for president. (AP).

Military Hosts "Rock Beyond Belief" Event For Nonbelievers

At Fort Bragg, North Carolina on Saturday, the military for the first time ever hosted an event specifically for military members who do not believe in God.  AP and the Fort Stewart Patch both report on the Rock Beyond Belief event that drew several hundred attendees to the Fort Bragg parade field. Among the featured speakers was Richard Dawkins. The event was organized after the Army provided funding in  2010 for the "Rock the Fort" concert held at Fort Bragg under the auspices of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association. (See prior posting.)  The crowd at Saturday's event, in part because of rainy weather, was substantially smaller that organizers had hoped for. They wanted Christian soldiers to attend as well.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Charles J. Reid, Tales Legal Fictions Tell, (Northwestern Interdisciplinary Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Joel A. Nichols, Religion, Marriage, and Pluralism, (25 Emory International Law Review 967, 2012).
• Tamir Moustafa, Islamic Law, Women's Rights, and Popular Legal Consciousness in Malaysia, (Law and Social Inquiry, Forthcoming).
• Danny O' Connell, A Brief Analysis of Current Issues in Church-State Relations in Ireland, (March 28, 2012).
• Roberta Rosenthal Kwall, The Cultural Analysis Paradigm: Women and Synagogue Ritual as a Case Study, (Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 34, Forthcoming).
• Swati Sharma, Islamic Finance, (February 24, 2012).
• Helen L. Norton, The Equal Protection Implications of Government's Hateful Speech, (54 William and Mary Law Review, forthcoming 2012).

From SmartCILP:

• Mark Cammack, Islamic Finance: Prospects and Significance, 18 Southwestern Journal of International Law 113-123 (2011).
• Richard E. Flint, Consumer Bankruptcy Policy: Ability to Pay and Catholic Social Teaching, 43 St. Mary's Law Journal 333-412 (2012).
• Frank Pasquale, Joining or Changing the Conversation? Catholic Social Thought and Intellectual Property, 29 Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal 681-727 (2011).
• Symposium: Religious Legal Theory. Introduction by Mark L. Movsesian; articles by Steven D. Smith, Keisuke Mark Abe, Ian Bartrum, Zachary R. Calo, Nathan S. Chapman, Simeon O. Ilesanmi, Samuel J. Levine, Joel A. Nichols, James W. McCarty III, Andrea Pin and Rene Reyes. 85 St. John's Law Review 397-681 (2011). 

Turkey Passes Controversial, Pro-Islamic Education Reform

Reuters reports that Turkey's ruling AK Party on Friday pushed a controversial school reform bill through Parliament that critics say furthers an Islamic agenda and lowers education standards. Among the changes are ones that allow public schools to offer optional classes in Qur'anic studies and the life of the Prophet Muhammad.  The bill also allows imam hatip schools-- ones that combine religious studies with modern secular subjects-- to admit students at age 11 instead of the current age 15. Today's Zaman has additional details on the bill which must still be approved by President Abdullah Gül.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Curry v. California Department of Corrections, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38464 (ND CA, March 21, 2012), a California federal district court rejected an inmate's claim that his rights were infringed when he was not permitted to obtain scented oil for the practice of his Shetaut Neter religion. The court called for additional evidence and argument on plaintiff's request for a religious Kemetic diet.

In Contreraz v. Adams, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38512 (ED CA, March 21, 2012), a California federal district court dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies claims by a Native American inmate who observes the Olin Pyramid religion who sought a religious diet and chapel access to perform full moon rituals. The court allowed plaintiff to move ahead with his challenge to a denial of a religious exemption from grooming standards.

In Garraway v. Lappin, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38712 (MD PA, March 21, 2012), a Pennsylvania federal district court in a lengthy opinion dismissed a series of challenges to prison practices brought by a Muslim inmate serving a life sentence as a military prisoner. At issue were chapel scheduling for group prayer, lack of a full time Sunni Muslim chaplain, alleged delay in delivery of Islamic books sent through the mail, religious diet claims, clothing and dress issues, withholding or limiting access to Islamic tapes, magazines and books, withholding of prayer oil and ceremonial items, distribution of Bible quotes by Christian inmates, the method in which funds are allocated among religious groups, denial of chapel use for teaching Arabic, and allowing non-Muslims to participate in Muslim observances.

In Diggs v. Marikah, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38483 (SD NY, March 20, 2012), a New York federal district court permitted a Muslim inmate to move ahead with his free exercise challenge to the refusal to allow him to attend weekly congregate Jumu'ah services.

In Cole v. Jones, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37960 (MD AL, March 21, 2012), an Alabama federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38448, March 1, 2012) and dismissed, among other claims, an inmate's contention that his free exercise rights were infringed by restrictions on him while he was in a restricted privilege dorm that prevented him from attending church services. It reached a similar conclusion as to any RLUIPA claim.

In Hamilton v. Fisher, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39116 (ND NY, March 22, 2012), a New York federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39118, Feb. 29, 2012) and dismissed, with leave to amend, an inmate's allegations  that authorities refused to acknowledge his claim that he is Jewish and furnish him a kosher diet. Plaintiff failed to allege enough facts to permit the court to evaluate whether he had a valid free exercise or RLUIPA claim.

In Hall v. Skolnik, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39684 (D NV, March 23, 2012), a Nevada federal district court rejected an inmate's claim that his rights were violated when he was denied kosher meals. The court found that plaintiff had not shown a sincere religious belief, nor did he show that the kosher meal policy was implemented with an intent to discriminate against the prison's African-American Jewish population.

In Jamison v. Davue, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40266 (ED CA, March 23, 2012), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed, with leave to amend, an inmate's conclusory allegations that he has had difficulty obtaining kosher meals.

The March 28 Las Vegas Review Journal reports that a settlement has been reached in a class action suit brought against the Nevada Department of Corrections by an Orthodox Jewish inmate over kosher food.  Under the agreement, prison authorities will obtain rabbinic kosher certification for the prison's "common fare" diet. The parties agreed to a 6-month stay of the pending litigation while the agreement is implemented.

In Green v. Sneath, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41199 (MD PA, March 26, 2012), a Pennsylvania federal district court rejected a Muslim inmate's free exercise and RLUIPA claims growing out of his Qur'an being left behind and accidentally thrown out when he was transferred to a different cell.  He was quickly provided with a new Qur'an, but it was not the translation he preferred.  The correct translation was eventually ordered and furnished to him several months later.

Court Rejects Religious Defense To Failure To Have Auto Insurance

In State of Wisconsin v. Gotthardt, (WI App., March 22, 2012), defendant appealed a penalty of $200 that was imposed on her for driving a motor vehicle without insurance. She claimed that the requirement to maintain automobile insurance conflicted with her sincerely held religious beliefs. The court held that defendant's 1st Amendment defense was untimely, and that in any event she had not shown that the insurance requirement was unconstitutional.

Appeals Court Says Divorced Parents' Dispute Over Baptism of Children May Be Adjudicated

In Jarrell v. Jarrell, (TN Ct. App., March 28, 2012), a father asked the court to hold his former wife in contempt for violating the Parenting Plan entered by the court in their divorce under which major decisions regarding their children's religious upbringing were to be made jointly.  The mother, Lauren Jarrell, had their two children baptized without the knowledge or consent of their father, Emmett Jarrell. During their marriage, Lauren and Emmett disagreed on whether their children should be baptized at an early age, or only when they are older. The court rejected Lauren's argument that in granting Emmett's petition, the trial court gave preference to the father's religious views over those of the mother. The court said:

Mother is correct that courts “must maintain strict neutrality in cases involving religious disputes between divorced parents[,]” and they may not “prefer the religious views of one parent over another unless one parent’s religious beliefs and practices threaten the health and well-being of the child.”.... However, simply put, this is not a “religious dispute.” In this case, the trial court was asked only to determine whether Mother’s conduct in failing to abide by the terms of the Parenting Plan warranted a finding of contempt; it was not called upon to resolve a religious dispute between the parties.

The appeals court reversed the trial court's civil contempt order, though, finding that the trial court was attempting to punish the mother rather than obtain compliance which is the function of civil contempt. But at the same time it also concluded that the trial court erred in holding that Lauren was not given adequate notice to support a criminal contempt finding. AP reports on the decision.

Ballot Language On Missouri Free Exercise Constitutional Amendment Upheld

Last year the Missouri legislature approved placing on the November 2012 ballot a proposal that would add a laundry list of religious freedom protections to the state constitution. (See prior posting.) Earlier this week, according to AP, a state trial court judge rejected a challenge to this ballot summary language for the proposal that was prescribed by the legislature:

Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to ensure: • That the right of Missouri citizens to express their religious beliefs shall not be infringed; • That school children have the right to pray and acknowledge God voluntarily in their schools; and • That all public schools shall display the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution.

The suit argued that the summary fails to mention that under the proposal students could refuse homework and prisoners could lose some religious rights.

Fortune 500 Company Settles EEOC Religious Accommodation Lawsuit

EEOC reports that AutoZone, Inc. has settled a religious discrimination lawsuit brought against it by the EEOC in a Massachusetts federal district court.  The suit was brought on behalf of a former Sikh employee who was harassed  by mangers and customers and who was not permitted to wear a turban or a kara (religious bracelet). The employee, Frank Mahoney, was fired allegedly because of his religion and in retaliation for seeking an accommodation and complaining about discrimination. In the settlement, the Fortune 500 auto parts distributor will pay damages of $75,000, attorneys fees, and will adopt new policies and training procedures on religious discrimination.

Suit Challenges Exclusion of Religious College From Florida Tuition Grant Program

Earlier this month, Florida Christian College and 5 of its student brought suit challenging the school's exclusion from the Florida Resident Access Grant Program that provides students at eligible private colleges $2000 per year tuition assistance. The complaint (full text) in Florida Christian College v. Shanahan, (ND FL, filed 3/8/2012) alleges that exclusion of FCC students from the program violates plaintiffs' free exercise, establishment clause, free speech and equal protection rights. The statute creating the program (FL Stat Sec. 1009.89) requires that eligible schools must have a secular purpose, and receipt of state aid by students at the institution may not have the primary effect of advancing or impeding religion or result in an excessive entanglement between the state and any religious sect. The Florida Department of Education argued that FCC does not meet the secular purpose requirement. Speak Up blog reported on the case earlier this month.

Bald Eagle Permit Was "Catch-22"; Amended Complaint Filed

Earlier this month, the issuance by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service of a permit to allow the Northern Arapaho Indian tribe to kill up to two bald eagles for religious purposes was widely seen as an important vindication of Native American religious freedom. (See prior posting.) However, according to an AP report today, once the tribe's attorneys read the fine print, they concluded that the permit was a "sham." The federal permit  specifically bars the tribe from killing eagles within the Wind River Indian Reservation, and also requires adherence to state law in killing the eagles. Wyoming state law prohibits all killing of eagles and applies everywhere in the state except on the Wind River Reservation.  So the permit precludes taking of eagles at the only location where state law allows it. All of this has led the tribe on behalf of its members to file an amended complaint in Northern Arapaho Tribe v. Ashe, (D WY, filed 3/30/2012) (full text of complaint) claiming that their rights under the Free Exercise Clause and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act have been infringed, and that the government's action violates the Administrative Procedure Act. The lawsuit seeks an injunction ordering the Fish and Wildlife Service to issue a permit without improper restrictions in it.

Mexico's Congress Approves Constitutional Changes On Public Display of Religion

AP reports that Mexico's Senate on Wednesday, by a vote of 72-35, approved a proposed constitutional amendment that would allow religious events to be celebrated in public as long as they do not involve electoral politics. The changes, already approved by the Chamber of Deputies of Mexico's Congress (Today's Catholic, 12/19/11), come three days after the conclusion of Pope Benedict XVI's visit to Mexico. At least 16 of Mexico's state legislatures must still approve the changes for them to take effect.

Priest's Embezzlement Conviction Not Barred By First Amendment

In Rodis v. Attorney General of Virginia, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42650 (WD VA, March 28, 2012), a Virginia federal district court held that the 1st Amendment does not preclude civil courts from convicting a Catholic priest of embezzlement of funds contributed by parishioners.  Rejecting Rodney Rodis' petition for habeas corpus, the court held:  "Petitioner's criminal acts, even if performed under the guise of ecclesiastical duties, are not shielded by the First Amendment because petitioner's prosecution did not relate to any ecclesiastical dispute, faith, or doctrine."

Catholic School Teacher May Challenge Her Firing For Using Artificial Insemination

In Dias v. Archdiocese of Cincinnati, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43240 (SD OH, March 29, 2012), an Ohio federal district court refused to dismiss a pregnancy discrimination and breach of contract suit brought by a former technology coordinator at two Catholic schools. Plaintiff, a non-Catholic, oversaw the schools' computer systems and instructed students on computer usage. As a non-Catholic, she was not permitted to teach religion classes. When plaintiff became pregnant, she was fired. Initially she was told her dismissal was because she became pregnant while she was unmarried, but subsequently she was informed that it was because she had used artificial insemination, which violates Catholic teachings.

The court held that the ministerial exception does not apply because plaintiff is not a ministerial employee. While plaintiff's contract stated that she would comply with the teachings of the Catholic Church, the court concluded that there is a question of fact as to whether a non-Catholic would know that artificial insemination is against Church teachings. Finally it held that plaintiff had stated a plausible claim that she was terminated because of her   pregnancy, and not because of a policy against extramarital sex enforced equally against men and women.

4 More Indicted In Amish Beard Cutting Assaults

As previously reported, last December a federal grand jury in Ohio returned a 7-count indictment charging 10 Amish men and two Amish women in five separate assaults on members of a rival Amish group. The assaults involved forcibly cutting the beards of the victims. A Department of Justice press release on Wednesday reports that a superseding indictment has now been handed down. The new indictment adds four women as defendants.

Cert Petition Filed In Ecclesiastical Abstention Dispute

In February, a petition for certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court (full text) was filed in Lutzer v. Duncan. The petition seeks review of an Illinois state appeals court decision, Duncan v. Peterson, which refused to apply the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine to a clergyman's false light invasion of privacy claim against the church that ordained him as a minister.  It defrocked him and circulated letters to board members of plaintiff's current congregation accusing him of marital infidelity, misusing church funds and abusing alcohol. [Thanks to Eric Rassbach for the lead.]

Former Prof Charges Religious Discrimination After Discipline For Refusing To Attend Show On Gay Rights

Courthouse News Service reports on a suit filed yesterday in a state trial court in Texas by a former theater and dance faculty member at Lamar University who was graded down in her annual review because she refused, for religious reasons, to attend a student-organized show billed as a celebration of homosexuality. The complaint (full text) in Ozmun v. Lamar University, (TX Dist. Ct., filed 3/29/2012), recounts that the student show was created after a one-man show about a performer's gay lifestyle was cancelled under community pressure. Subsequently the one-man show was brought to campus, and plaintiff again refused to attend and says she was disciplined for it. Plaintiff says this amounts to religious discrimination in violation of Texas law.

Former 10 Commandments Foe Is Now Write-In Candidate Against Roy Moore

As previously reported, in March Alabama's former Supreme Court chief justice Roy Moore won the March Republican primary to again become a candidate for his old job. According to AP, his Democratic opponent Harry Lyon has run ten previous campaigns for various county and state offices, and has never won.  This has led two attorneys to launch write-in campaigns to try to keep Moore from regaining office. One of those candidates is Melinda Lee Maddox. She was one of three lawyers who sued Moore over the 5,280 pound granite Ten Commandments monument he had installed in the rotunda of the Alabama Judicial Building. (Background).